SARS-CoV-2 persistence and infectivity in COVID-19 corpses: a systematic review.

The persistence and infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 in different postmortem COVID-19 specimens remain unclear despite numerous published studies. This information is essential to improve corpses management related to clinical biosafety and viral transmission in medical staff and the public community. We aim to understand SARS-CoV-2 persistence and infectivity in COVID-19 corpses. We conducted a systematic review according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) protocols. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Science Direct Scopus, and Google Scholar databases using specific keywords. We critically reviewed the collected studies and selected the articles that met the criteria. We included 33 scientific papers that involved 491 COVID-19 corpses. The persistence rate and maximum postmortem interval (PMI) range of the SARS-CoV-2 findings were reported in the lungs (138/155, 89.0%; 4 months), followed by the vitreous humor (7/37, 18.9%; 3 months), nasopharynx/oropharynx (156/248, 62.9%; 41 days), abdominal organs (67/110, 60.9%; 17 days), skin (14/24, 58.3%; 17 days), brain (14/31, 45.2%; 17 days), bone marrow (2/2, 100%; 12 days), heart (31/69, 44.9%; 6 days), muscle tissues (9/83, 10.8%; 6 days), trachea (9/20, 45.0%; 5 days), and perioral tissues (21/24, 87.5%; 3.5 days). SARS-CoV-2 infectivity rates in viral culture studies were detected in the lungs (9/15, 60%), trachea (2/4, 50%), oropharynx (1/4, 25%), and perioral (1/4, 25%) at a maximum PMI range of 17 days. The SARS-CoV-2 persists in the human body months after death and should be infectious for weeks. This data should be helpful for postmortem COVID-19 management and viral transmission preventive strategy.

Evaluating the Relationship Between Online Learning Environment and Medical Students' Wellbeing During COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been found to negatively affect medical students' wellbeing. This finding may be related to how medical education is being conducted at present, with online learning replacing face-to-face teaching in many countries. This cross-sectional study aims to assess how the online learning environment is connected to medical students' wellbeing. METHODS: A self-administered online questionnaire was distributed to undergraduate medical students at Universitas Indonesia. The study was conducted from September 2020 to February 2021. The questionnaire included a modified version of the Online Learning Environment Scale (OLES) and the Positive Emotion, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning and Accomplishment (PERMA) profiler. The OLES was used to evaluate students' perceptions of the online learning environment, whereas the PERMA Profiler was used to evaluate students' wellbeing. We validated the questionnaire before distribution. The content validity index was 1.0, with internal consistency coefficients of 0.87 and 0.89, respectively. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the relationship between OLES and PERMA scores. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 274 undergraduate medical students. Students reported moderate to high degrees of positive perception towards online learning, high levels of positive emotions and moderate levels of negative emotions. Statistically significant differences were found across groups based on students' gender, year of study and academic programme. Almost all aspects of the online learning environment were significantly predictive of students' wellbeing, with personal relevance and evaluation and assessment being the two most important predictors (R 2 = 0.201; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Medical students generally enjoyed online learning, although some challenges were presented. The online learning environment was positively associated with students' wellbeing; however, some students expressed negative emotions including loneliness, anxiety, anger and sadness.

Trainees' perceptions and expectations of formal academic mentoring during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesian cardiology residency programs.

PURPOSE: During medical residency programs, physicians develop their professional identities as specialists and encounter high expectations in terms of achieving competencies. The responsibilities of medical trainees include caring for patients, balancing work with personal life, and weathering stress, depression, and burnout. Formal academic mentoring programs strive to ease these burdens. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has altered the trainee­academic mentor relationship, and solutions are needed to address these challenges. The present study aimed to evaluate the formal academic mentoring process through trainees' perceptions and expectations of formal mentoring programs during COVID-19 in Indonesian cardiology residency programs. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used a self-administered online questionnaire to capture trainees' perceptions and expectations regarding academic mentoring programs in 3 cardiology residency programs in Indonesia from October to November 2020. The questionnaire was developed before data collection. Perceptions of the existing mentoring programs were compared with expectations. RESULTS: Responses were gathered from 169 out of 174 residents (response rate, 97.3%). Most trainees reported having direct contact with COVID-19 patients (88.82%). They stated that changes had taken place in the mode and frequency of communication with their academic advisors during the pandemic. Significant differences were found between trainees' perceptions of the existing mentoring programs and their expectations for academic mentoring programs (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Despite the challenges of interacting with their academic mentors, trainees still perceived academic mentors as a vital resource. Study programs need to consider trainees' expectations when designing academic mentoring programs.