Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi ; 55(12): 1496-1499, 2021 Dec 06.
Article in Chinese | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1600035


A questionnaire was used to investigate the emergency training needs of novel coronavirus pneumonia of disease prevention and control institutions in provinces, deputy provincial level regions and cities specifically designated in the state plan, and the effect evaluation of emergency training activities conducted by Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (China CDC). The results showed that 67.4% of 47 disease prevention and control institutions (31/46) believed that the emergency training at the initial stage of the epidemic should be conducted as soon as possible, and the form of network training should be given priority. The training should focus on the urgently needed technologies such as epidemiological investigation, formulation and response of prevention and control strategies, laboratory testing, etc. The teaching materials should highlight pertinence and practicability and be presented in the form of electronic video. The average satisfaction score of the video training conducted by China CDC was (8.81±1.125) and the score of audio-video courseware was (8.97±0.893). The needs analysis and evaluation of novel coronavirus pneumonia prevention and control in disease prevention and control institutions could provide reference for the follow-up training and improve the emergency training management.

COVID-19 , Pneumonia , China/epidemiology , Humans , Pneumonia/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
QJM ; 114(10): 721-732, 2021 Dec 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1440648


BACKGROUND: Ivermectin became a popular choice for COVID-19 treatment among clinicians and the public following encouraging results from pre-print trials and in vitro studies. Early reviews recommended the use of ivermectin based largely on non-peer-reviewed evidence, which may not be robust. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of ivermectin for treating COVID-19 based on peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (OSs). METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed were searched from 1 January 2020 to 1 September 2021 for relevant studies. Outcomes included time to viral clearance, duration of hospitalization, mortality, incidence of mechanical ventilation and incidence of adverse events. RoB2 and ROBINS-I were used to assess risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted. GRADE was used to evaluate quality of evidence. RESULTS: Three OSs and 14 RCTs were included in the review. Most RCTs were rated as having some concerns in regards to risk of bias, while OSs were mainly rated as having a moderate risk of bias. Based on meta-analysis of RCTs, the use of ivermectin was not associated with reduction in time to viral clearance, duration of hospitalization, incidence of mortality and incidence of mechanical ventilation. Ivermectin did not significantly increase incidence of adverse events. Meta-analysis of OSs agrees with findings from RCT studies. CONCLUSIONS: Based on very low to moderate quality of evidence, ivermectin was not efficacious at managing COVID-19. Its safety profile permits its use in trial settings to further clarify its role in COVID-19 treatment. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021275302).

COVID-19 , Ivermectin , Hospitalization , Humans , Ivermectin/adverse effects , Observational Studies as Topic , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2