A Systematic Review on the Safety and Efficacy of COVID-19 Vaccines Approved in Saudi Arabia.

Comprehensive safety and efficacy studies of COVID-19 vaccines might reduce the apprehension of the general population about the adverse reactions and duration of protection offered by them. The study aimed to conduct a systemic review on the four COVID-19 vaccines (AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Moderna, and Janssen) approved in Saudi Arabia. The study was conducted by reviewing the published articles from electronic databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science using the search terms "COVID-19", "Vaccine", "Safety", "Efficacy" and "Human trials" and as per the standard guidelines for systemic review. The review analyzed eighteen articles and the data from them were evaluated to analyze the safety and efficacy of the vaccines in different groups of population such as males, females, those above 18 years and people with co-morbidities. The common local reactions observed after vaccination were pain at the site of injection (40-70%), redness (16-30%), swelling (18-39%) and tenderness (20-40%). The systemic reactions reported were fever (40-60%), chills (12-23%), fatigue (44-65%), headache (30-42%) and muscle pain (15-40%). The efficacy was observed to be above the threshold value (60%) stipulated by the WHO. However, precautions need to be followed while vaccinating special groups of population such as those that are pregnant, lactating or experiencing severe illness. Additionally, the rare and serious adverse events reported remotely after vaccination need more studies.

Benefits of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin on mortality in patients with severe COVID-19: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: The clinical benefits of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) in treating COVID-19 remained controversial. Methods: We systematically searched databases up to February 17, 2022, for studies examining the efficacy of IVIg compared to routine care. Meta-analyses were conducted using the random-effects model. Subgroup analysis, meta-regression, and trial series analysis w ere performed to explore heterogeneity and statistical significance. Results: A total of 4,711 hospitalized COVID-19 patients (1,925 IVIg treated and 2786 control) were collected from 17 studies, including five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 12 cohort studies. The application of IVIg was not associated with all-cause mortality (RR= 0.89 [0.63, 1.26], P= 0.53; I2 = 75%), the length of hospital stays (MD= 0.29 [-3.40, 6.44] days, P= 0.88; I2 = 96%), the needs for mechanical ventilation (RR= 0.93 ([0.73, 1.19], P= 0.31; I2 = 56%), or the incidence of adverse events (RR= 1.15 [0.99, 1.33], P= 0.06; I2 = 20%). Subgroup analyses showed that overall mortality among patients with severe COVID-19 was reduced in the high-dose IVIg subgroup (RR= 0.33 [0.13, 0.86], P= 0.02, I2 = 68%; very low certainty). Conclusions: Results of this study suggest that severe hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with high-dose IVIg would have a lower risk of death than patients with routine care. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021231040, identifier CRD42021231040.

Facial dermatoses induced by face masks: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

The use of masks for infection control was common in the COVID-19 pandemic. As numerous cross-sectional studies have suggested a link between the use of such masks and various facial dermatoses, a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies was conducted to evaluate this association, as well as potential risk factors for the development of such facial dermatoses. Observational studies were searched for in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register. Thirty-seven observational studies with a total of 29 557 study participants were identified. This study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist and quality was assessed via the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale., Overall prevalence of facial dermatoses was 55%. Individually, acne, facial dermatitis, itch and pressure injuries were consistently reported as facial dermatoses, with a pooled prevalence of 31%, 24%, 30% and 31%, respectively. Duration of mask-wear was the most significant risk factor for the development of facial dermatoses (95% CI: 1.31-1.54, p < 0.001). Overall, facial dermatoses associated with mask wear are common, and consist of distinct entities. They are related to duration of use. Appropriate and tailored treatment is important to improve the outcomes for these affected patients.

