Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(11)2022 06 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1884130

ABSTRACT

Rapid antigen detection of SARS-CoV-2 has been widely used. However, there is no consensus on the best sampling method. This study aimed to determine the level of agreement between SARS-CoV-2 fluorescent detection and a real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR), using different swab methods. Fifty COVID-19 and twenty-six healthy patients were confirmed via rRT-PCR, and each patient was sampled via four swab methods: oropharyngeal (O), nasal (N), spit saliva (S), and combined O/N/S swabs. Each swab was analyzed using an immunofluorescent Quidel system. The combined O/N/S swab provided the highest sensitivity (86%; Kappa = 0.8), followed by nasal (76%; Kappa = 0.68), whereas the saliva revealed the lowest sensitivity (66%; kappa = 0.57). Further, when considering positive detection in any of the O, N, and S samples, excellent agreements with rRT-PCR were achieved (Kappa = 0.91 and 0.97, respectively). Finally, among multiple factors, only patient age revealed a significant negative association with antigenic detection in the saliva. It is concluded that immunofluorescent detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen is a reliable method for rapid diagnosis under circumstances where at least two swabs, one nasal and one oropharyngeal, are analyzed. Alternatively, a single combined O/N/S swab would improve the sensitivity in contrast to each site swabbed alone.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Saliva , Sensitivity and Specificity , Specimen Handling/methods
2.
Confl Health ; 16(1): 18, 2022 Apr 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1793917

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In 2008, Somalia introduced an electronic based Early Warning Alert and Response Network (EWARN) for real time detection and response to alerts of epidemic prone diseases in a country experiencing a complex humanitarian situation. EWARN was deactivated between 2008 to 2016 due to civil conflict and reactivated in 2017 during severe drought during a cholera outbreak. We present an assessment of the performance of the EWARN in Somalia from January 2017 to December 2020, reflections on the successes and failures, and provide future perspectives for enhancement of the EWARN to effectively support an Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response strategy. METHODS: We described geographical coverage of the EWARN, system attributes, which included; sensitivity, flexibility, timeliness, data quality (measured by completeness), and positive predictive value (PPV). We tested for trends of timeliness of submission of epidemiological reports across the years using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel stratified test of association. RESULTS: By December 2020, all 6 states and the Banadir Administrative Region were implementing EWARN. In 2017, only 24.6% of the records were submitted on time, but by 2020, 96.8% of the reports were timely (p < 0.001). Completeness averaged < 60% in all the 4 years, with the worst-performing year being 2017. Overall, PPV was 14.1%. Over time, PPV improved from 7.1% in 2017 to 15.4% in 2019 but declined to 9.7% in 2020. Alert verification improved from 2.0% in 2017 to 52.6% by 2020, (p < 0.001). In 2020, EWARN was enhanced to facilitate COVID-19 reporting demonstrating its flexibility to accommodate the integration of reportable diseases. CONCLUSIONS: During the past 4 years of implementing EWARN in Somalia, the system has improved significantly in timeliness, disease alerts verification, and flexibility in responding to emerging disease outbreaks, and enhanced coverage. However, the system is not yet optimal due to incompleteness and lack of integration with other systems suggesting the need to build additional capacity for improved disease surveillance coverage, buttressed by system improvements to enhance data quality and integration.

3.
Journal of Health Psychology ; 27(4):805-824, 2022.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-1765282

ABSTRACT

A systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted to examine the overall prevalence of psychological health outcomes during COVID-19. Seven databases were systematically searched to include studies reporting on at least one psychological outcome. The pooled prevalence of primary psychological outcomes was 26% (95%CI: 21–32). Pooled prevalence for symptoms of PTSD was 33% (0–86), anxiety 28% (21–36), stress 27% (14–43), and depression 22% (13–33). The prevalence of psychological outcomes was similar in healthcare workers and in the general population (34% [24–44] and 33% [27–40] respectively). High prevalence figures support the importance of ensuring adequate provision of resources for mental health. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Journal of Health Psychology is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

4.
Travel Med Infect Dis ; 43: 102119, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1267935

ABSTRACT

The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARSCoV- 2) emerged in Wuhan City, China. The SARS-CoV-2 crossed borders and quickly transformed into a "Public health emergency of international concern". Countries around the globe are in the race to achieve herd immunity. We describe the steps taken by Saudi Arabia to achieve this goal.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Saudi Arabia , Vaccination
5.
J Clin Oncol ; 39(1): 66-78, 2021 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-966781

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Critical Care/methods , Elective Surgical Procedures/methods , Neoplasms/surgery , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Cohort Studies , Epidemics , Female , Humans , International Cooperation , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Postoperative Complications/virology , SARS-CoV-2/physiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL