Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Front Public Health ; 10: 804404, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1731867

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In early 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic spread worldwide, overwhelming hospitals with severely ill patients and posing the urgent need for clinical evidence to guide patient care. First treatment options available were repurposed drugs to fight inflammation, coagulopathy, and viral replication. A vast number of clinical studies were launched globally to test their efficacy and safety. Our analysis describes the development of global evidence on repurposed drugs, in particular corticosteroids, anticoagulants, and (hydroxy)chloroquine in hospitalized COVID-19 patients based on different study types. We track the incorporation of clinical data in international and national treatment guidelines and identify factors that characterize studies and analyses with the greatest impact on treatment recommendations. METHODS: A literature search in MEDLINE was conducted to assess the clinical evidence on treatment with corticosteroids, anticoagulants, and (hydroxy)chloroquine in hospitalized COVID-19 patients during the first year of the pandemic. Adoption of the evidence from this clinical data in treatment guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO), Germany, and United States (US) was evaluated over time. RESULTS: We identified 106 studies on corticosteroids, 141 studies on anticoagulants, and 115 studies on (hydroxy)chloroquine. Most studies were retrospective cohort studies; some were randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and a few were platform trials. These studies were compared to studies directly and indirectly referred to in WHO (7 versions), German (5 versions), and US (21 versions) guidelines. We found that initially large, well-adjusted, mainly retrospective cohort studies and ultimately large platform trials or coordinated meta-analyses of RCTs provided best available clinical evidence supporting treatment recommendations. DISCUSSION: Particularly early in the pandemic, evidence for the efficacy and safety of repurposed drugs was of low quality, since time and scientific rigor seemed to be competing factors. Pandemic preparedness, coordinated efforts, and combined analyses were crucial to generating timely and robust clinical evidence that informed national and international treatment guidelines on corticosteroids, anticoagulants, and (hydroxy)chloroquine. Multi-arm platform trials with master protocols and coordinated meta-analyses proved particularly successful, with researchers joining forces to answer the most pressing questions as quickly as possible.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Chloroquine , Clinical Trials as Topic , Humans , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Int J Technol Assess Health Care ; 37(1): e63, 2021 May 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1213898

ABSTRACT

The Monitoring Studies (MS) program, the approach developed by RedETS to generate postlaunch real-world evidence (RWE), is intended to complement and enhance the conventional health technology assessment process to support health policy decision making in Spain, besides informing other interested stakeholders, including clinicians and patients. The MS program is focused on specific uncertainties about the real effect, safety, costs, and routine use of new and insufficiently assessed relevant medical devices carefully selected to ensure the value of the additional research needed, by means of structured, controlled, participative, and transparent procedures. However, despite a clear political commitment and economic support from national and regional health authorities, several difficulties were identified along the development and implementation of the first wave of MS, delaying its execution and final reporting. Resolution of these difficulties at the regional and national levels and a greater collaborative impulse in the European Union, given the availability of an appropriate methodological framework already provided by EUnetHTA, might provide a faster and more efficient comparative RWE of improved quality and reliability at the national and international levels.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Costs and Cost Analysis , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , Spain
3.
Indian J Med Res ; 151(5): 459-467, 2020 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-624932

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at an elevated risk of contracting COVID-19. While intense occupational exposure associated with aerosol-generating procedures underlines the necessity of using personal protective equipment (PPE) by HCWs, high-transmission efficiency of the causative agent [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)] could also lead to infections beyond such settings. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a repurposed antimalarial drug, was empirically recommended as prophylaxis by the National COVID-19 Task Force in India to cover such added risk. Against this background, the current investigation was carried out to identify the factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs in the country. METHODS: A case-control design was adopted and participants were randomly drawn from the countrywide COVID-19 testing data portal maintained by the ICMR. The test results and contact details of HCWs, diagnosed as positive (cases) or negative (controls) for SARS-CoV-2 using real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR), were available from this database. A 20-item brief-questionnaire elicited information on place of work, procedures conducted and use of PPE. RESULTS: Compared to controls, cases were slightly older (34.7 vs. 33.5 yr) and had more males (58 vs. 50%). In multivariate analyses, HCWs performing endotracheal intubation had higher odds of being SARS-CoV-2 infected [adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 4.33, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.16-16.07]. Consumption of four or more maintenance doses of HCQ was associated with a significant decline in the odds of getting infected (AOR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.22-0.88); a dose-response relationship existed between frequency of exposure to HCQ and such reductions (χ[2] for trend=48.88; P <0.001). In addition, the use of PPE was independently associated with the reduction in odds of getting infected with SARS-CoV-2. INTERPRETATIONS & CONCLUSIONS: Until results of clinical trials for HCQ prophylaxis become available, this study provides actionable information for policymakers to protect HCWs at the forefront of COVID-19 response. The public health message of sustained intake of HCQ prophylaxis as well as appropriate PPE use need to be considered in conjunction with risk homoeostasis operating at individual levels.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Health Personnel , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Occupational Exposure , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Adolescent , Adult , Antimalarials/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Case-Control Studies , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , India/epidemiology , Intubation, Intratracheal/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Protective Factors , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
4.
Indian J Public Health ; 64(Supplement): S105-S107, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-555434

ABSTRACT

There is a lot of discussion on COVID-19 control strategies from the mainstream approaches, but it is also necessary to examine the contributions of the Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, Sowa Riga and Homeopathy (AYUSH) sector, which is now being brought into public health interventions nationally. Although the AYUSH sector had previously joined the management of dengue and chikungunya outbreaks in some Indian states, its participation has remained contentious and there is reluctance in mainstream public health discourses to seriously examine their interventions. This is a commentary on the efforts made by the Ministry of AYUSH, state AYUSH directorates, AYUSH research institutions, and public hospitals, based on official documents as well as official statements reported in the media, with the aim of bringing out concerns in the process of adapting traditional textual knowledge and practices to public health requirements of the current age.


Subject(s)
Complementary Therapies/methods , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Homeopathy/methods , Humans , India/epidemiology , Medicine, Ayurvedic/methods , Naturopathy/methods , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Yoga
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL