COVID-19 and Gut Injury.

COVID-19 induced by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is currently a pandemic and it has led to more than 620 million patients with 6.56 million deaths globally. Males are more susceptible to COVID-19 infection and associated with a higher chance to develop severe COVID-19 than females. Aged people are at a high risk of COVID-19 infection, while young children have also increased cases. COVID-19 patients typically develop respiratory system pathologies, however symptoms in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract are also very common. Inflammatory cell recruitments and their secreted cytokines are found in the GI tract in COVID-19 patients. Microbiota changes are the key feature in COVID-19 patients with gut injury. Here, we review all current known mechanisms of COVID-19-induced gut injury, and the most acceptable one is that SARS-CoV-2 binds to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor on host cells in the GI tract. Interestingly, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an inflammatory disorder, but the patients with IBD do not have the increased risk to develop COVID-19. There is currently no cure for COVID-19, but anti-viruses and monoclonal antibodies reduce viral load and shorten the recovery time of the disease. We summarize current therapeutics that target symptoms in the GI tract, including probiotics, ACE2 inhibitors and nutrients. These are promising therapeutic options for COVID-19-induced gut injury.

Editorial of the Special Issue "Dietary Fiber and Inflammatory Bowel Disease".

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, is a chronic disease of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract; its burden has significantly increased in recent decades, with 6.8 million cases of IBD reported in 2017 according to the Global Burden of Disease study [...].

Dietary Patterns and Changes in Weight Status Among Chinese Men and Women During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Aims: To identify dietary patterns during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to examine their association with changes in weight status in the Chinese population. Methods: The 2020 China COVID-19 cross-sectional survey is an anonymous 74-item survey administered via social media across 31 provinces in mainland China between April and May 2020. Dietary data were assessed by a Food Frequency Questionnaire and the changes in weight status were self-reported. Exploratory factor analysis using the principal component analysis method was applied to identify dietary patterns. The multinomial regression models were conducted, and forest plots were used to present the associations between dietary patterns and changes in weight status. Results: Of a total of 10,545 adults (aged ≥18 years), more than half of participants reported to have weight gain, with 18.6% of men and 16.3% of women having weight gain >2.5 kg. Approximately 8% of participants reported to have weight loss, with 2.1% of men and 2.5% women having weight loss >2.5 kg. Two dietary patterns, namely, the modern and prudent dietary patterns, were identified during the COVID-19 pandemic. The modern dietary pattern was loaded heavily with soft drinks, fried foods, pickles, and inversely with fresh vegetables. The prudent dietary pattern was characterized by high intake of fresh fruits, vegetables, and inversely with soft drinks and fried food. The modern dietary pattern was positively associated with weight gain in men and women, while the prudent dietary pattern was negatively associated with both weight gain and loss in men and women during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion: Dietary patterns during COVID-19 are significantly associated with the changes in weight status, which may subsequently increase the risk of diet-related non-communicable disease among the Chinese population.

The Effect of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy on Depression, Anxiety, and Stress in Patients With COVID-19: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: As a public health emergency of international concern, the COVID-19 outbreak has had a tremendous impact on patients' psychological health. However, studies on psychological interventions in patients with COVID-19 are relatively rare. Objectives: This study examined the effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) in relieving patients' psychological distress during the COVID-19 epidemic. Methods: Ninety-three eligible participants selected by cluster sampling were randomized to an intervention group (N = 47) and a control group (N = 46). Participants in the control group received routine treatment according to the Chinese Management Guidelines for COVID-19, while participants in the intervention group received routine treatment with additional CBT. The Chinese Version of Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21) was used to evaluate depression, anxiety, and stress for all participants at baseline and post-intervention. Two-sided t-test, and proportion tests were used to examine the differences between the intervention and control group for each DASS-21 indicator. Univariate linear regression was used to examine the association between chronic disease status and change in each DASS-21 indicator after intervention. Two-way scatter plots were generated to show the association of the length of hospital stay and the changes of each DASS-21 indicator by intervention and control groups. Results: Significant decreases in means were found for scales of depression, anxiety, stress and total DASS-21 in both intervention (p < 0.001) and control group (p = 0.001), with participants in the intervention group having a bigger reduction in means. After the intervention, more participants in the intervention group had no depression or anxiety symptoms than in the control group, but no statistical differences were found (p > 0.05). Compared with participants with chronic disease, participants with no chronic disease had a significantly larger reduction of total DASS-21 scale (coefficient = -4.74, 95% CI: -9.31; -0.17).The length of hospital stay was significantly associated with a greater increase in anxiety scale in the intervention group (p = 0.005), whilst no significant association was found in the control group (p = 0.29). Conclusions: The patients with COVID-19 experienced high levels of anxiety, depression and stress. Our study result highlights the effectiveness of CBT in improving the psychological health among patients with COVID-19, also suggests that CBT should be focused on patients with chronic disease and those who have longer hospital stays. These results have important implications in clinical practice in improving psychological health in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. Trial Registration: ISRCTN68675756. Available at: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN68675756.

