Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
1.
Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can ; 42(10): 421-430, 2022 10 12.
Article in English, French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2146154

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: This study explores the relationship between emotional support, perceived risk and mental health outcomes among health care workers, who face high rates of burnout and mental distress since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional, multicentred online survey of health care workers in the Greater Toronto Area, Ontario, Canada, during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic evaluated coping strategies, confidence in infection control, impact of previous work during the 2003 SARS outbreak and emotional support. Mental health outcomes were assessed using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, the Impact of Event Scale - Revised and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). RESULTS: Of 3852 participants, 8.2% sought professional mental health services while 77.3% received emotional support from family, 74.0% from friends and 70.3% from colleagues. Those who felt unsupported in their work had higher odds ratios of experiencing moderate and severe symptoms of anxiety (odds ratio [OR] = 2.23; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.84-2.69), PTSD (OR = 1.88; 95% CI: 1.58-2.25) and depression (OR = 1.88; 95% CI: 1.57-2.25). Nearly 40% were afraid of telling family about the risks they were exposed to at work. Those who were able to share this information demonstrated lower risk of anxiety (OR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.48-0.69), PTSD (OR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.41-0.56) and depression (OR = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.47-0.65). CONCLUSION: Informal sources of support, including family, friends and colleagues, play an important role in mitigating distress and should be encouraged and utilized more by health care workers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychological Distress , Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Ontario/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
4.
J Neuroradiol ; 49(6): 428-430, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1768429

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Various neurological sequalae have been described following COVID-19 vaccination. Here we describe the first case of untreated post COVID-19 vaccine encephalitis with spontaneous resolution of contrast enhancing hyperintensities on MRI concomitant with clinical improvement. CASE PRESENTATION: A 59-year-old woman presented with a two-day history of unsteady gait, incoordination, visual symptoms, and lethargy. She had received AZD1222 (AstraZeneca) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccines at 3 months and 12 days, respectively, before presentation. Brain MRI showed no abnormality on the non-enhanced sequences, but numerous enhancing lesions in the cerebral cortex, deep grey matter, brainstem, and cerebellum. Treatment was expectant, the patient improved clinically over 10 days, and repeat MRI showed near complete resolution of the imaging abnormality. CONCLUSIONS: We describe neurological deterioration 12 days after a second dose of COVID-19 vaccine. There was no evidence of edema or demyelinating lesions in the brain on MRI, but there was extensive contrast-enhancement indicating loss of blood-brain barrier (BBB) integrity. This provides a potential in vivo, clinical-imaging correlate of the post-mortem evidence that SARS-CoV-2 spike protein may induce loss of BBB permeability. While this adds to the list of rare adverse neurological reactions to COVID-19 vaccination, the benefits of receiving the vaccine far outweigh these risks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Vaccination , Brain/diagnostic imaging , Brain/pathology
5.
Canadian Medical Association. Journal ; 194(7), 2022.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1711086

ABSTRACT

Five things to know about fluvoxamine for symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 are presented.

6.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0258893, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1700707

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Explore how previous work during the 2003 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak affects the psychological response of clinical and non-clinical healthcare workers (HCWs) to the current COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional, multi-centered hospital online survey of HCWs in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada. Mental health outcomes of HCWs who worked during the COVID-19 pandemic and the SARS outbreak were assessed using Impact of Events-Revised scale (IES-R), Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7), and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). RESULTS: Among 3852 participants, moderate/severe scores for symptoms of post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (50.2%), anxiety (24.6%), and depression (31.5%) were observed among HCWs. Work during the 2003 SARS outbreak was reported by 1116 respondents (29.1%), who had lower scores for symptoms of PTSD (P = .002), anxiety (P < .001), and depression (P < .001) compared to those who had not worked during the SARS outbreak. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed non-clinical HCWs during this pandemic were at higher risk of anxiety (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.19-2.15, P = .01) and depressive symptoms (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.34-3.07, P < .001). HCWs using sedatives (OR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.61-4.03, P < .001), those who cared for only 2-5 patients with COVID-19 (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.06-2.38, P = .01), and those who had been in isolation for COVID-19 (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.96-1.93, P = .05), were at higher risk of moderate/severe symptoms of PTSD. In addition, deterioration in sleep was associated with symptoms of PTSD (OR, 4.68, 95% CI, 3.74-6.30, P < .001), anxiety (OR, 3.09, 95% CI, 2.11-4.53, P < .001), and depression (OR 5.07, 95% CI, 3.48-7.39, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Psychological distress was observed in both clinical and non-clinical HCWs, with no impact from previous SARS work experience. As the pandemic continues, increasing psychological and team support may decrease the mental health impacts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/epidemiology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/psychology , Adaptation, Psychological/physiology , Adolescent , Adult , Allied Health Personnel , Anxiety/psychology , Anxiety/virology , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , Anxiety Disorders/virology , COVID-19/virology , Canada , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/psychology , Depression/virology , Disease Outbreaks , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Health , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Patient Health Questionnaire , Psychological Distress , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/virology , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/psychology , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/virology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
10.
CMAJ ; 192(43): E1341-E1342, 2020 10 26.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-962950
12.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 68(8): 1636-1646, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-342880

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection causes high morbidity and mortality in older adults with chronic illnesses. Several trials are currently underway evaluating the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a potential treatment for acute infection. However, polypharmacy predisposes patients to increased risk of drug-drug interactions with hydroxychloroquine and may render many in this population ineligible to participate in trials. We aimed to quantify the degree of polypharmacy and burden of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) that older hospitalized adults are taking that would interact with hydroxychloroquine. METHODS: We reanalyzed data from the cohort of patients 65 years and older enrolled in the MedSafer pilot study. We first identified patients taking medications with potentially harmful drug-drug interactions with hydroxychloroquine that might exclude them from participation in a typical 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) therapeutic trial. Next, we identified medications that were flagged by MedSafer as potentially inappropriate and crafted guidance around medication management if contemplating the use of hydroxychloroquine. RESULTS: The cohort contained a total of 1,001 unique patients with complete data on their home medications at admission. Of these 1,001 patients, 590 (58.9%) were receiving one or more home medications that could potentially interact with hydroxychloroquine, and of these, 255 (43.2%) were flagged as potentially inappropriate by the MedSafer tool. Common classes of PIMs observed were antipsychotics, cardiac medications, and antidiabetic agents. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the importance of medication optimization and deprescribing PIMs in older adults. By acting now to reduce polypharmacy and use of PIMs, we can better prepare this vulnerable population for inclusion in trials and, if substantiated, pharmacologic treatment or prevention of COVID-19. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1636-1646, 2020.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Deprescriptions , Hydroxychloroquine/administration & dosage , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Potentially Inappropriate Medication List/standards , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Clinical Trials as Topic , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Patient Selection , Pilot Projects , Polypharmacy , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL