Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open ; 3(1): e12605, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2318080

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The BinaxNOW coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Ag Card test (Abbott Diagnostics Scarborough, Inc.) is a lateral flow immunochromatographic point-of-care test for the qualitative detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleocapsid protein antigen. It provides results from nasal swabs in 15 minutes. Our purpose was to determine its sensitivity and specificity for a COVID-19 diagnosis. METHODS: Eligible patients had symptoms of COVID-19 or suspected exposure. After consent, 2 nasal swabs were collected; 1 was tested using the Abbott RealTime SARS-CoV-2 (ie, the gold standard polymerase chain reaction test) and the second run on the BinaxNOW point of care platform by emergency department staff. RESULTS: From July 20 to October 28, 2020, 767 patients were enrolled, of which 735 had evaluable samples. Their mean (SD) age was 46.8 (16.6) years, and 422 (57.4%) were women. A total of 623 (84.8%) patients had COVID-19 symptoms, most commonly shortness of breath (n = 404; 55.0%), cough (n = 314; 42.7%), and fever (n = 253; 34.4%). Although 460 (62.6%) had symptoms ≤7 days, the mean (SD) time since symptom onset was 8.1 (14.0) days. Positive tests occurred in 173 (23.5%) and 141 (19.2%) with the gold standard versus BinaxNOW test, respectively. Those with symptoms >2 weeks had a positive test rate roughly half of those with earlier presentations. In patients with symptoms ≤7 days, the sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive values for the BinaxNOW test were 84.6%, 98.5%, 94.9%, and 95.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The BinaxNOW point-of-care test has good sensitivity and excellent specificity for the detection of COVID-19. We recommend using the BinasNOW for patients with symptoms up to 2 weeks.

2.
Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) ; 36(3): 318-324, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2257624

ABSTRACT

Wearing a cloth face mask has been shown to impair exercise performance; it is essential to understand the impact wearing a cloth face mask may have on cognitive performance. Participants completed two maximal cardiopulmonary exercise tests on a cycle ergometer (with and without a cloth face mask) with a concurrent cognitive task. Blood pressure, heart rate, oxygen saturation, perceived exertion, shortness of breath, accuracy, and reaction time were measured at rest, during each exercise stage, and following a 4-minute recovery period. The final sample included 35 adults (age = 26.1 ± 5.8 years; 12 female/23 male). Wearing a cloth face mask was associated with significant decreases in exercise duration (-2:00 ± 3:40 min, P = 0.003), peak measures of maximal oxygen uptake (-818.9 ± 473.3 mL/min, -19.0 ± 48 mL·min-1·kg-1, P < 0.001), respiratory exchange ratio (-0.04 ± 0.08, P = 0.005), minute ventilation (-36.9 ± 18 L/min), oxygen pulse (-3.9 ± 2.3, P < 0.001), heart rate (-7.9 ± 12.6 bpm, P < 0.001), oxygen saturation (-1.5 ± 2.8%, P = 0.004), and blood lactate (-1.7 ± 2.5 mmol/L, P < 0.001). While wearing a cloth face mask significantly impaired exercise performance during maximal exercise testing, cognitive performance was unaffected in this selected group of young, active adults.

3.
Int J Infect Dis ; 128: 223-229, 2023 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2231594

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Effective and widely available therapies are still needed for outpatients with COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) for early treatment of non-hospitalized individuals diagnosed with COVID-19. METHODS: This randomized, placebo (Plb)-controlled, double-blind, multi-site decentralized clinical trial enrolled non-hospitalized adults with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and six or fewer days of acute respiratory infection symptoms who were randomized to either twice-daily oral LPV/r (400 mg/100 mg) or Plb for 14 days. Daily surveys on study days 1 through 16 and again on study day 28 evaluated symptoms, daily activities, and hospitalization status. The primary outcome was longitudinal change in an ordinal scale based on a combination of symptoms, activity, and hospitalization status through day 15 and was analyzed by use of a Bayesian longitudinal proportional odds logistic regression model for estimating the probability of a superior recovery for LPV/r over Plb (odds ratio >1). RESULTS: Between June 2020 and December 2021, 448 participants were randomized to receive either LPV/r (n = 216) or Plb (n = 221). The mean symptom duration before randomization was 4.3 days (SD 1.3). There were no differences between treatment groups through the first 15 days for the ordinal primary outcome (odds ratio 0.96; 95% credible interval: 0.66 to 1.41). There were 3.2% (n = 7) of LPV/r and 2.7% (n = 6) of Plb participants hospitalized by day 28. Serious adverse events did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: LPV/r did not significantly improve symptom resolution or reduce hospitalization in non-hospitalized participants with COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04372628.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Ritonavir , Adult , Humans , Lopinavir , Bayes Theorem , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Treatment Outcome
4.
Int J Mol Sci ; 23(14)2022 Jul 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1964014

