ABSTRACT
Background: Case study: Conclusion(s): The purpose of the study was twofold: (1) to present post-COVID-19 syndrome, which involves a variety of ongoing neurological, neuropsychiatric, neurocognitive, emotional and behavioral disorders resulting from SARS-CoV-2 infection followed by a severe course of COVID-19 treated in long term pharmacologically induced coma in a visual artist, which impacted on her artwork;(2) to present QEEG/ERP results and neuropsychological testing results in the evaluation of the effectiveness of a comprehensive neurotherapy program, with individualized EEG-Neurofeedback, and art-therapy in the reduction of post-COVID-19 syndrome in this artist. Ms. G., 42, a visual artist, portraitist, with good health, became ill in May 2022. Allegedly flu symptoms appeared first. After a few days, shortness of breath joined in. The PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 was positive. The patient was hospitalized, referred to the ICU, put on a respirator and treated over 11days of a pharmacologically induced coma. Two months after leaving hospital the patient developed post-COVID-19 syndrome. She was diagnosed by an interdisciplinary team: a neurologist, neuropsychiatrist and neuropsychologist. A PET scan of her brain revealed extensive changes involving a loss of metabolism in various brain areas. The presence of complex post-COVID, neurological, neuropsychiatric, neurocognitive, emotional and behavioral disorders was found and a neuropsychiatrist suggested a diagnosis of post-COVID schizophrenia. She was refered to the Reintegration and Training Center of the Polish Neuropsychological Society.We tested the working hypothesis as to the presence of schizophrenia and there was no reduction in the difference of ERPs waves under GO/NOGO task conditions, like in the reference group with schizophrenia (see also Pachalska, Kaczmarek and Kropotov 2021). The absence of a functional neuromarker for schizophrenia allowed us to exclude this diagnosis and to propose a new disease entity, that being post-COVID-19 syndrome. She received a comprehensive two-component program of neurotherapy: (1) program A consisting in goal-oriented neuropsychological rehabilitation, including art therapy (see also: Pachalska 2008;2022b), and (2) program B, based on the most commonly used form of EEG-Neurofeedback: frequency/ power EEG-Neurofeedback, using 2 bipolar surface electrodes, with the protocols written for her specific needs (see also Thompson & Thompson 2012;Kropotov 2016). The comprehensive neurotherapy program lasted 10 weeks, EEG Neurofeedback and art therapy classes were conducted 3 times a week for 45 minutes each. We found that after the completion of the comprehensive neurotherapy program there was a statistically significant reduction in high beta activity compared to the normative HBI database, which is associated with a reduction of anxiety. Also, we observed the improvement of neurocognitive functioning in neuropsychological testing (a significant reduction of anxiety and a noticeable improvement in neurocognitive functions). It should be stressed that the artist was happy that she had regained the ability to create, and even sells her artwork, although her style of painting had changed. Almost all the neurological, psychiatric, neurocognitive, emotional and behavioral disturbances, were reduced in their severity. The artist showed marked improvement and was able to return to painting. The artwork she produced after her illness is in high demand with art collectors. It can be also helpful in the reintegration of the Self System, and the improvement in her quality of life. Human Brain Index (HBI) methodology might be very useful in diagnosing and developing therapies for patients with post-COVID-19 syndrome.Copyright © 2023, MEDSPORTPRESS Publishing House. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Background: SARS-CoV2 antibody testing is an important auxillary test especially for retrospective diagnosis or in patients with long COVID-19 or multisystem inflammatory syndrome of childhood. Epidemiological serology studies may also assist public health planning. Access to formal laboratory testing is not universal in many low-and middle-income (LMIC) countries and rapid lateral flow antibody tests are an attractive alternative. Performance of these tests has been inconsistent. A large-scale study was undertaken in South Africa, during the beta and delta waves, to assess the field-based performance of rapid point of care (POC) COVID-19 antibody tests. Methods: Symptomatic, ambulatory persons under investigation (PUIs) aged 18 years and older, presenting for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis at public health facilities in three provinces, South Africa were enrolled at baseline. All patients completed a questionnaire regarding symptoms. Nasopharyngeal swabs were taken and processed for SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing using a GeneXpert (Cepheid, USA), or manual assay (ThermoFisher TaqPath assay or Seegene Allplex assay) on a real-time platform at routine accredited National Health Laboratory Service laboratories as per routine national protocols. Concomitantly, trained study staff performed three facility-based POC lateral flow antibody tests on a on a fingerstick sample and blood was collected for formal serology. POC tests were selected following a rapid in-laboratory evaluation. Asymptomatic contacts of people with confirmed COVID-19 were recruited into the asymptomatic study arm and rapid tests and PCR were performed. PCR and rapid positive patients and 500 negative controls were followed up at 5-14 days. Antibody tests were compared with formal serology performed on 2 platforms-Euroimmun (Euroimmun, Lubeck) IgA and IgG anti-S antibodies and Abbott Architect IgG test. Results: The sensitivity (S), specificity (Sp), positive (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) values of tests for PUIs and contacts were calculated (Table 1)∗. Analyses using serology as a reference are forthcoming. Conclusion: Compared with PCR, performance of rapid POC COVID-19 antibody tests was poor with low sensitivity. This may reflect the patient cohort tested as humoral responses typically develop from day 7-14. The tests are unlikely to be useful for acute diagnosis but sensitivity may improve at later timepoints and further follow up data will be analysed by duration of symptom onset, severity of symptoms and wave (beta versus delta).
ABSTRACT
Background: Access to SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing is a bottleneck globally, especially in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). Reliable point-of-care (POC) diagnostics for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are cheaper and easier to scale-up than PCR especially in LMICs, and will facilitate interruption of transmission. We report the field-based effectiveness of rapid point-of-care (POC) antigen COVID-19 tests during the beta and delta waves, in South Africa. Methods: We enrolled symptomatic, ambulatory persons under investigation (PUIs) aged 18 years and older, presenting for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis at public health facilities in three provinces, South Africa. All patients completed a questionnaire regarding symptoms. Nasopharyngeal swabs were taken and processed for SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing using either GeneXpert (Cepheid, USA), or with a manual assay (ThermoFisher TaqPath assay or Seegene Allplex assay) on a real-time PCR platform at routine, accredited National Health Laboratory Service laboratories, as per routine national protocols. Concomitantly, trained study staff performed three facility-based POC antigen tests on a nasal/nasopharyngeal swab, as recommended by the manufacturer. Asymptomatic contacts of people with confirmed COVID-19 were recruited into the asymptomatic study arm and rapid tests and PCR were performed. The sensitivity (S), specificity (Sp), positive (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) values of tests for PUIs and contacts were calculated using PCR as the reference standard. Results: Between Oct 2020-2021 1816 participants were enrolled;472 (26%) tested PCR or rapid test positive;235 positives (49.8%) and 532 negatives were followed up at 5-14 days;574 asymptomatic contacts were enrolled, of which 21 (3.7%) were PCR positive. Performance of the three antigen tests are shown in Table 1∗. Conclusion: In a real world setting, during the beta and delta waves, compared with PCR the sensitivity of rapid antigen tests ranged from 35-68%. This may reflect low viral loads at diagnosis. Further work will compare antigen test performance in patients with high versus lower cycle threshold (Ct) values. Meanwhile, PCR testing capacity needs urgent scale-up in LMICs and improved POC diagnostics are needed to facilitate COVID-19 diagnosis in LMICs.