Frailty and risks of all-cause and cause-specific death in community-dwelling adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The associations of frailty with all-cause and cause-specific mortality remain unclear. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to fill this gap. METHODS: We searched the PubMed and Embase databases through June 2022. Prospective cohort studies or clinical trials examining frailty were evaluated, and the multiple adjusted risk estimates of all-cause and cause-specific mortality, such as death from cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, respiratory illness, dementia, infection, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), were included. A random effects model was used to calculate the summary hazard ratio (HR). RESULTS: Fifty-eight studies were included for the qualitative systematic review, of which fifty-six studies were eligible for the quantitative meta-analysis, and the studies included a total of 1,852,951 individuals and more than 145,276 deaths. Compared with healthy adults, frail adults had a significantly higher risk of mortality from all causes (HR 2.40; 95% CI 2.17-2.65), CVD (HR 2.64; 95% CI 2.20-3.17), respiratory illness (HR 4.91; 95% CI 2.97-8.12), and cancer (HR 1.97; 95% CI 1.50-2.57). Similar results were found for the association between prefrail adults and mortality risk. In addition, based on the studies that have reported the HRs of the mortality risk per 0.1 and per 0.01 increase in the frailty index, we obtained consistent results. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated that frailty was not only significantly related to an increased risk of all-cause mortality but was also a strong predictor of cause-specific mortality from CVD, cancer, and respiratory illness in community-dwelling adults. More studies are warranted to clarify the relationship between frailty and cause-specific mortality from dementia, infection, and COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42021276021).

Medical students' perceptions and performance in an online regional anatomy course during the Covid-19 pandemic.

The present study evaluated the students' psychological well-being, experiences, performance, and perception of learning regional anatomy remotely. A regional anatomy remote learning curriculum was designed and learning materials were delivered virtually to 120 undergraduate medical students at Jinan University, China. All the students consented and voluntarily participated in this study by completing self-administered online questionnaires including the Zung's Self-Rating Anxiety and Depression Scales at the beginning and end of the learning session. A subset participated in focus group discussions. Most of the students (90.0%) positively evaluated the current distance learning model. More than 80% were satisfied with the content arrangement and coverage. Many students preferred virtual lectures (68.2%) and videos showing dissections (70.6%) during the distance learning sessions. However, writing laboratory reports and case-based learning were the least preferred modes of learning as they were only preferred by 23.2% and 14.1% of the students, respectively. There was no significant lockdown-related anxiety or depression reported by students using depression and anxiety scales as well as feedback from focus group discussions. The surveyed students' confidence scores in distance learning were significantly higher after 5 weeks than at the beginning of the session (3.05 ± 0.83 vs. 3.70 ± 0.71, P < 0.05). Furthermore, the present results showed no significant differences between the current group's academic performance in the unit tests as well as the final overall evaluation for different parts of the course compared to that of the previous year's cohort. The findings above were congruent with focus group discussion data that the use of the online teaching platform for regional anatomy significantly improved the students' confidence in virtual and self-directed learning and did not negatively affect their academic performance.

Clinical characteristics and immunosuppressant management of coronavirus disease 2019 in solid organ transplant recipients.

Over 1 000 000 cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been confirmed since the worldwide outbreak began. Not enough data on infected solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are available, especially data about the management of immunosuppressants. We report two cases of COVID-19 in two transplant recipients, with different treatments and prognoses. The first patient received liver transplantation due to hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma and was confirmed to have COVID-19 9 days later. Following a treatment regimen consisting of discontinued immunosuppressant use and low-dose methylprednisolone-based therapy, the patient developed acute rejection but eventually recovered. The other patient had undergone a renal transplant from a living-related donor 17 years ago, and was admitted to the hospital because of persistent fever. This patient was also diagnosed with COVID-19. His treatment regimen consisted of reduced immunosuppressant use. No signs of rejection were observed during the regimen. In the end, the patient successfully recovered from COVID-19. These effectively treated cases can provide a basis for immunosuppressant management of COVID-19-positive SOT recipients.