Musicoterapia y telehealth: Una revisión sistemática

La crisis sanitaria y las restricciones provocadas por la COVID-19 han tenido un gran impacto en la salud física y mental con un incremento de la teleasistencia (telehealth). Se realiza una revisión sistemática de la literatura sobre la aplicación de la musicoterapia en telehealth en PsycInfo, PsicoDoc, Scopus, PubMed y Web of Science. Se identificaron 8 estudios que muestran mejoras en los objetivos terapéuticos y el uso de nuevos modelos de intervención y recursos tecnológicos. Se puede concluir que la investigación empírica en musicoterapia con telehealth es escasa, pero los estudios seleccionados abren un camino para su aplicación ante la dificultad de acceso a una terapia presencial. Alternate : La crisis sanitaria y las restricciones provocadas por la COVID-19 han tenido un gran impacto en la salud física y mental con un incremento de la teleasistencia (telehealth). Se realiza una revisión sistemática de la literatura sobre la aplicación de la musicoterapia en telehealth en PsycInfo, PsicoDoc, Scopus, PubMed y Web of Science. Se identificaron 8 estudios que muestran mejoras en los objetivos terapéuticos y el uso de nuevos modelos de intervención y recursos tecnológicos. Se puede concluir que la investigación empírica en musicoterapia con telehealth es escasa, pero los estudios seleccionados abren un camino para su aplicación ante la dificultad de acceso a una terapia presencial. Palabras clave: música;salud;musicoterapia;telehealth Destacados: La crisis sanitaria por COVID-19 ha provocado gran impacto en la salud física y mental. La musicoterapia vía telehealth puede ser una solución a las dificultades en disponibilidad de la terapia presencial.

The Diagnostic Accuracy of Xpert Xpress to SARS-CoV-2: A systematic review.

The SARS-CoV-2 infection rate, as well as mortality rate, is high. There is an urgent need for a high-throughput, accurate and reliable method of diagnosing COVID-19 pneumonia. We included references from databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase, and extracted data. Then, MetaDisc and STATA were used to establish forest plots and funnel plots for meta-analysis. We collected 14 articles and performed a systematic review. The following results were obtained: sensitivity and specificity were 0.97 (0.96 to 0.98) and 0.97 (0.96 to 0.98) respectively; PLR and NLR were 24.51 (16.63-36.12) and 0.03 (0.01 to 0.10) respectively, DOR was 975.15 (430.11-2210.88), and AUC was 0.9926. When Xpress detects SARS-CoV-2 in different samples, the heterogeneity is small and the specificity and sensitivity are extremely high. We recommend the employment of Xpert Xpress analysis in rapid screening.

COVID 19 Scoping: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The world has faced the pandemic of COVID-19 in the march of 2020 and still it continues to effect in 2021. Hence, in the present study we aim to evaluate the gulps in the research so that certain recommendations can be made for the future research. We conducted a scoping review of the COVID meta-analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Online data was collected from the search engines of EBSCO, PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus. The searched terms were COVID-19, CORONA, SARS-CoV-2, clinical features, Wuhan, etc. The study articles were collected that from January 2020 to February 2021. Based on the PRISMA guidelines, the meta-analysis was performed. RESULTS: In the present study, we finalized 316 articles. On February 2020, the first article was published. We observed a spike in the meta-analysis later on. Most of the meta-analysis were issued in the virology and infection magazines. As expected, the majority studies were from Wuhan. The other countries that published the meta-analysis were the USA, the UK, and Italy. The studies included in each meta-analysis were nearly 25 and the subjects were approximately 16 thousand. However, we noticed a poor quality in majority of these meta-analysis and <10% of all the meta-analysis showed higher confidence. CONCLUSION: A poor quality of the meta-analysis has predominated the data and very few are of high quality. All the journal editors and the reviewing team should verify and thoroughly organize the protocol so that only high quality meta-analysis are encouraged.

