Diagnosis of bacterial infection in patients with COVID-19: is it a simple task? (literature review)

Diagnosing bacterial infection in patients with novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19) is not an easy task. Available data suggest that bacterial infection in patients with COVID-19 is rare and occurs in less than 10% of cases. At the same time, data of individual studies and systematic reviews indicate that more than 70% of patients with COVID-19 receive mainly empirical antimicrobial therapy with broad-spectrum antibiotics often before the diagnosis of COVID-19 has been verified. Therefore, this widespread empirical use of antibiotics is not supported by data on the need for their use. The article discusses the literature data on the significance of commonly accepted methods for diagnosing bacterial infection, with an emphasis on laboratory presence / absence tests. In everyday practice, the likelihood of bacterial coinfection in patients with COVID-19 is assessed by clinical presentation of the disease and the results of standard laboratory tests and imaging methods. However, when viral respiratory infection develops, this approach does not always allow to diagnose bacterial coinfection with sufficient significance. This issue may be handled by available modern test systems, the use of a combination of signs or additional laboratory criteria (for example, procalcitonin), and the analysis of the overall clinical presentation by the doctor using knowledge about patient risk groups.

Targeting TLR-4 Signaling to Treat COVID-19-induced Acute Kidney Injury

The newly discovered severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) has turned into a potentially fatal pandemic illness. Numerous acute kidney injury (AKI) cases have been reported, although diffuse alveolar destruction and acute respiratory failure are the major symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The AKI, often known as a sudden loss of kidney function, carries a greater risk of mortality and morbidity. AKI was the second most frequent cause of death after acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). While most patients with COVID-19 have moderate symptoms, some have severe symptoms, such as septic shock and ARDS. Also, it has been proven that some patients have severe symptoms, such as the failure of several organs. The kidneys are often affected either directly or indirectly. The major signs of kidney involvement are proteinuria and AKI. It is hypothesized that multiple mechanisms contribute to kidney injury in COVID-19. Direct infection of podocytes and proximal tubular cells in the kidneys may lead to acute tubular necrosis and collapsing glomerulopathy. SARS-CoV2 may also trigger a cascade of immunological responses that lead to AKI, including cytokine storm (CS), macrophage activation syndrome, and Toll-like receptor type-4 activation (TLR-4). Other proposed processes of AKI include interactions between organs, endothelial failure, hypercoagulability, rhabdomyolysis, and sepsis.Furthermore, ischemic damage to the kidney might result from the decreased oxygen supply. This article focuses on kidney injury's epidemiology, etiology, and pathophysiological processes. Specifically, it focuses on the CS and the role of TLR-4 in this process. To effectively manage and treat acute kidney damage and AKI in COVID-19, it is crucial to understand the underlying molecular pathways and pathophysiology.

Mild SARS-CoV-2 infection results in long-lasting microbiota instability.

Viruses targeting mammalian cells can indirectly alter the gut microbiota, potentially compounding their phenotypic effects. Multiple studies have observed a disrupted gut microbiota in severe cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection that require hospitalization. Yet, despite demographic shifts in disease severity resulting in a large and continuing burden of non-hospitalized infections, we still know very little about the impact of mild SARS-CoV-2 infection on the gut microbiota in the outpatient setting. To address this knowledge gap, we longitudinally sampled 14 SARS-CoV-2-positive subjects who remained outpatient and 4 household controls. SARS-CoV-2 cases exhibited a significantly less stable gut microbiota relative to controls. These results were confirmed and extended in the K18-humanized angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 mouse model, which is susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. All of the tested SARS-CoV-2 variants significantly disrupted the mouse gut microbiota, including USA-WA1/2020 (the original variant detected in the USA), Delta, and Omicron. Surprisingly, despite the fact that the Omicron variant caused the least severe symptoms in mice, it destabilized the gut microbiota and led to a significant depletion in Akkermansia muciniphila. Furthermore, exposure of wild-type C57BL/6J mice to SARS-CoV-2 disrupted the gut microbiota in the absence of severe lung pathology.IMPORTANCETaken together, our results demonstrate that even mild cases of SARS-CoV-2 can disrupt gut microbial ecology. Our findings in non-hospitalized individuals are consistent with studies of hospitalized patients, in that reproducible shifts in gut microbial taxonomic abundance in response to SARS-CoV-2 have been difficult to identify. Instead, we report a long-lasting instability in the gut microbiota. Surprisingly, our mouse experiments revealed an impact of the Omicron variant, despite producing the least severe symptoms in genetically susceptible mice, suggesting that despite the continued evolution of SARS-CoV-2, it has retained its ability to perturb the intestinal mucosa. These results will hopefully renew efforts to study the mechanisms through which Omicron and future SARS-CoV-2 variants alter gastrointestinal physiology, while also considering the potentially broad consequences of SARS-CoV-2-induced microbiota instability for host health and disease.

Evolution of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern over a period of Delta and Omicron cocirculation, among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in an Italian reference hospital: Impact on clinical outcomes.

Despite the higher transmissibility of Omicron Variant of Concern (VOC), several reports have suggested lower risk for hospitalization and severe outcomes compared to previous variants of SARS-CoV-2. This study, enrolling all COVID-19 adults admitted to a reference hospital who underwent both the S-gene-target-failure test and VOC identification by Sanger sequencing, aimed to describe the evolving prevalence of Delta and Omicron variants and to compare the main in-hospital outcomes of severity, during a trimester (December 2021 to March 2022) of VOCs' cocirculation. Factors associated with clinical progression to noninvasive ventilation (NIV)/mechanical ventilation (MV)/death within 10 days and to MV/admission to intensive care unit (ICU)/death within 28 days, were investigated through multivariable logistic regressions. Overall, VOCs were: Delta n = 130/428, Omicron n = 298/428 (sublineages BA.1 n = 275 and BA.2 n = 23). Until mid-February, Delta predominance shifted to BA.1, which was gradually displaced by BA.2 until mid-March. Participants with Omicron VOC were more likely to be older, fully vaccinated, with multiple comorbidities and to have a shorter time from symptoms' onset, and less likely to have systemic symptoms and respiratory complications. Although the need of NIV within 10 days and MV within 28 days from hospitalization and the admission to ICU were less frequent for patients with Omicron compared to those with Delta infections, mortality was similar between the two VOCs. In the adjusted analysis, multiple comorbidities and a longer time from symptoms' onset predicted 10-day clinical progression, while complete vaccination halved the risk. Multimorbidity was the only risk factor associated with 28-day clinical progression. In our population, in the first trimester of 2022, Omicron rapidly displaced Delta in COVID-19 hospitalized adults. Clinical profile and presentation differed between the two VOCs and, although Omicron infections showed a less severe clinical picture, no substantial differences for clinical progression were found. This finding suggests that any hospitalization, especially in more vulnerable individuals, may be at risk for severe progression, which is more related to the underlying frailty of patients than to the intrinsic severity of the viral variant.

Measurement of the Body Physical Parameters by Bioelectrical Impedance Method in Individuals Survived after Covid-19

Objective: The coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) has significantly affected human health around the world, causing many complications. However, it is not fully understood how the body compositions of individuals affected in the short or long term after disease. In this study, we aimed to show the effects of Covid-19 on body composition and phase angle values, using Bioelectrical Impedance Analyzer. Methods: Subjects were selected from individuals in the 18-60 age group, who had survived COVID-19 disease. 33 individuals who had survived it 1-3 months ago, and 30 individuals who had survived it 3-6 months ago were included in the study. Results: Effects of COVID-19 on basal metabolism and body composition and the ratio of damaged cells in the body after the disease were determined. Basal metabolic rate, lean body mass, body cell mass, total body fluid, intracellular fluid, and phase angle values were found to be significantly changed in the 3-6 months range compared to that of 1-3 months. Conclusions: These results indicate that the basal metabolism and body composition parameters of the body become better, and the proportion of damaged cells decreases as time goes on after suffering COVID-19, reaching values close to normal in 1-3 months and quite better values in 3-6 months. It can be concluded that, although covid-19 influences body composition parameters and cell integrity in survivors of Covid 19 disease, these effects are limited to 3-6 months.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Management of Mental Health Services for Hospitalized Patients in Sibiu County-Central Region, Romania.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic brought a burden and represented a challenge for the Romanian medical system. This study explored the consequences that COVID epidemiological measures had on the quality of the mental health care provided to hospitalized patients in a regional psychiatric hospital in Romania. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Both patient-level and hospital-level indicators were considered for this comparative retrospective study. On the one hand, we extracted patient-level indicators, such as sociodemographics, diagnosis, admission, and discharge dates for 7026 hospitalized patients (3701 women, average age = 55.14) from hospital records. On the other hand, for the hospital-level indicators, we included indicators referring to the aggregated concept of mental health services, such as case mix index, length of stay, bed occupancy rate and patients' degree of satisfaction. Data extracted covered a period of two years (1 March 2019-28 February 2021) before and during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: We found that, compared to the pre-pandemic period, the pandemic period was marked by a drastic decrease in hospitalized patient admissions, coupled with an increase in emergency-based admissions. Other management indicators, such as the case mix index, the number of cases contracted/performed, and the degree of patient satisfaction, decreased. In contrast, the average length of stay and bed occupancy rate increased. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic, especially in the first year, raised multiple difficult issues for the management of psychiatric hospitals. It imposed an application of strict measures designed to face these new and unprecedented challenges. Our findings offer a detailed snapshot of the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of its impact on mental health services and suggest some future directions. Implications for hospital management are discussed.

Time evolution of cytokine profiles associated with mortality in COVID-19 hospitalized patients.

Background: High cytokine levels have been associated with severe COVID-19 disease. Although many cytokine studies have been performed, not many of them include combinatorial analysis of cytokine profiles through time. In this study we investigate the association of certain cytokine profiles and its evolution, and mortality in SARS-CoV2 infection in hospitalized patients. Methods: Serum concentration of 45 cytokines was determined in 28 controls at day of admission and in 108 patients with COVID-19 disease at first, third and sixth day of admission. A principal component analysis (PCA) was performed to characterize cytokine profiles through time associated with mortality and survival in hospitalized patients. Results: At day of admission non-survivors present significantly higher levels of IL-1α and VEGFA (PC3) but not through follow up. However, the combination of HGF, MCP-1, IL-18, eotaxine, and SCF (PC2) are significantly higher in non-survivors at all three time-points presenting an increased trend in this group through time. On the other hand, BDNF, IL-12 and IL-15 (PC1) are significantly reduced in non-survivors at all time points with a decreasing trend through time, though a protective factor. The combined mortality prediction accuracy of PC3 at day 1 and PC1 and PC2 at day 6 is 89.00% (p<0.001). Conclusions: Hypercytokinemia is a hallmark of COVID-19 but relevant differences between survivors and non-survivors can be early observed. Combinatorial analysis of serum cytokines and chemokines can contribute to mortality risk assessment and optimize therapeutic strategies. Three clusters of cytokines have been identified as independent markers or risk factors of COVID mortality.

Hematological and Biochemical Parameters at Admission as Predictors for Mortality in Patients with Moderate to Severe COVID-19

BACKGROUND: Timely diagnosis and effective use of available resources are urgent to avoid the loss of time, medical, and technological resources, particularly in COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to identify the most dominant predicting factor for mortality in moderate-severe COVID-19 patients.METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included a total of 253 patients diagnosed with moderate-severe COVID-19. The primary outcome measure was mortality during hospitalization. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine cut-off points. The data were categorized according to the cut-off points in ROC curve and analyzed using Chi-square and by binary logistic regression test to identify the independent predictors associated with mortality.RESULTS: The mean number of leukocytes (/mu L), neutrophils (%), neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet lymphocyte ratio (PLR), C-reactive protein (CRP, mg/L), and D-dimer (mg/L) in the non-survived group was significantly higher than those of the survived group. Meanwhile, the mean number of platelet count/mu L, absolute lymphocyte count (ALC), in the non-survived group was significantly lower than those of the survived group. CRP level predicted mortality with a cut-off point of >= 8.41 mg/L, sensitivity of 98.1%, and specificity of 72.0% (P = .000).CONCLUSIONS: High leukocyte count, low platelet count, high NLR, high CRP level, and high D-dimer on admission predicted mortality of COVID-19 patients. In addition, CRP was found to be the most dominant predicting factor of mortality in moderate-severe COVID-19 patients.

