Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Clin Nutr ; 41(12): 2934-2939, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2149545

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIMS: COVID-19 patients present a high hospitalization rate with a high mortality risk for those requiring intensive care. When these patients have other comorbid conditions and older age, the risk for severe disease and poor outcomes after ICU admission are increased. The present work aims to describe the preliminary results of the ongoing NUTRICOVID study about the nutritional and functional status and the quality of life of adult COVID-19 survivors after ICU discharge, emphasizing the in-hospital and discharge situation of this population. METHODS: A multicenter, ambispective, observational cohort study was conducted in 16 public hospitals of the Community of Madrid with COVID-19 survivors who were admitted to the ICU during the first outbreak. Preliminary results of this study include data retrospectively collected. Malnutrition and sarcopenia were screened at discharge using MUST and SARC-F; the use of healthcare resources was measured as the length of hospital stay and requirement of respiratory support and tracheostomy during hospitalization; other study variables were the need for medical nutrition therapy (MNT); and patients' functional status (Barthel index) and health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L). RESULTS: A total of 176 patients were included in this preliminary analysis. Most patients were male and older than 60 years, who suffered an average (SD) weight loss of 16.6% (8.3%) during the hospital stay, with a median length of stay of 53 (27-89.5) days and a median ICU stay of 24.5 (11-43.5) days. At discharge, 83.5% and 86.9% of the patients were at risk of malnutrition and sarcopenia, respectively, but only 38% were prescribed MNT. In addition, more than 70% of patients had significant impairment of their mobility and to conduct their usual activities at hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary analysis evidences the high nutritional and functional impairment of COVID-19 survivors at hospital discharge and highlights the need for guidelines and systematic protocols, together with appropriate rehabilitation programs, to optimize the nutritional management of these patients after discharge.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Malnutrition , Sarcopenia , Adult , Humans , Male , Female , Quality of Life , COVID-19/epidemiology , Sarcopenia/epidemiology , Functional Status , Retrospective Studies , Intensive Care Units , Hospitalization , Survivors , Malnutrition/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Nutritional Status
2.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(8)2022 Jul 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1969533

ABSTRACT

The objective of this study was to assess the local and systemic adverse reactions after the administration of a COVID-19 mRNA-1273 booster between December 2021 and February 2022 by comparing the type of mRNA vaccine used as primary series (mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2) and homologous versus heterologous booster in health care workers (HCW). A cross-sectional study was performed in HCW at a tertiary hospital in Barcelona, Spain. A total of 17% of booster recipients responded to the questionnaire. The frequency of reactogenicity after the mRNA-1273 booster (88.5%) was similar to the mRNA-1273 primary doses (85.8%), and higher than the BNT162b2 primary doses (71.1%). The reactogenicity was similar after receiving a heterologous booster compared to a homologous booster (88.0% vs. 90.2%, p = 0.3), and no statistically significant differences were identified in any local or systemic reactions. A higher frequency of medical leave was identified in the homologous booster dose group vs. the heterologous booster dose group (AOR 1.45; 95% CI: 1.00-2.07; p = 0.045). Our findings could be helpful in improving vaccine confidence toward heterologous combinations in the general population and in health care workers.

3.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 12(7)2022 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1917365

ABSTRACT

The emergency of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to the off-label use of drugs without data on their toxicity profiles in patients with COVID-19, or on their concomitant use. Patients included in the COVID-19 Patient Registry of a tertiary hospital during the first wave were analyzed to evaluate the adverse drug reactions (ADRs) with the selected treatments. Twenty-one percent of patients (197 out of 933) had at least one ADR, with a total of 240 ADRs. Patients with ADRs were more commonly treated with multiple drugs for COVID-19 infection than patients without ADRs (p < 0.001). They were younger (median 62 years vs. 70.1 years; p < 0.001) and took less medication regularly (69.5% vs. 75.7%; p = 0.031). The most frequent ADRs were gastrointestinal (67.1%), hepatobiliary (10.8%), and cardiac disorders (3.3%). Drugs more frequently involved included lopinavir/ritonavir (82.2%), hydroxychloroquine (72.1%), and azithromycin (66.5%). Although most ADRs recovered without sequelae, fatal cases were described, even though the role of the disease could not be completely ruled out. In similar situations, efforts should be made to use the drugs in the context of clinical trials, and to limit off-label use to those drugs with a better benefit/risk profile in specific situations and for patients at high risk of poor disease prognosis.

4.
Enfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica (English ed.) ; 40(6):289-295, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1887537

ABSTRACT

Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) compared with no treatment in healthcare workers with mild SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods Prospective, non-randomized study. All health professionals with confirmed COVID-19 between April 7 and May 6, 2020, non-requiring initial hospitalization were asked to participate. Patients who accepted treatment were given HCQ for five days (loading dose of 400 mg q12 h the first day followed by200 mg q12 h). Control group included patients with contraindications for HCQ or who rejected treatment. Study outcomes were negative conversion and viral dynamics of SARS-CoV-2, symptoms duration and disease progression. Result Overall, 142 patients were enrolled: 87 in treatment group and 55 in control group. The median age was 37 years and 75% were female, with few comorbidities. There were no significant differences in time to negative conversion of PCR between both groups. The only significant difference in the probability of negative conversion of PCR was observed at day 21 (18.7%, 95%CI 2.0–35.4). The decrease of SARS-CoV-2 viral load during follow-up was similar in both groups. A non significant reduction in duration of some symptoms in HCQ group was observed. Two patients with HCQ and 4 without treatment developed pneumonia. No patients required admission to the Intensive Care Unit or died. About 50% of patients presented mild side effects of HCQ, mainly diarrhea. Conclusions Our study failed to show a substantial benefit of HCQ in viral dynamics and in resolution of clinical symptoms in health care workers with mild COVID-19.

5.
Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin (Engl Ed) ; 40(6): 289-295, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1881951

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) compared with no treatment in healthcare workers with mild SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Prospective, non-randomized study. All health professionals with confirmed COVID-19 between April 7 and May 6, 2020, non-requiring initial hospitalization were asked to participate. Patients who accepted treatment were given HCQ for five days (loading dose of 400mg q12h the first day followed by200mg q12h). Control group included patients with contraindications for HCQ or who rejected treatment. Study outcomes were negative conversion and viral dynamics of SARS-CoV-2, symptoms duration and disease progression. RESULT: Overall, 142 patients were enrolled: 87 in treatment group and 55 in control group. The median age was 37 years and 75% were female, with few comorbidities. There were no significant differences in time to negative conversion of PCR between both groups. The only significant difference in the probability of negative conversion of PCR was observed at day 21 (18.7%, 95%CI 2.0-35.4). The decrease of SARS-CoV-2 viral load during follow-up was similar in both groups. A non significant reduction in duration of some symptoms in HCQ group was observed. Two patients with HCQ and 4 without treatment developed pneumonia. No patients required admission to the Intensive Care Unit or died. About 50% of patients presented mild side effects of HCQ, mainly diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: Our study failed to show a substantial benefit of HCQ in viral dynamics and in resolution of clinical symptoms in health care workers with mild COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Hydroxychloroquine , Adult , Delivery of Health Care , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Male , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Viruses ; 14(1)2021 12 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1580399

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is neither always accessible nor easy to perform in children. We aimed to propose a machine learning model to assess the need for a SARS-CoV-2 test in children (<16 years old), depending on their clinical symptoms. METHODS: Epidemiological and clinical data were obtained from the REDCap® registry. Overall, 4434 SARS-CoV-2 tests were performed in symptomatic children between 1 November 2020 and 31 March 2021, 784 were positive (17.68%). We pre-processed the data to be suitable for a machine learning (ML) algorithm, balancing the positive-negative rate and preparing subsets of data by age. We trained several models and chose those with the best performance for each subset. RESULTS: The use of ML demonstrated an AUROC of 0.65 to predict a COVID-19 diagnosis in children. The absence of high-grade fever was the major predictor of COVID-19 in younger children, whereas loss of taste or smell was the most determinant symptom in older children. CONCLUSIONS: Although the accuracy of the models was lower than expected, they can be used to provide a diagnosis when epidemiological data on the risk of exposure to COVID-19 is unknown.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Machine Learning , Male , Models, Statistical , Predictive Value of Tests
7.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 9(12)2021 Dec 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1572683

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to assess adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines, comparing the BNT162b2 or the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines and the presence and seriousness of a previous COVID-19 infection. We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of vaccinated healthcare workers at a tertiary hospital in Barcelona (Spain). Thirty-eight percent of vaccine recipients responded to the questionnaire. We compared the prevalence of adverse reactions by vaccine type and history of COVID-19 infections. A total of 2373 respondents had received the BNT162b2 vaccine, and 506 the mRNA-1273 vaccine. The prevalence of at least one adverse reaction with doses 1 and 2 was 41% and 70%, respectively, in the BNT162b2 group, and 60% and 92% in the mRNA-1273 group (p < 0.001). The BNT162b2 group reported less prevalence of all adverse reactions. Need for medical leave was significantly more frequent among the mRNA-1273 group (12% versus 4.6% p < 0.001). Interestingly, respondents with a history of allergies or chronic illnesses did not report more adverse reactions. The frequency of adverse reactions with dose 2 was 96% (95% CI 88-100%) for those with a history of COVID-19 related hospitalization, and 86% (95% CI 83-89%) for those with mild or moderate symptomatic COVID-19, significantly higher than for participants with no history of COVID-19 infections (67%, 95% CI 65-69%). Our results could help inform vaccine recipients of the probability of their having adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines.

8.
Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin (Engl Ed) ; 2020 Dec 09.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1014454

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) compared with no treatment in healthcare workers with mild SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Prospective, non-randomized study. All health professionals with confirmed COVID-19 between April 7 and May 6, 2020, non-requiring initial hospitalization were asked to participate. Patients who accepted treatment were given HCQ for five days (loading dose of 400mg q12h the first day followed by200mg q12h). Control group included patients with contraindications for HCQ or who rejected treatment. Study outcomes were negative conversion and viral dynamics of SARS-CoV-2, symptoms duration and disease progression. RESULT: Overall, 142 patients were enrolled: 87 in treatment group and 55 in control group. The median age was 37 years and 75% were female, with few comorbidities. There were no significant differences in time to negative conversion of PCR between both groups. The only significant difference in the probability of negative conversion of PCR was observed at day 21 (18.7%, 95%CI 2.0-35.4). The decrease of SARS-CoV-2 viral load during follow-up was similar in both groups. A non significant reduction in duration of some symptoms in HCQ group was observed. Two patients with HCQ and 4 without treatment developed pneumonia. No patients required admission to the Intensive Care Unit or died. About 50% of patients presented mild side effects of HCQ, mainly diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: Our study failed to show a substantial benefit of HCQ in viral dynamics and in resolution of clinical symptoms in health care workers with mild COVID-19.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL