Do patients with and survivors of COVID-19 benefit from telerehabilitation? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) significantly impacts physical, psychological, and social functioning and reduces quality of life, which may persist for at least 6 months. Given the fact that COVID-19 is a highly infectious disease and therefore healthcare facilities may be sources of contagion, new methods avoiding face-to-face contact between healthcare workers and patients are urgently needed. Telerehabilitation is the provision of rehabilitation services to patients at a distance via information and communication technologies. However, high-quality evidence of the efficacy of telerehabilitation for COVID-19 is still lacking. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the efficacy of telerehabilitation for patients with and survivors of COVID-19. Methods We searched the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline (via PubMed), PEDro, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from January 1st, 2020 to April 30th, 2022 for randomized controlled trials published in English, which aimed to evaluate the efficacy of telerehabilitation vs. face-to-face rehabilitation, usual care, or no treatment for COVID-19. Methodological quality and overall evidence quality of the included studies were assessed. The statistical reliability of the data was quantified using the trial sequential analysis. Results Seven randomized controlled trials with eight comparisons were included and all of them were used for meta-analysis. The meta-analyses of absolute values showed the superiority of telerehabilitation over no treatment or usual care for dyspnea (Borg scale: mean difference = −1.88, −2.37 to −1.39;Multidimensional dyspnea-12: mean difference = −3.70, −5.93 to −1.48), limb muscle strength (mean difference = 3.29;2.12 to 4.47), ambulation capacity (standardized mean difference = 0.88;0.62 to 1.14), and depression (mean difference = −5.68;−8.62 to −2.74). Significant improvement in these variables persisted in the meta-analyses of change scores. No significant difference was found in anxiety and quality of life. No severe adverse events were reported in any of the included studies. Conclusions Moderate- to very low-quality evidence demonstrates that telerehabilitation may be an effective and safe solution for patients with and survivors of COVID-19 in dyspnea, lower limb muscle strength, ambulation capacity, and depression. Further well-designed studies are required to evaluate the long-term effects, cost-effectiveness, and satisfaction in larger samples.

COVID-19 Quarantine is a Risk Factor for Poor Pregnancy Outcomes in GDM Patients: A Retrospective Study (preprint)

Aims: : T his study was to evaluate the effects of the home quarantine on pregnancy outcomes of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) patients during the COVID-19 outbreak. Methods: : Thecomplete electronic medical records of GDM patients with home quarantine history were collected and classified into the home quarantine group from 24 February 2020 to 24 November 2020. The same period of GDM patients without home quarantine historywas included in the control group from 2018 and 2019. Results: : A total of 1358 GDM patients were included in the analysis, including 484 in 2018, 468 in 2019, and 406 in 2020. GDM patients with home quarantine in 2020 had higher glycemic levels and worse pregnancy outcomes than 2018 and 2019, including higher cesarean section rate,lower Apgar scores, and higher incidence of macrosomia and nuchal cord. More importantly, the second trimester of home quarantine had brought a broader impactto pregnant women and fetuses. Conclusion: Home quarantine has aggravated the condition of GDM pregnant women and brought more adverse pregnancy outcomes during the COVID-19 outbreak. Therefore, we suggested that governments and hospitals should strengthen lifestyle guidance, glucose management, and antenatal care for GDM patients with home quarantine during public health emergencies.

Deep Venous Thrombosis and Risk of Consequent Sepsis Event: A Retrospective Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study.

Deep vein thrombosis causes several acute and chronic vessel complications and puts patients at risk of subsequent sepsis development. This unique study aimed to estimate the risk of sepsis development in DVT patients compared with non-DVT patients. This population-based cohort study used records of a longitudinal health insurance database containing two million patients defined in Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). Our study included patients aged over 20 years with a new diagnosis of DVT with at least two outpatient department visits or an admission between 2001 and 2014. Patients with a diagnosis of sepsis before the index date were excluded. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to homogenize the baseline characteristics between the two groups. To define the independent risk of the DVT group, a multivariate Cox proportional hazard model was used to estimate the hazard ratios. After PSM, the DVT group (n = 5753) exhibited a higher risk of sepsis (adjusted hazard ratio, aHR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.59-1.90) compared with non-DVT group (n = 5753). Patients with an increased risk of sepsis were associated with being elderly aged, male, having diabetes, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, stroke, malignancy, and use of antibiotics. In conclusion, this population-based cohort study demonstrated an increased risk of sepsis in DVT patients compared with non-DVT patients. Thus, early prevention and adequate treatment of DVT is necessary in clinical practice.

Execution of intervention matters more than strategy: A lesson from the spatiotemporal assessment of COVID-19 clusters in Nepal (preprint)

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been the biggest public health problem of the present world. As the number of people suffering from the pandemic is rising, it is likely to claim more life and worsen global health and economy. Nepal, one of the developing countries in South Asia has been strongly influenced by the pandemic and struggling to contain it with multiple interventions, however, spatiotemporal dynamics of the epidemic and its linkage with various intervention strategies has not been studied yet. Here, we employed the prospective spatial-temporal analysis with SaTScan assessing dynamics of the COVID-19 cases from 23 January to 31 August 2020 at district level in Nepal. The results revealed that COVID-19 dynamics in the early stage of transmission was slower and confined in certain districts. However, from the third week of April, transmission spread rapidly across districts of Province No. 2 and Sudoorpaschim Province, primarily introduced by Nepalese citizens returning from India. Despite nationwide lockdown, nine statistically significant active and emerging clusters were detected between 23 January and 21 July 2020, whereas ten emerging clusters were observed for extended period to 31 August. The population density and population inflow from India crossing the sealed border had significant effects on the elevated risk of the epidemic. The capital city Kathmandu has become the highest-risk active cluster since August when travel restriction has been suspended. Movement restriction appears to be the most effective non-pharmaceutical intervention against the COVID-19 for resource-scarce countries with limited health care facilities. Our findings could be valuable to the health authorities within Nepal and beyond to better allocate resources and improve interventions on the pandemic for containing it efficiently.

Clinical features and outcomes of pregnant women with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The recent COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China, has quickly spread throughout the world. In this study, we systematically reviewed the clinical features and outcomes of pregnant women with COVID-19. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched from January 1, 2020, to April 16, 2020. Case reports and case series of pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2 were included. Two reviewers screened 366 studies and 14 studies were included. Four reviewers independently extracted the features from the studies. We used a random-effects model to analyse the incidence (P) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 236 pregnant women with COVID-19. The results were as follows: positive CT findings (71%; 95% CI, 0.49-0.93), caesarean section (65%; 95% CI, 0.42-0.87), fever (51%; 95% CI, 0.35-0.67), lymphopenia (49%; 95% CI, 0.29-0.70), coexisting disorders (33%; 95% CI, 0.21-0.44), cough (31%; 95% CI, 0.23-0.39), fetal distress (29%; 95% CI, 0.08-0.49), preterm labor (23%; 95% CI, 0.14-0.32), and severe case or death (12%; 95% CI, 0.03-0.20). The subgroup analysis showed that compared with non-pregnant patients, pregnant women with COVID-19 had significantly lower incidences of fever (pregnant women, 51%; non-pregnant patients, 91%; P < 0.00001) and cough (pregnant women, 31%; non-pregnant patients, 67%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The incidences of fever, cough and positive CT findings in pregnant women with COVID-19 are less than those in the normal population with COVID-19, but the rate of preterm labor is higher among pregnant with COVID-19 than among normal pregnant women. There is currently no evidence that COVID-19 can spread through vertical transmission.