Influence of influenza vaccine and comorbidity on the evolution of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. / Influencia de la vacunación antigripal y la comorbilidad en la evolución de los pacientes hospitalizados por COVID-19.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 coronavirus disease outbreak is evolving around the world. The aim of this study is to evaluate the association between influenza vaccination and the risk of mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, as well as other risk factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective observational study. This study was conducted among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at Hospital La Mancha Centro between March 5 and 25, 2020. Information on influenza vaccination was extracted from electronic medical records. We used a multivariate logistic regression to explore the association between influenza vaccination and mortality from COVID and other risk factors. RESULTS: 410 patients were included. Influenza vaccine had no effect among COVID-19 hospitalized patients [OR: 1.55 (95%CI: 0.96 - 2.48; p=0.071)]. Increasing hospital mortality was associated with older age [OR: 1.05 (95% CI 1.02-1.07), per year increase; p<0.001)], Charlson ≥3 [OR: 1.84 (95%CI: 1.07-3.15, p=0.027)] and heart failure on admission [OR: 6 (IC95%: 1.6 - 21.7; p=0.007)] CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccine had no effect among COVID-19 hospitalized patients. The risk factors identified were older age, higher comorbidity and heart failure on admission.

Comparison of the health literacy and the lifestyle of hospitalized Covid-19 patients admitted to the hospital

The aim of this study was to compare the health literacy and the lifestyle of Covid-19 patients admitted to Shahid Firoozabadi Hospital in Tehran's 20th district and non-covid-19 patients. For this purpose, 60 Covid 19 patients admitted to the hospital were compared to 60 patients with diseases other than Covid-19. To achieve this goal, two questionnaires were submitted to the participants;Health literacy of Iran's Urban Population and Miller-Smith Lifestyle Assessment Quesnaire. Data analysis was performed using central tendency analysis (mean), and multivariate analysis of variance. The results showed a significant difference between these two groups on the two variables of health literacy and lifestyle. The results showed that the Covid-19 patients had a higher level of health literacy than non-covid-19 patients. It is possible that covid-19 patients attempt to gather health-related information in order to accelerate the recovery process, to prevent other family members from getting infected, to reduce the side effects of medications and the disease, have led to an increase in health literacy in this group compared to non-covid-19 patients. Also, the unfavorable conditions and the long-term side-effects of Covid-19 have caused them to experience an unpleasant lifestyle compared to non-covid-19 patients. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

The psychological experience and intervention in post-acute COVID-19 inpatients

Purpose: COVID-19 patients faced first-hand the life-threatening consequences of the disease, oftentimes involving prolonged hospitalization in isolation from family and friends. This study aimed at describing the psychological intervention to address the psychological difficulties and issues encountered by the hospitalized post-acute COVID-19 patients in a rehabilitation setting. Patients and Methods: Patients' demographics, medical diagnosis, and neuropsychological information were collected from March 2nd to May 12th, 2020. The main psychological issues and intervention strategies were collected. Results: A total of 181 patients were hospitalized during this period. Among them, the 47.5% underwent psychological assessment (N = 86;age: 74.58 +/- 13.39;54.7% females). The most common psychological issues were acute stress disorders (18.6%), anxious and demoralization symptoms (26.7%), depression (10.5%%), and troublesome grief (8.1%). Once recovered from COVID-19, many patients were discharged home (38.4%), some received further rehabilitation in non-COVID-19 wards (41.9%), mostly due to pre-existent diseases (72.2%) rather than to COVID-19 complications (27.8%). Conclusion: A great number of the hospitalized post-acute COVID-19 patients showed psychological issues requiring psychological intervention, the most common were anxiety, demoralization, acute stress, depression, and grief. The proposed psychological treatment for hospitalized COVID-19 patients was conducted in a Cognitive Behavioral framework. In particular, during the COVID-19 pandemic, psychological intervention is an important part of rehabilitation in the post-acute phase of the illness to reduce distress symptoms and improve psychological health. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Frequency and correlation of gastrointestinal symptoms with outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19