mHealth education interventions in heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) is a chronic disease with significant impact on quality of life and presents many challenges to those diagnosed with the condition, due to a seemingly complex daily regimen of self-care which includes medications, monitoring of weight and symptoms, identification of signs of deterioration and follow-up and interaction with multiple healthcare services. Education is vital for understanding the importance of this regimen, and adhering to it. Traditionally, education has been provided to people with heart failure in a face-to-face manner, either in a community or a hospital setting, using paper-based materials or video/DVD presentations. In an age of rapidly-evolving technology and uptake of smartphones and tablet devices, mHealth-based technology (defined by the World Health Organization as mobile and wireless technologies to achieve health objectives) is an innovative way to provide health education which has the benefit of being able to reach people who are unable or unwilling to access traditional heart failure education programmes and services. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review and quantify the potential benefits and harms of mHealth-delivered education for people with heart failure. SEARCH METHODS: We performed an extensive search of bibliographic databases and registries (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, IEEE Xplore, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal), using terms to identify HF, education and mHealth. We searched all databases from their inception to October 2019 and imposed no restriction on language of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies if they were conducted as a randomised controlled trial (RCT), involving adults (≥ 18 years) with a diagnosis of HF. We included trials comparing mHealth-delivered education such as internet and web-based education programmes for use on smartphones and tablets (including apps) and other mobile devices, SMS messages and social media-delivered education programmes, versus usual HF care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risks of bias, and extracted data from all included studies. We calculated the mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data and the odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous data with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed heterogeneity using the I2 statistic and assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We include five RCTs (971 participants) of mHealth-delivered education interventions for people with HF in this review. The number of trial participants ranged from 28 to 512 participants. Mean age of participants ranged from 60 years to 75 years, and 63% of participants across the studies were men. Studies originated from Australia, China, Iran, Sweden, and The Netherlands. Most studies included participants with symptomatic HF, NYHA Class II - III. Three studies addressed HF knowledge, revealing that the use of mHealth-delivered education programmes showed no evidence of a difference in HF knowledge compared to usual care (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.2 to 0.40, P = 0.51, I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 411 participants; low-quality evidence). One study assessing self-efficacy reported that both study groups had high levels of self-efficacy at baseline and uncertainty in the evidence for the intervention (MD 0.60, 95% CI -0.57 to 1.77; P = 0.31; 1 study, 29 participants; very low-quality evidence).Three studies evaluated HF self-care using different scales. We did not pool the studies due to the heterogenous nature of the outcome measures, and the evidence is uncertain. None of the studies reported adverse events. Four studies examined health-related quality of life (HRQoL). There was uncertainty in the evidence for the use of mHealth-delivered education on HRQoL (MD -0.10, 95% CI -2.35 to 2.15; P = 0.93, I2 = 61%; 4 studies, 942 participants; very low-quality evidence). Three studies reported on HF-related hospitalisation. The use of mHealth-delivered education may result in little to no difference in HF-related hospitalisation (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.06; P = 0.10, I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 894 participants; low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of the studies due to limitations in study design and execution, heterogeneity, wide confidence intervals and fewer than 500 participants in the analysis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found that the use of mHealth-delivered educational interventions for people with HF shows no evidence of a difference in HF knowledge; uncertainty in the evidence for self-efficacy, self-care and health-related quality of life; and may result in little to no difference in HF-related hospitalisations. The identification of studies currently underway and those awaiting classification indicate that this is an area of research from which further evidence will emerge in the short and longer term.

Factors associated with the psychological well-being among front-line nurses exposed to COVID-2019 in China: A predictive study.

AIMS: To evaluate psychological well-being and factors associated with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among front-line nurses during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-2019 is a pandemic that has posed a public health emergency of international concern. Psychological well-being of front-line nurses is a big concern during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: With a predictive study design, a same survey was sent separately at two time points (i.e. before and after nurses worked at COVID-19 units) between January and March 2020 among 356 front-line nurses in First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China. RESULTS: Of a total 356 front-line nurses, stress level and the prevalence of PTSD were significantly increased after they worked at COVID-19 units. Nurses who had work experience less than 2 years were significantly associated with a high risk of developing PTSD. Nurses who worked in COVID-19 inpatients wards had significantly higher odds of being PTSD (odds ratio [OR] = 21.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.08; 94.5) than those who worked in other COVID-19-related units. Resilience was negatively associated with PTSD (OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.93; 0.99). CONCLUSION: Nurses had significantly increased risk to develop PTSD during COVID-19 pandemic. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Clinical and policy strategies to support front-line nurses' psychological well-being, particularly young nurses, in response to COVID-19 crisis are urgently needed.

SARS-CoV-2 induces transcriptional signatures in human lung epithelial cells that promote lung fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2-induced coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is a pandemic disease that affects > 2.8 million people worldwide, with numbers increasing dramatically daily. However, there is no specific treatment for COVID-19 and much remains unknown about this disease. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)2 is a cellular receptor of SARS-CoV-2. It is cleaved by type II transmembrane serine protease (TMPRSS)2 and disintegrin and metallopeptidase domain (ADAM)17 to assist viral entry into host cells. Clinically, SARS-CoV-2 infection may result in acute lung injury and lung fibrosis, but the underlying mechanisms of COVID-19 induced lung fibrosis are not fully understood. METHODS: The networks of ACE2 and its interacting molecules were identified using bioinformatic methods. Their gene and protein expressions were measured in human epithelial cells after 24 h SARS-CoV-2 infection, or in existing datasets of lung fibrosis patients. RESULTS: We confirmed the binding of SARS-CoV-2 and ACE2 by bioinformatic analysis. TMPRSS2, ADAM17, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase (TIMP)3, angiotensinogen (AGT), transformation growth factor beta (TGFB1), connective tissue growth factor (CTGF), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) A and fibronectin (FN) were interacted with ACE2, and the mRNA and protein of these molecules were expressed in lung epithelial cells. SARS-CoV-2 infection increased ACE2, TGFB1, CTGF and FN1 mRNA that were drivers of lung fibrosis. These changes were also found in lung tissues from lung fibrosis patients. CONCLUSIONS: Therefore, SARS-CoV-2 binds with ACE2 and activates fibrosis-related genes and processes to induce lung fibrosis.