ABSTRACT

Herein, we elucidate the biophysical aspects of the interaction of an important protein, Interleukin-6 (IL6), which is involved in cytokine storm syndrome, with a natural product with anti-inflammatory activity, piperine. Despite the role of piperine in the inhibition of the transcriptional protein NF-κB pathway responsible for activation of IL6 gene expression, there are no studies to the best of our knowledge regarding the characterisation of the molecular interaction of the IL6-piperine complex. In this context, the characterisation was performed with spectroscopic experiments aided by molecular modelling. Fluorescence spectroscopy alongside van't Hoff analyses showed that the complexation event is a spontaneous process driven by non-specific interactions. Circular dichroism aided by molecular dynamics revealed that piperine caused local α-helix reduction. Molecular docking and molecular dynamics disclosed the microenvironment of interaction as non-polar amino acid residues. Although piperine has three available hydrogen bond acceptors, only one hydrogen-bond was formed during our simulation experiments, reinforcing the major role of non-specific interactions that we observed experimentally. Root mean square deviation (RMSD) and hydrodynamic radii revealed that the IL6-piperine complex was stable during 800 ns of simulation. Taken together, these results can support ongoing IL6 drug discovery efforts.


Subject(s)
Interleukin-6 , Polyunsaturated Alkamides , Alkaloids , Benzodioxoles/chemistry , Molecular Docking Simulation , Molecular Dynamics Simulation , Piperidines , Polyunsaturated Alkamides/metabolism
5.
Chest ; 162(5): 982-994, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1914240

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been one of the most common treatments for COVID-19, but most clinical trial data to date have not supported its efficacy. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is rigorously selected COVID-19 convalescent plasma with neutralizing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies an efficacious treatment for adults hospitalized with COVID-19? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial among adults hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection and acute respiratory symptoms for < 14 days. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned to receive one unit of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (n = 487) or placebo (n = 473). The primary outcome was clinical status (disease severity) 14 days following study infusion measured with a seven-category ordinal scale ranging from discharged from the hospital with resumption of normal activities (lowest score) to death (highest score). The primary outcome was analyzed with a multivariable ordinal regression model, with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) < 1.0 indicating more favorable outcomes with convalescent plasma than with placebo. In secondary analyses, trial participants were stratified according to the presence of endogenous anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies ("serostatus") at randomization. The trial included 13 secondary efficacy outcomes, including 28-day mortality. RESULTS: Among 974 randomized patients, 960 were included in the primary analysis. Clinical status on the ordinal outcome scale at 14 days did not differ between the convalescent plasma and placebo groups in the overall population (aOR, 1.04; one-seventh support interval [1/7 SI], 0.82-1.33), in patients without endogenous antibodies (aOR, 1.15; 1/7 SI, 0.74-1.80), or in patients with endogenous antibodies (aOR, 0.96; 1/7 SI, 0.72-1.30). None of the 13 secondary efficacy outcomes were different between groups. At 28 days, 89 of 482 (18.5%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and 80 of 465 (17.2%) patients in the placebo group had died (aOR, 1.04; 1/7 SI, 0.69-1.58). INTERPRETATION: Among adults hospitalized with COVID-19, including those seronegative for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, treatment with convalescent plasma did not improve clinical outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04362176; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , COVID-19/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Hospitalization , Treatment Outcome , COVID-19 Serotherapy
6.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(3): e222735, 2022 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1748801

ABSTRACT

Importance: SARS-CoV-2 viral entry may disrupt angiotensin II (AII) homeostasis, contributing to COVID-19 induced lung injury. AII type 1 receptor blockade mitigates lung injury in preclinical models, although data in humans with COVID-19 remain mixed. Objective: To test the efficacy of losartan to reduce lung injury in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in 13 hospitals in the United States from April 2020 to February 2021. Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and a respiratory sequential organ failure assessment score of at least 1 and not already using a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor were eligible for participation. Data were analyzed from April 19 to August 24, 2021. Interventions: Losartan 50 mg orally twice daily vs equivalent placebo for 10 days or until hospital discharge. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the imputed arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (Pao2:Fio2) ratio at 7 days. Secondary outcomes included ordinal COVID-19 severity; days without supplemental o2, ventilation, or vasopressors; and mortality. Losartan pharmacokinetics and RAAS components (AII, angiotensin-[1-7] and angiotensin-converting enzymes 1 and 2)] were measured in a subgroup of participants. Results: A total of 205 participants (mean [SD] age, 55.2 [15.7] years; 123 [60.0%] men) were randomized, with 101 participants assigned to losartan and 104 participants assigned to placebo. Compared with placebo, losartan did not significantly affect Pao2:Fio2 ratio at 7 days (difference, -24.8 [95%, -55.6 to 6.1]; P = .12). Compared with placebo, losartan did not improve any secondary clinical outcomes and led to fewer vasopressor-free days than placebo (median [IQR], 9.4 [9.1-9.8] vasopressor-free days vs 8.7 [8.2-9.3] vasopressor-free days). Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that initiation of orally administered losartan to hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and acute lung injury did not improve Pao2:Fio2 ratio at 7 days. These data may have implications for ongoing clinical trials. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04312009.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , COVID-19/complications , Losartan/therapeutic use , Lung Injury/prevention & control , Lung Injury/virology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , Double-Blind Method , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Lung Injury/diagnosis , Male , Middle Aged , Organ Dysfunction Scores , Respiratory Function Tests , United States
7.
Br J Sports Med ; 56(2): 107-113, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1604636