Objective: To assess the frequency and correlation of GI manifestations with outcomes in hospitalized patients suffering from COVID-19. Study Design: Retrospective Cohort study. Setting: Tertiary Care Hospital, Gujrat. Period: April 1st, 2020 to March 31st, 2021. Material & Methods: Medical records were collected retrospectively from six hundred eighty eight COVID-19 patients having complete charts. Among them male were 364 (52.91%). Incomplete charts were excluded from the study. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used after adjusting for co-morbidities and clinical demographics. Results: Most of the patients with COVID-19 presented with cough (38.44%), dyspnea (37.53%), and fever (34.34%), while GI symptoms were noted in 25.92% of patients. Among them diarrhea was in 12.83%, nausea and vomiting in 10.53%, diminished hunger 9.32%, and abdominal discomfort 3.83%. Mortality, admission to ICU and need for intubation was more common among patients with diarrhea. (p = 0.006). Conclusion: Gastrointestinal (GI) manifestations are common in patients with COVID-19. Among them patients with diarrhea were more prone to admission to intensive care unit, intubation and death so patients with COVID-19 should be questioned for GI symptoms also. Medical professionals should know that diarrhea may be an indicator of severity of disease and its effect on prognosis of patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Professional Medical Journal is the property of Professional Medical Journal 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 abstract 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 abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The way forward: For patients, healthcare providers, and research

This chapter summarizes key information and formulate guiding principles to move forward and achieve a better understanding and management of long COVID. Long COVID has become a catch-all term for a huge variety of symptoms that are the result of an infection with SARS-CoV-2. Lingering symptoms in hospitalized patients are generally related to well-defined organ damage, what we have termed long-COVID disease;the subsequent medical course is similar to that of any severely ill patient. Although there are many symptoms associated with long COVID, fatigue is almost always a primary problem. There is no simple test to confirm the diagnosis of long COVID, and the diagnosis is made based on a patient's symptoms. Patients with severe symptoms will require multidisciplinary evaluation and care. Long-COVID care should be based on shared decision-making and includes patient self-monitoring and self-management. © 2023 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. All rights reserved.

Long-COVID disease or long-COVID syndrome?

Long COVID is a new term, introduced by patients, to account for multiple symptoms that last months and interfere with daily life, yet have no clear medical explanation. Disease is defined by organ damage, such as when a biopsy reveals cancer. A disease is characterized by its symptoms, such as pain or exhaustion, as well as physical signs, such as fever or swelling. Well-controlled studies have demonstrated that patients hospitalized with COVID-19 have much greater, persistent health problems than uninfected subjects. Women had more long-COVID symptoms than men, including greater fatigue, anxiety, or depression, and greater dyspnea, which was documented with abnormal pulmonary function testing. In controlled reports comparing hospitalized COVID-19 patients to noninfected community controls, about 10% of patients meet criteria for long COVID at three to six months after hospital discharge. Neuropsychiatric symptoms, including cognitive disturbances, particularly confusion, and mood disturbances were much more common in the non-hospitalized patients. © 2023 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. All rights reserved.

Postscript: Responding to the COVID-19 pandemic

The risk posed to health facilities by COVID-19 is well recognised. From the first wave of infections in 2020, protective measures have been in place. In accordance with health district policy, staff and visitors were screened before entry to the Walker Unit. Along with the rest of the world, Walker staff became familiar with conducting meetings through online platforms such as Zoom. Compliance with ever changing infection control directives was a challenge, indeed a threat to the viability of the programme. There have been direct impacts on the operation of the Walker Unit, with travel and visiting severely restricted. The chapter will outline the adaptations made to the Walker programme through the pandemic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Retroperitoneal and abdominal bleeding in anticoagulated COVID-19 hospitalized patients: Case series and brief literature review.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized and severely ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients necessitate prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation to minimize the risk of thrombosis at different sites. Life-threatening bleeding complications include spontaneous iliopsoas hematoma, peritoneal bleeding, and extra-abdominal manifestations such as intracranial hemorrhage. CASE SUMMARY: Bleeding in the abdominal wall results in less severe complications than seen with iliopsoas hematoma or peritoneal bleeding. In our case series of 9 patients, we present retroperitoneal and abdominal bleeding complications following anticoagulation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pneumonia. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) is the best imaging modality for assessing hematoma secondary to anticoagulation and determines the therapeutic approach, whether interventional, surgical, or conservative management. CONCLUSION: We present the role of CE-CT for rapid and precise localization of the bleeding site and prognostic counseling. Finally, we provide a brief review of the literature.

Severity Status of COVID-19 and Its Associated Factors at the Nyarugenge Treatment Center in Rwanda.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has continued to be a public health emergency currently; on March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared it a global pandemic. Despite the Rwanda National Health Measures that have been put in place to protect the public including lockdowns, curfew, face mask mandate, handwashing sensitization, etc., severe morbidity and mortality cases of COVID-19 are continued to be seen. Some studies have linked COVID-19 complications to its direct chain of mechanism; however, other studies have linked comorbidity or underlying disease conditions to its poor prognosis. Studies have not yet been conducted in Rwanda on the severe status of COVID-19 and its associated factors among patients. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the severe status of COVID-19 and its associated factors at the Nyarugenge Treatment Center. Methods A descriptive cross-sectional study was done. All patients admitted to the Nyarugenge Treatment Center from January 8, 2021, when the hospital opened, until the end of May 2021 were recruited in the study. The eligible participants were all patients who were admitted and tested positive for COVID-19 by RT-PCR method according to the Rwanda Ministry of Health criteria. Results All data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software, version 25 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). The number of patients admitted during the study period was 648, with a median age of 53; 45.2% of them were females, and 54.2% were males. Of these, 81.2% (526) were discharged from the hospital, while 18.8% (122) died. The proportion of severe status of COVID-19 was 42.1%. The factors that showed a risk of severe COVID-19 status were age and the number of comorbidities. Patients aged above 60 years (OR = 11.7, 95% CI: 5.35-25.67, p-value < 0.001) and those between the age of 51 and 60 (OR = 6.86, 95% CI: 2.96-15.93, p-value < 0.001) were 12 and seven times more likely to have severe COVID-19 status compared to those aged below 30 years. Having two comorbidities had twice the risk of developing a severe COVID-19 status compared to those with no comorbidity (OR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.20-3.77, p-value < 0.001). Conclusion Elderly people and those with comorbidities are encouraged to obtain all standard operating procedures and comply with the vaccination program.

Adjunct tele-yoga on clinical status at 14 days in hospitalized patients with mild and moderate COVID-19: A randomized control trial.

Background: The initial insights from the studies on COVID-19 had been disappointing, indicating the necessity of an aggravated search for alternative strategies. In this regard, the adjunct potential of yoga has been proposed for enhancing the effectiveness of the standard of care with respect to COVID-19 management. We tested whether a telemodel of yoga intervention could aid in better clinical management for hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 when complemented with the standard of care. Methods: This was a randomized controlled trial conducted at the Narayana Hrudyalaya, Bengaluru, India, on hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 infection enrolled between 31 May and 22 July 2021. The patients (n = 225) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio [adjunct tele-yoga (n = 113) or standard of care]. The adjunct yoga group received intervention in tele-mode within 4-h post-randomization until 14 days along with the standard of care. The primary outcome was the clinical status on day 14 post-randomization, assessed with a seven-category ordinal scale. The secondary outcome set included scores on the COVID Outcomes Scale on day 7, follow-up for clinical status and all-cause mortality on day 28, post-randomization, duration of days at the hospital, 5th-day changes post-randomization for viral load expressed as cyclic threshold (Ct), and inflammatory markers and perceived stress scores on day 14. Results: As compared with the standard of care alone, the proportional odds of having a higher score on the 7-point ordinal scale on day 14 were ~1.8 for the adjunct tele-yoga group (OR = 1.83, 95% CI, 1.11-3.03). On day 5, there were significant reductions in CRP (P = 0.001) and LDH levels (P = 0.029) in the adjunct yoga group compared to the standard of care alone. CRP reduction was also observed as a potential mediator for the yoga-induced improvement of clinical outcomes. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of all-cause mortality on day 28 was the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.26 (95% CI, 0.05-1.30). Conclusion: The observed 1.8-fold improvement in the clinical status on day 14 of patients of COVID-19 with adjunct use of tele-yoga contests its use as a complementary treatment in hospital settings.

Specialized palliative care for hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection: an analysis of the LEOSS registry.

PURPOSE: Symptom control for patients who were severely ill or dying from COVID-19 was paramount while resources were strained and infection control measures were in place. We aimed to describe the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients who received specialized palliative care (SPC) and the type of SPC provided in a larger cohort. METHODS: From the multi-centre cohort study Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 infected patients (LEOSS), data of patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection documented between July 2020 and October 2021 were analysed. RESULTS: 273/7292 patients (3.7%) received SPC. Those receiving SPC were older and suffered more often from comorbidities, but 59% presented with an estimated life expectancy > 1 year. Main symptoms were dyspnoea, delirium, and excessive tiredness. 224/273 patients (82%) died during the hospital stay compared to 789/7019 (11%) without SPC. Symptom control was provided most common (223/273; 95%), followed by family and psychological support (50% resp. 43%). Personal contact with friends or relatives before or during the dying phase was more often documented in patients receiving SPC compared to patients without SPC (52% vs. 30%). CONCLUSION: In 3.7% of SARS-CoV-2 infected hospitalized patients, the burden of the acute infection triggered palliative care involvement. Besides complex symptom management, SPC professionals also focused on psychosocial and family issues and aimed to enable personal contacts of dying patients with their family. The data underpin the need for further involvement of SPC in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients but also in other severe chronic infectious diseases.

Comprehensive evaluation of six interventions for hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A propensity score matching study.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of either hydroxychloroquine, triple combination therapy (TCT), favipiravir, dexamethasone, remdesivir, or COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) in comparison with standard-of-care for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 using real-world data from Saudi Arabia. Patients and methods: A secondary database analysis was conducted using the Saudi Ministry of Health database for patients with COVID-19. Adult (≥18 years) hospitalized patients with COVID-19 between March 2020 and January 2021 were included in the analysis. A propensity score matching technique was used to establish comparable groups for each therapeutic approach. Lastly, an independent t-test and chi-square test were used to compare the matching groups in the aspects of the duration of hospitalization, length of stay (LOS) in intensive care units (ICU), in-hospital mortality, and composite poor outcome. Multilevel logistic regression model was used to assess the association between the severity stage of COVID-19 and the outcomes while using the medication or intervention used as a grouping variable in the model. Results: The mean duration of hospitalization was significantly longer for patients who received TCT, favipiravir, dexamethasone, or CCP compared to patients who did not receive these therapies, with a mean difference ranging between 2.2 and 4.9 days for dexamethasone and CCP, respectively. Furthermore, the use of favipiravir or CCP was associated with a longer stay in ICU. Remdesivir was the only agent associated with in-hospital mortality benefit. A higher risk of mortality and poorer composite outcome were associated with the use of favipiravir or dexamethasone. However, the logistic regression model reveled that the difference between the two matched cohorts was due to the severity stage not the medication. Additionally, the use of hydroxychloroquine, TCT, or CCP had no impact on the incidence of in-hospital mortality or composite poor outcomes. Conclusion: Remdesivir was the only agent associated with in-hospital mortality benefit. The observed worsened treatment outcomes associated with the use of dexamethasone or FPV shall be attributed to the severity stage rather than the medication use. In light of these varied results, additional studies are needed to continue evaluating the actual benefits of these therapies.