Frequency of coinfection by respiratory pathogens and its impact on the prognosis of patients with COVID-19

Introduction: Co-infection between other microorganisms and SARS-CoV-2, such as viruses, bacteria and fungi, is an important factor in the management of COVID-19, which could increase the difficulties in diagnosis, management, prognosis, and even increase the mortality. Objectives: The objective of this review is to describe the published scientific evidence regarding coinfection in patients with COVID-19. Methods: A bibliographic search of studies published in Spanish or English was carried out using the PubMed, The Cochrane Library and Google Scholar search engines. Studies published between January 2020 and January 24, 2021 were assessed. Results: 25 articles from various continents (America, Asia and Europe) were included. All the studies had patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 added to some other test that identified some co-infection. We identified 18 studies that showed bacterial coinfection, 17 studies of viral coinfection and 5 studies of fungal coinfection. The prevalence of coinfection showed extremely dissimilar figures according to the population studied and diagnostic criteria. Conclusions: The presence of coinfection seems to be linked to a higher frequency of unfavorable outcomes. However, it is important to develop Latin American studies, given the heterogeneity in the studies seen in different countries. Standardized definitions should be developed in order to be able to assess the impact of coinfections in patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19.

Regional distribution of mortality by COVID-19 in Peru

Objectives: Compare the death rate from COVID-19 at the national level by regions and departments from March to September 2020. Methods: Quantitative, observational, cross-sectional, ecological and retrospective study. The data was extracted from the National Death System (SINADEF) in Microsoft Excel 2016 and imported into Stata. The variables were described as frequencies and percentages. Mortality was obtained by dividing the total deaths over the total population according to the last census. An adjusted exploratory analysis was performed using robust regression methods to evaluate the association between mortality by department and regions adjusted for age and sex of the deceased. P <0.05 was considered significant. Results: 32535 deaths were reported, 69.84% were male and the median was 67. The mortality rate in the Costa region 145 deaths were calculated (n = 24,276), followed by Sierra with 51 (n = 4434) and Selva with 63 (n = 2545). There were significant differences in mortality according to the region, in the comparison of the coast with the Sierra region a beta coefficient of -96.28 was found (p <0.001 IC -123.76 -68.77), while in the comparison with the Selva it was determined a coefficient of -50.38 (p 0.01 95% CI -91.47 -9.29). No significant association was found between the mortality rate and the average age or sex of the deceased by department. Conclusions: The death rate from COVID-19 at the national level was 101 per 100 000 inhabitants. The mortality rate found was higher on the Costa region than in the Sierra and Selva, regardless of the proportion of men, women or age.

Perception of risk to covid-19 and mental health indicators in workers of a Peruvian hospital: An analytical cross-sectional study

Introduction COVID-19 has caused great fear on health professionals and could affect their mental health, therefore it is important to determine the association between the perception of risk to COVID-19 and mental health in workers of a Peruvian hospital. Methods Analytical cross-sectional study, through virtual survey. The dependent variables were: depression, anxiety and stress;The independent variable was perception of risk to COVID-19 and the covariates: sociodemographic, family, work and clinical data. Crude and adjusted prevalence ratios were found with a 95% confidence interval and a significance level of 5%. Results There was no association between risk perception and depression (adjusted prevalence ratio: 0.98 95% confidence interval: 0.89 to 1.08), anxiety (adjusted prevalence ratio: 0.94 95% confidence interval: 0.89 to 1.00), stress (adjusted prevalence ratio: 0.89 95% confidence interval 0.76 to 1.04). In the multivariate analysis, an association was found between depression with direct contact with the COVID-19 patient (adjusted prevalence ratio: 2.06, 95% confidence interval: 1.14 to 3.70) and with having a comorbidity (adjusted prevalence ratio: 2.56 95% confidence interval: 1.52 to 4.30);likewise, between anxiety with number of children (adjusted prevalence ratio: 1.09 95% confidence interval: 1.00 to 1.18), with direct contact with COVID-19 patient (adjusted prevalence ratio: 2.67 95% confidence interval 1.46 to 4.85) and having comorbidity (adjusted prevalence ratio: 2.00 95% confidence interval: 1.40 to 2.86);finally, between stress with direct contact with the COVID-19 patient (adjusted prevalence ratio: 2.86, 95% confidence interval: 1.20 to 6.83). Conclusions No statistically significant association was found between risk perception and depression, anxiety, or stress. However, there was an association between depression, anxiety, and stress, each with direct contact with COVID-19 patients;between anxiety and depression, each with having comorbidities and, finally, anxiety with the number of children.