Mortality Benefit of Convalescent Plasma in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance/Background: With a scarcity of high-grade evidence for COVID-19 treatment, researchers and health care providers across the world have resorted to classical and historical interventions. Immunotherapy with convalescent plasma (CPT) is one such therapeutic option. Methods: A systematized search was conducted for articles published between December 2019 and 18th January 2021 focusing on convalescent plasma efficacy and safety in COVID-19. The primary outcomes were defined as mortality benefit in patients treated with convalescent plasma compared to standard therapy/placebo. The secondary outcome was pooled mortality rate and the adverse event rate in convalescent plasma-treated patients. Results: A total of 27,706 patients were included in the qualitative analysis, and a total of 3,262 (2,127 in convalescent plasma-treated patients and 1,135 in the non-convalescent plasma/control group) patients died. The quantitative synthesis in 23 studies showed that the odds of mortality in patients who received plasma therapy were significantly lower than those in patients who did not receive plasma therapy [odds ratio (OR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53-0.80, p < 0.0001, I 2 = 15%). The mortality benefit remains the same even for 14 trials/prospective studies (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43-0.81, p = 0.001, I 2 = 22%) as well as for nine case series/retrospective observational studies (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.94, p = 0.01, I 2 = 0%). However, in a subgroup analysis for 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), there was no statistically significant reduction in mortality between the CPT group compared to the non-CPT group (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53-1.08, p = 0.13, I 2 = 7%). Furthermore, the sensitivity analysis of 10 RCTs, excluding the study with the highest statistical weight, displayed a lower mortality rate compared to that of non-CPT COVID-19 patients (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42-0.97, p = 0.04, I 2 = 0%). The observed pooled mortality rate was 12.9% (95% CI 9.7-16.9%), and the pooled adverse event rate was 6.1% (95% CI 3.2-11.6), with significant heterogeneity. Conclusions and Relevance: Our systemic review and meta-analysis suggests that CPT could be an effective therapeutic option with promising evidence on the safety and reduced mortality in concomitant treatment for COVID-19 along with antiviral/antimicrobial drugs, steroids, and other supportive care. Future exploratory studies could benefit from more standardized reporting, especially in terms of the timing of interventions and clinically relevant outcomes, like days until discharge from the hospital and improvement of clinical symptoms.

Prevalence of mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The global COVID-19 pandemic has generated major mental and psychological health problems worldwide. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the prevalence of depression, anxiety, distress, and insomnia during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We searched online biomedical databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Ovid, CNKI, and Wanfang Data) and preprint databases (SSRN, bioRxiv, and MedRxiv) for observational studies from January 1, 2020 to March 16, 2020 investigating the prevalence of mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: We retrieved 821 citations from the biomedical databases and 53 citations from the preprint databases: 66 studies with 221,970 participants were included in our meta-analysis. The overall pooled prevalence of depression, anxiety, distress, and insomnia was 31.4%, 31.9%, 41.1% and 37.9%, respectively. Noninfectious chronic disease patients, quarantined persons, and COVID-19 patients had a higher risk of depression (Q=26.73, p<0.01) and anxiety (Q=21.86, p<0.01) than other populations. The general population and non-medical staff had a lower risk of distress than other populations (Q=461.21, p< 0.01). Physicians, nurses, and non-medical staff showed a higher prevalence of insomnia (Q=196.64, p<0.01) than other populations. LIMITATIONS: All included studies were from the early phase of the global pandemic. Additional meta-analyses are needed to obtain more data in all phases of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic increases the mental health problems of the global population, particularly health care workers, noninfectious chronic disease patients, COVID-19 patients, and quarantined persons. Interventions for mental health are urgently needed for preventing mental health problems.

Blood biochemical characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Objective Recently, there have been several studies on the clinical characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, these studies have mainly been concentrated in Wuhan, China; the sample sizes of each article were different; and the reported clinical characteristics, especially blood biochemical indices, were quite different. This study aimed to summarize the blood biochemistry characteristics of COVID-19 patients by performing a systemic review and meta-analysis of published studies. Methods Comprehensive studies were screened from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library through March 11, 2020. The inclusion criteria included studies investigating the biochemical indexes of patients with COVID-19. The statistical software R3.6.3 was used for meta-analysis. Results Ten studies including 1745 COVID-19 patients met the inclusion criteria for our meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that 16% and 20% of patients with COVID-19 had alanine transaminase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels higher than the normal range, respectively. Thirty-four percent of patients showed albumin (ALB) levels lower than the normal range, and 6% of patients showed abnormal total bilirubin (TBil) levels. The levels of creatinine (CRE) were increased in 8% of patients. The creatine kinase (CK) level of 13% of patients exceeded the normal range, and 52% of patients had elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels. In addition, six studies met the inclusion criteria for the systemic review evaluating the relevance between LDH levels and the severity of COVID-19, and all six studies showed a positive association between these two factors. Conclusions Some patients with COVID-19 had different degrees of blood biochemical abnormalities, which might indicate multiple organ dysfunction. Some biochemical indexes, such as abnormal ALB and LDH, could reflect the severity of the disease to a certain extent. These blood biochemical indicators should be considered in the clinical management of the disease.