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To (1) determine if wearing a cloth face mask significantly affected exercise performance and associated physiological responses, and (2) describe perceptual measures of effort and participants' experiences while wearing a face mask during a maximal treadmill test. METHODS: Randomised controlled trial of healthy adults aged 18-29 years. Participants completed two (with and without a cloth face mask) maximal cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPETs) on a treadmill following the Bruce protocol. Blood pressure, heart rate, oxygen saturation, exertion and shortness of breath were measured. Descriptive data and physical activity history were collected pretrial; perceptions of wearing face masks and experiential data were gathered immediately following the masked trial. RESULTS: The final sample included 31 adults (age=23.2±3.1 years; 14 women/17 men). Data indicated that wearing a cloth face mask led to a significant reduction in exercise time (-01:39±01:19 min/sec, p<0.001), maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) (-818±552 mL/min, p<0.001), minute ventilation (-45.2±20.3 L/min), maximal heart rate (-8.4±17.0 beats per minute, p<0.01) and increased dyspnoea (1.7±2.9, p<0.001). Our data also suggest that differences in SpO2 and rating of perceived exertion existed between the different stages of the CPET as participant's exercise intensity increased. No significant differences were found between conditions after the 7-minute recovery period. CONCLUSION: Cloth face masks led to a 14% reduction in exercise time and 29% decrease in VO2max, attributed to perceived discomfort associated with mask-wearing. Compared with no mask, participants reported feeling increasingly short of breath and claustrophobic at higher exercise intensities while wearing a cloth face mask. Coaches, trainers and athletes should consider modifying the frequency, intensity, time and type of exercise when wearing a cloth face mask.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Running , Adolescent , Adult , Exercise Test , Female , Heart Rate , Humans , Male , Masks , Oxygen Saturation , Young Adult
8.
Trials ; 22(1): 221, 2021 Mar 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1143248

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma is being used widely as a treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma is unclear. METHODS: The Passive Immunity Trial for Our Nation (PassITON) is a multicenter, placebo-controlled, blinded, randomized clinical trial being conducted in the USA to provide high-quality evidence on the efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma as a treatment for adults hospitalized with symptomatic disease. Adults hospitalized with COVID-19 with respiratory symptoms for less than 14 days are eligible. Enrolled patients are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to 1 unit (200-399 mL) of COVID-19 convalescent plasma that has demonstrated neutralizing function using a SARS-CoV-2 chimeric virus neutralization assay. Study treatments are administered in a blinded fashion and patients are followed for 28 days. The primary outcome is clinical status 14 days after study treatment as measured on a 7-category ordinal scale assessing mortality, respiratory support, and return to normal activities of daily living. Key secondary outcomes include mortality and oxygen-free days. The trial is projected to enroll 1000 patients and is designed to detect an odds ratio ≤ 0.73 for the primary outcome. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide the most robust data available to date on the efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma for the treatment of adults hospitalized with acute moderate to severe COVID-19. These data will be useful to guide the treatment of COVID-19 patients in the current pandemic and for informing decisions about whether developing a standardized infrastructure for collecting and disseminating convalescent plasma to prepare for future viral pandemics is indicated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04362176 . Registered on 24 April 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Hospitalization , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Host-Pathogen Interactions , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , United States , COVID-19 Serotherapy
9.
J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev ; 5(1)2021 01 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1055227

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has rapidly affected all facets of everyday life including the practice of medicine. Hospital systems and medical practices have evolved to protect patients, physicians, and staff and conserve personal protective equipment and resources. Orthopaedic practices have been specifically affected by social distancing and stay at home guidelines, limiting in-office practice and elective surgery restrictions. This, in turn, has had an effect on resident education. Previous literature has been published regarding how academic programs have adjusted to these changes. However, the effects on smaller orthopaedic residencies with nonacademic faculty has not been discussed. The orthopaedic residency at Baylor University Medical Center of Dallas is a fifteen-resident program with a combination of hospital employed and private practice faculty. We adjusted our resident education in mid-March 2020 to keep residents safe while trying to maximize surgical and clinical education and outside research. GOALS: Our goals were to come up with a plan allowed for continuing high-level patient care and resident education while protecting residents and limiting burnout. MODEL: We devised a four-team system with five-day call periods. Interactions between teams were strictly minimized. We also moved to a web-based academic curriculum and devised a system for safe resident participation in surgical cases. The model has been adjusted based on attending and resident feedback. CONCLUSION: Until we develop effective treatments or vaccination for COVID-19, there is a possibility that it will be an ongoing threat. Resident education must also adapt to the changing environment while continuing to provide residents safe opportunities for patient care, didactic education, and research. We believe we have come up with a sustainable, adaptable model for resident education during this challenging time.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Curriculum , Education, Medical, Graduate/methods , Internship and Residency/methods , Orthopedics/education , Pandemics , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL