Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 40
Filter
1.
BMJ Open ; 13(5): e066524, 2023 05 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20239547

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to design and produce a low-cost, ergonomic, hood-integrated powered air-purifying respirator (Bubble-PAPR) for pandemic healthcare use, offering optimal and equitable protection to all staff. We hypothesised that participants would rate Bubble-PAPR more highly than current filtering face piece (FFP3) face mask respiratory protective equipment (RPE) in the domains of comfort, perceived safety and communication. DESIGN: Rapid design and evaluation cycles occurred based on the identified user needs. We conducted diary card and focus group exercises to identify relevant tasks requiring RPE. Lab-based safety standards established against British Standard BS-EN-12941 and EU2016/425 covering materials; inward particulate leakage; breathing resistance; clean air filtration and supply; carbon dioxide elimination; exhalation means and electrical safety. Questionnaire-based usability data from participating front-line healthcare staff before (usual RPE) and after using Bubble-PAPR. SETTING: Overseen by a trial safety committee, evaluation progressed sequentially through laboratory, simulated, low-risk, then high-risk clinical environments of a single tertiary National Health Service hospital. PARTICIPANTS: 15 staff completed diary cards and focus groups. 91 staff from a range of clinical and non-clinical roles completed the study, wearing Bubble-PAPR for a median of 45 min (IQR 30-80 (15-120)). Participants self-reported a range of heights (mean 1.7 m (SD 0.1, range 1.5-2.0)), weights (72.4 kg (16.0, 47-127)) and body mass indices (25.3 (4.7, 16.7-42.9)). OUTCOME MEASURES: Preuse particulometer 'fit testing' and evaluation against standards by an independent biomedical engineer.Primary:Perceived comfort (Likert scale).Secondary: Perceived safety, communication. RESULTS: Mean fit factor 16 961 (10 participants). Bubble-PAPR mean comfort score 5.64 (SD 1.55) vs usual FFP3 2.96 (1.44) (mean difference 2.68 (95% CI 2.23 to 3.14, p<0.001). Secondary outcomes, Bubble-PAPR mean (SD) versus FFP3 mean (SD), (mean difference (95% CI)) were: how safe do you feel? 6.2 (0.9) vs 5.4 (1.0), (0.73 (0.45 to 0.99)); speaking to other staff 7.5 (2.4) vs 5.1 (2.4), (2.38 (1.66 to 3.11)); heard by other staff 7.1 (2.3) vs 4.9 (2.3), (2.16 (1.45 to 2.88)); speaking to patients 7.8 (2.1) vs 4.8 (2.4), (2.99 (2.36 to 3.62)); heard by patients 7.4 (2.4) vs 4.7 (2.5), (2.7 (1.97 to 3.43)); all p<0.01. CONCLUSIONS: Bubble-PAPR achieved its primary purpose of keeping staff safe from airborne particulate material while improving comfort and the user experience when compared with usual FFP3 masks. The design and development of Bubble-PAPR were conducted using a careful evaluation strategy addressing key regulatory and safety steps. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04681365.


Subject(s)
Respiratory Protective Devices , State Medicine , Humans , Health Personnel , Perception , Hospitals
2.
BMJ Open ; 13(1): e066623, 2023 01 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2193796

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), the clot play a role in gas exchange abnormalities. Fibrinolytic therapy can improve alveolar ventilation by restoring blood flow. In this systematic review and meta-analysis protocol, we aim to assess the safety and efficacy of fibrinolytic therapy in such a population. METHODS: We will perform a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and LILACS databases without language restrictions for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs. Two review authors will independently perform data extraction and quality assessments of data from included studies. In case of divergence, a third author will be contacted. The Cochrane handbook will be used for guidance. If the results are not appropriate for a meta-analysis, a descriptive analysis will be performed. DISCUSSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol will provide current evidence about the safety and efficacy of fibrinolytic therapy in patients with COVID-19 and ARDS. These findings will provide if fibrinolytic therapy might be an option for a desperate clinical setting, where all medical efforts have been used. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42020187482. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics committee approval is not necessary. We intend to update the public registry, report any protocol amendments and publish the results in a widely accessible journal.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Humans , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/drug therapy , Thrombolytic Therapy
3.
BMJ Open ; 12(12): e064953, 2022 12 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2193784

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the real-world effectiveness of casirivimab and imdevimab (CAS+IMD) versus no COVID-19 antibody treatment among patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting, including patients diagnosed during the Delta-dominant period prior to Omicron emergence. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Komodo Health closed claims database. PARTICIPANTS: 13 273 128 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 (December 2020 through September 2021) were treated with CAS+IMD or untreated but treatment eligible under the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Each treated patient was exact and propensity score matched without replacement to up to five untreated EUA-eligible patients. INTERVENTIONS: CAS+IMD. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Composite endpoint of 30-day all-cause mortality or COVID-19-related hospitalisation. Kaplan-Meier estimators were used to calculate outcome risks overall and across subgroups: age, COVID-19 vaccination status, immunocompromised status, and timing of diagnosis (December 2020 to June 2021, and July to September 2021). Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted HRs (aHRs) and 95% CIs. RESULTS: Among 75 159 CAS+IMD-treated and 1 670 338 EUA-eligible untreated patients, 73 759 treated patients were matched to 310 688 untreated patients; matched patients were ~50 years, ~60% were women and generally well balanced across risk factors. The 30-day risk of the composite outcome was 2.1% and 5.2% in the CAS+IMD-treated and CAS+IMD-untreated patients, respectively; equivalent to a 60% lower risk (aHR 0.40; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.42). The effect of CAS+IMD was consistent across subgroups, including those who received a COVID-19 vaccine (aHR 0.48, 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.56), and those diagnosed during the Delta-dominant period (aHR 0.40, 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: The real-world effectiveness of CAS+IMD is consistent with the efficacy for reducing all-cause mortality or COVID-19-related hospitalisation reported in clinical trials. Effectiveness is maintained across patient subgroups, including those prone to breakthrough infections, and was effective against susceptible variants including Delta. .


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Female , Male , COVID-19 Vaccines , Retrospective Studies , Antibodies, Neutralizing
4.
BMJ Open ; 12(11): e060994, 2022 11 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2137707

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To estimate continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) length of treatment effect on survival of hospitalised COVID-19 patients in a medium-sized UK Hospital, and how this effect changes according to the patient's comorbidity and COVID-19 route of acquisition (community or nosocomial) during the two waves in 2020. SETTING: The acute inpatient unit in Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh Teaching Hospitals National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust (WWL), a medium-sized NHS Trust in north-west of England. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort of all confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted in WWL during 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 1830 patients (568 first wave, 1262 s wave) with antigen confirmed COVID-19 disease and severe acute respiratory syndrome admitted between 17 March 2020 (first confirmed COVID-19 case) and 31 December 2020. OUTCOME MEASURE: COVID-19 survival rate in all patients and survival rate in potentially hospital-acquired COVID-19 (PHA) patients were modelled using a predictor set which include comorbidities (eg, obesity, diabetes, chronic ischaemic heart disease (IHD), chronic kidney disease (CKD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)), wave, age, sex and care home residency, and interventions (remdesivir, dexamethasone, CPAP, intensive care unit (ICU), intubation). Secondary outcome measure was CPAP length, which was modelled using the same predictors of the survival rate. RESULTS: Mortality rate in the second wave was significantly lower than in the first wave (43.4% vs 28.1%, p<0.001), although for PHA COVID-19 patients mortality did not reduce, remaining at very high levels independently of wave and CPAP length. For all cohort, statistical modelling identified CPAP length (HR 95% CI 0.86 to 0.96) and women (HR 95% CI 0.71 to 0.81) were associated with improved survival, while being older age (HR 95% CI 1.02 to 1.03) admitted from care homes (HR 95% CI 2.22 to 2.39), IHD (HR 95% CI 1.13 to 1.24), CKD (HR 95% CI 1.14 to 1.25), obesity (HR 95% CI 1.18 to 1.28) and COPD-emphysema (HR 95% CI 1.18 to 1.57) were associated with reduced survival. Despite the detrimental effect of comorbidities, patients with CKD (95% CI 16% to 30% improvement in survival), IHD (95% CI 1% to 10% improvement in survival) and asthma (95% CI 8% to 30% improvement in survival) benefitted most from CPAP length, while no significant survival difference was found for obese and patients with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: The experience of an Acute Trust during the COVID-19 outbreak of 2020 is documented and indicates the importance of care home and hospitals in disease acquisition. Death rates fell between the first and second wave only for community-acquired COVID-19 patients. The fall was associated to CPAP length, especially for some comorbidities. While uncovering some risk and protective factors of mortality in COVID-19 studies, the study also unravels how little is known about PHA COVID-19 and the interaction between CPAP and some comorbidities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic , Humans , Female , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19/therapy , State Medicine , Comorbidity , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/therapy , Hospitals , Obesity , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/epidemiology , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/therapy , United Kingdom/epidemiology
5.
BMJ Open ; 12(11): e061870, 2022 11 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2097985

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Long COVID-19, where symptoms persist 12 weeks after the initial SARS-CoV-2-infection, is a substantial problem for individuals and society in the surge of the pandemic. Common symptoms are fatigue, postexertional malaise and cognitive dysfunction. There is currently no effective treatment and the underlying mechanisms are unknown, although several hypotheses exist, with chronic inflammation as a common denominator. In prospective studies, hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) has been suggested to be effective for the treatment of similar syndromes such as chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia. A case series has suggested positive effects of HBOT in long COVID-19. This randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial will explore HBOT as a potential treatment for long COVID-19. The primary objective is to evaluate if HBOT improves health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for patients with long COVID-19 compared with placebo/sham. The main secondary objective is to evaluate whether HBOT improves endothelial function, objective physical performance and short-term HRQoL. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase II clinical trial in 80 previously healthy subjects debilitated due to long COVID-19, with low HRQoL. Clinical data, HRQoL questionnaires, blood samples, objective tests and activity metre data will be collected at baseline. Subjects will be randomised to a maximum of 10 treatments with hyperbaric oxygen or sham treatment over 6 weeks. Assessments for safety and efficacy will be performed at 6, 13, 26 and 52 weeks, with the primary endpoint (physical domains in RAND 36-Item Health Survey) and main secondary endpoints defined at 13 weeks after baseline. Data will be reviewed by an independent data safety monitoring board. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial is approved by the Swedish National Institutional Review Board (2021-02634) and the Swedish Medical Products Agency (5.1-2020-36673). Positive, negative and inconclusive results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals with open access. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04842448.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hyperbaric Oxygenation , Humans , Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic , COVID-19/therapy , Double-Blind Method , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
6.
BMJ Open ; 12(10): e064677, 2022 10 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2064171

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate healthcare professional staff and students' perception of wearing surgical masks before and after their experience with the COVID-19 pandemic, and to evaluate the impact on mask wearing behaviour in future influenza seasons. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using anonymous survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare students and staff from a healthcare academic institution in Southern California participated in the mask survey study. Survey results were collected from June to November 2021. A total of 305 respondents responded to the survey, with 173 being healthcare students and 132 being working healthcare staff. OUTCOMES: The study examined respondents' perceptions and hospital mask wearing behaviour before and after their COVID-19 pandemic experience, as well as during previous and future influenza seasons. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-four (86.6%) respondents agreed that wearing a surgical mask reduces infection and limits transmission of infectious disease, yet prior to the pandemic, only a small proportion wore a mask in the hospital or during patient care. After experiencing the COVID-19 pandemic, more respondents indicated that they would continue to wear a mask when they are in a hospital in general (n=145, 47.5%), during patient care (n=262, 85.9%), during influenza seasons throughout the hospital (n=205, 67.2%) and during influenza seasons during patient care (n=270, 88.5%). CONCLUSION: The pandemic experience has greatly influenced the health prevention behaviours of healthcare students and staff. After the pandemic, many respondents will continue to practice surgical mask wearing behaviour in the hospital, especially during face-to-face patient care. This demonstrates a significant change in health prevention perceptions among the current and the future generation of healthcare professionals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza, Human , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , California/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Masks , Pandemics/prevention & control , Seasons , Students
7.
BMJ Open ; 12(10): e062305, 2022 10 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2064157

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To develop a computer-based decision support tool (DST) for key decision makers to safely explore the impact on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) care of service changes driven by restrictions to prevent the spread of COVID-19. DESIGN: The DST is powered by discrete event simulation which captures the entire patient pathway. To estimate the number of COPD admissions under different scenario settings, a regression model was developed and embedded into the tool. The tool can generate a wide range of patient-related and service-related outputs. Thus, the likely impact of possible changes (eg, COVID-19 restrictions and pandemic scenarios) on patients with COPD and care can be estimated. SETTING: COPD services (including outpatient and inpatient departments) at a major provider in central London. RESULTS: Four different scenarios (reflecting the UK government's Plan A, Plan B and Plan C in addition to a benchmark scenario) were run for 1 year. 856, 616 and 484 face-to-face appointments (among 1226 clinic visits) are expected in Plans A, B and C, respectively. Clinic visit quality in Plan A is found to be marginally better than in Plans B and C. Under coronavirus restrictions, lung function tests decreased more than 80% in Plan C as compared with Plan A. Fewer COPD exacerbation-related admissions were seen (284.1 Plan C vs 395.1 in the benchmark) associated with stricter restrictions. Although the results indicate that fewer quality-adjusted life years (in terms of COPD management) would be lost during more severe restrictions, the wider impact on physical and mental health must also be established. CONCLUSIONS: This DST will enable COPD services to examine how the latest developments in care delivery and management might impact their service during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, and in the event of future pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/complications , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/therapy , Quality of Life , United Kingdom/epidemiology
8.
BMJ Open ; 12(10): e063961, 2022 10 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2053220

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine the pooled effectiveness and feasibility of telerehabilitation in patients with COVID-19. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, CINAHL, Science Direct, PEDro, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched to the end of March 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA AND OUTCOMES: RCTs investigating the effects of telerehabilitation in the management of patients with COVID-19 were included. The outcomes of interest were functional capacity, cardiopulmonary exercise tests, quality of life and other variables where data are available. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers screened, extracted data and performed methodological quality assessment independently. The revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Review Manager V.5.4 and Stata V.14.0 software were used for statistical analysis. Mean difference (MD) with 95% CI and the corresponding p value were used to determine the treatment effect between groups. A fixed-effect model was used for all variables as no significant heterogeneity was observed. RESULTS: Four studies with 334 patients with COVID-19 were included. The pooled result of telerehabilitation showed statistically significant improvement on 6-minute walking test (MD 75.50; 95% CI 54.69 to 96.30; p=0.48), 30-second sit-to-stand test (MD 1.76; 95% CI 1.47 to 2.04; p=0.30), Borg Scale (MD 2.49; 95% CI 2.16 to 2.83; p=0.28) and level of dyspnoea (MD 6.26; 95% CI 5.42 to 7.10; p=0.66). The overall treatment completion rate was 88.46%, and the most common reason for withdrawal after randomisation was lost to follow-up or uncooperativeness. CONCLUSIONS: The findings showed that telerehabilitation interventions could improve functional capacity and exercise perception among patients affected by COVID-19 and can be implemented with a high completion rate and minimal adverse events. However, more studies are required to investigate the effects on cardiopulmonary function, quality of life, anxiety, depression and other variables. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021287975.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Telerehabilitation , Dyspnea , Feasibility Studies , Humans , Quality of Life
9.
BMJ Open ; 12(10): e061332, 2022 10 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2053211

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Pulmonary disease is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in adults and children, but most of the world lacks diagnostic imaging for its assessment. Lung ultrasound is a portable, low-cost, and highly accurate imaging modality for assessment of pulmonary pathology including pneumonia, but its deployment is limited secondary to a lack of trained sonographers. In this study, we piloted a low-cost lung teleultrasound system in rural Peru during the COVID-19 pandemic using lung ultrasound volume sweep imaging (VSI) that can be operated by an individual without prior ultrasound training circumventing many obstacles to ultrasound deployment. DESIGN: Pilot study. SETTING: Study activities took place in five health centres in rural Peru. PARTICIPANTS: There were 213 participants presenting to rural health clinics. INTERVENTIONS: Individuals without prior ultrasound experience in rural Peru underwent brief training on how to use the teleultrasound system and perform lung ultrasound VSI. Subsequently, patients attending clinic were scanned by these previously ultrasound-naïve operators with the teleultrasound system. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Radiologists examined the ultrasound imaging to assess its diagnostic value and identify any pathology. A random subset of 20% of the scans were analysed for inter-reader reliability. RESULTS: Lung VSI teleultrasound examinations underwent detailed analysis by two cardiothoracic attending radiologists. Of the examinations, 202 were rated of diagnostic image quality (94.8%, 95% CI 90.9% to 97.4%). There was 91% agreement between radiologists on lung ultrasound interpretation among a 20% sample of all examinations (κ=0.76, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.98). Radiologists were able to identify sequelae of COVID-19 with the predominant finding being B-lines. CONCLUSION: Lung VSI teleultrasound performed by individuals without prior training allowed diagnostic imaging of the lungs and identification of sequelae of COVID-19 infection. Deployment of lung VSI teleultrasound holds potential as a low-cost means to improve access to imaging around the world.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Child , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Pandemics , Peru/epidemiology , Pilot Projects , Reproducibility of Results , Ultrasonography/methods
10.
BMJ Open ; 12(8): e060907, 2022 08 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2020043

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality, comprising the largest national cancer disease burden in Australia and New Zealand. Regional reports identify substantial evidence-practice gaps, unwarranted variation from best practice, and variation in processes and outcomes of care between treating centres. The Australia and New Zealand Lung Cancer Registry (ANZLCR) will be developed as a Clinical Quality Registry to monitor the safety, quality and effectiveness of lung cancer care in Australia and New Zealand. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Patient participants will include all adults >18 years of age with a new diagnosis of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), SCLC, thymoma or mesothelioma. The ANZLCR will register confirmed diagnoses using opt-out consent. Data will address key patient, disease, management processes and outcomes reported as clinical quality indicators. Electronic data collection facilitated by local data collectors and local, state and federal data linkage will enhance completeness and accuracy. Data will be stored and maintained in a secure web-based data platform overseen by registry management. Central governance with binational representation from consumers, patients and carers, governance, administration, health department, health policy bodies, university research and healthcare workers will provide project oversight. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The ANZLCR has received national ethics approval under the National Mutual Acceptance scheme. Data will be routinely reported to participating sites describing performance against measures of agreed best practice and nationally to stakeholders including federal, state and territory departments of health. Local, regional and (bi)national benchmarks, augmented with online dashboard indicator reporting will enable local targeting of quality improvement efforts.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Lung Neoplasms , Adult , Australia/epidemiology , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/epidemiology , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/therapy , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Lung Neoplasms/therapy , New Zealand/epidemiology , Registries
11.
BMJ Open ; 12(7): e060985, 2022 Jul 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1950192

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The WHO End-TB Strategy calls for the development of novel diagnostics to detect tuberculosis (TB) earlier and more accurately. Better diagnostics, together with tools to predict disease progression, are critical for achieving WHO End-TB targets. The Early Risk Assessment in TB Contacts by new diagnoStic tEsts (ERASE-TB) study aims to evaluate novel diagnostics and testing algorithms for early TB diagnosis and accurate prediction of disease progression among household contacts (HHCs) exposed to confirmed index cases in Mozambique, Tanzania and Zimbabwe. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A total of 2100 HHCs (aged ≥10 years) of adults with microbiologically-confirmed pulmonary TB will be recruited and followed up at 6-month intervals for 18-24 months. At each time point, a WHO symptom screen and digital chest radiograph (dCXR) will be performed, and blood and urine samples will be collected. Individuals screening positive (WHO symptom screen or dCXR) will be requested to provide sputum for Xpert MTB/Rif Ultra. At baseline, HHCs will also be screened for HIV, diabetes (HbA1c), chronic lung disease (spirometry), hypertension and anaemia. Study outcomes will be coprevalent TB (diagnosed at enrolment), incident TB (diagnosed during follow-up) or no TB at completion of follow-up. Novel diagnostics will be validated using fresh and biobanked samples with a nested case-control design. Cases are defined as HHCs diagnosed with TB (for early diagnosis) or with incident TB (for prediction of progression) and will be matched by age, sex and country to HHCs who remain healthy (controls). Statistical analyses will include assessment of diagnostic accuracy by constructing receiver operating curves and calculation of sensitivity and specificity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: ERASE-TB has been approved by regulatory and ethical committees in each African country and by each partner organisation. Consent, with additional assent for participants <18 years, is voluntary. Attestation by impartial witnesses is sought in case of illiteracy. Confidentiality of participants is being maintained throughout. Study findings will be presented at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed international journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04781257.Cite Now.


Subject(s)
Diagnostic Tests, Routine , Tuberculosis , Adult , Child , Humans , Disease Progression , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Tanzania , Clinical Studies as Topic
12.
BMJ Open ; 12(6): e059326, 2022 06 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1909760

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The Respiratory Health Strategic Clinical Network (RHSCN) was launched to facilitate respiratory and sleep health through implementation of innovative, patient-centred, evidence-informed coordinated services in Alberta. In collaboration with project partners, the RHSCN aimed to determine the respiratory research priorities for Alberta. DESIGN: The four phases of this research prioritisation project were (1) identifying research questions from stakeholders, (2) determining which research questions had been answered in existing literature, (3) prioritising unanswered questions and (4) finalising the priorities through an inperson workshop. SETTING: The study occurred in Alberta, Canada over a 2-year period beginning in March 2017. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 448 patients, clinicians and other stakeholders consented to participate in the survey. RESULTS: A total of 595 possible questions were submitted, with 343 unique questions identified. Of the questions, 94 were out of scope, 155 answered by existing literature and 10 were combined with others, while 83 were determined to be unanswered in the literature. Stakeholders were surveyed again to prioritise the remaining 83 questions and they were reviewed by the project's Steering Committee (clinicians and patients). At the inperson workshop, the Steering Committee identified 17 research topics as priority areas for respiratory and sleep research in Alberta. CONCLUSION: A stakeholder-led research prioritisation process identified optimal clinical management/follow-up, equitable access to services, and management of social, psychological and mental health issues related to respiratory/sleep health as priority research areas.


Subject(s)
Health Priorities , Research Design , Alberta , Humans , Referral and Consultation , Surveys and Questionnaires
13.
BMJ Open ; 12(6): e059110, 2022 06 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1891837

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to propose a simple, accessible and low-cost predictive clinical model to detect lung lesions due to COVID-19 infection. DESIGN: This prospective cohort study included COVID-19 survivors hospitalised between 30 March 2020 and 31 August 2020 followed-up 6 months after hospital discharge. The pulmonary function was assessed using the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale, oximetry (SpO2), spirometry (forced vital capacity (FVC)) and chest X-ray (CXR) during an in-person consultation. Patients with abnormalities in at least one of these parameters underwent chest CT. mMRC scale, SpO2, FVC and CXR findings were used to build a machine learning model for lung lesion detection on CT. SETTING: A tertiary hospital in Sao Paulo, Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: 749 eligible RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected patients aged ≥18 years. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: A predictive clinical model for lung lesion detection on chest CT. RESULTS: There were 470 patients (63%) that had at least one sign of pulmonary involvement and were eligible for CT. Almost half of them (48%) had significant pulmonary abnormalities, including ground-glass opacities, parenchymal bands, reticulation, traction bronchiectasis and architectural distortion. The machine learning model, including the results of 257 patients with complete data on mMRC, SpO2, FVC, CXR and CT, accurately detected pulmonary lesions by the joint data of CXR, mMRC scale, SpO2 and FVC (sensitivity, 0.85±0.08; specificity, 0.70±0.06; F1-score, 0.79±0.06 and area under the curve, 0.80±0.07). CONCLUSION: A predictive clinical model based on CXR, mMRC, oximetry and spirometry data can accurately screen patients with lung lesions after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Given that these examinations are highly accessible and low cost, this protocol can be automated and implemented in different countries for early detection of COVID-19 sequelae.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Survivors
14.
BMJ Open ; 11(8), 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1842709

ABSTRACT

IntroductionRegardless of having effective vaccines against COVID-19, containment measures such as enhanced physical distancing and good practice of personal hygiene remain the mainstay of controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. Countries across Asia have imposed these containment measures to varying extents. However, residents in different countries would have a differing degree of compliance to these containment measures potentially due to differences in the level of awareness and motivation in the early phase of pandemic.ObjectivesIn our study, we aimed to describe and correlate the level of knowledge and attitude with the level of compliance with personal hygiene and physical distancing practices among Asian countries in the early phase of pandemic.MethodsA multinational cross-sectional study was carried out using electronic surveys between May and June 2020 across 14 geographical areas. Subjects aged 21 years and above were invited to participate through social media, word of mouth and electronic mail.ResultsAmong the 2574 responses obtained, 762 (29.6%) participants were from East Asia and 1812 (70.4%) were from Southeast Asia (SEA). A greater proportion of participants from SEA will practise physical distancing as long as it takes (72.8% vs 60.6%). Having safe distancing practices such as standing more than 1 or 2 m apart (AdjOR 5.09 95% CI (1.08 to 24.01)) or more than 3 or 4 m apart (AdjOR 7.05 95% CI (1.32 to 37.67)), wearing a mask when they had influenza-like symptoms before the COVID-19 pandemic, preferring online news channels such as online news websites/applications (AdjOR 1.73 95% CI (1.21 to 2.49)) and social media (AdjOR 1.68 95% CI (1.13 to 2.50) as sources of obtaining information about COVID-19 and high psychological well-being (AdjOR 1.39 95% CI (1.04 to 1.87)) were independent factors associated with high compliance.ConclusionsWe found factors associated with high compliance behaviour against COVID-19 in the early phase of pandemic and it will be useful to consider them in risk assessment, communication and pandemic preparedness.

15.
BMJ Open ; 12(3): e058238, 2022 03 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1769918

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: SARS-CoV-2 has caused a pandemic claiming more than 4 million lives worldwide. Overwhelming COVID-19 respiratory failure placed tremendous demands on healthcare systems increasing the death toll. Cost-effective prognostic tools to characterise the likelihood of patients with COVID-19 to progress to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure are still needed. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to develop a model using demographic and clinical data collected in the first 12 hours of admission to explore associations with severe hypoxemic respiratory failure in unvaccinated and hospitalised patients with COVID-19. SETTING: University-based healthcare system including six hospitals located in the Galveston, Brazoria and Harris counties of Texas. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and admitted to one of six hospitals between 19 March and 30 June 2020. PRIMARY OUTCOME: The primary outcome was defined as reaching a WHO ordinal scale between 6 and 9 at any time during admission, which corresponded to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure requiring high-flow oxygen supplementation or mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: We included 329 participants in the model cohort and 62 (18.8%) met the primary outcome. Our multivariable regression model found that lactate dehydrogenase (OR 2.36), Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (OR 2.26) and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (OR 1.15) were significant predictors of severe disease. The final model showed an area under the curve of 0.84. The sensitivity analysis and point of influence analysis did not reveal inconsistencies. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that a combination of accessible demographic and clinical information collected on admission may predict the progression to severe COVID-19 among adult patients with mild and moderate disease. This model requires external validation prior to its use.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Oxygen , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Hospitalization , Humans , Oxygen/therapeutic use , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Texas/epidemiology
16.
BMJ Open ; 12(2): e050331, 2022 02 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1691317

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 is a heterogeneous disease, and many reports have described variations in demographic, biochemical and clinical features at presentation influencing overall hospital mortality. However, there is little information regarding longitudinal changes in laboratory prognostic variables in relation to disease progression in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. DESIGN AND SETTING: This retrospective observational report describes disease progression from symptom onset, to admission to hospital, clinical response and discharge/death among patients with COVID-19 at a tertiary centre in South East England. PARTICIPANTS: Six hundred and fifty-one patients treated for SARS-CoV-2 between March and September 2020 were included in this analysis. Ethical approval was obtained from the HRA Specific Review Board (REC 20/HRA/2986) for waiver of informed consent. RESULTS: The majority of patients presented within 1 week of symptom onset. The lowest risk patients had low mortality (1/45, 2%), and most were discharged within 1 week after admission (30/45, 67%). The highest risk patients, as determined by the 4C mortality score predictor, had high mortality (27/29, 93%), with most dying within 1 week after admission (22/29, 76%). Consistent with previous reports, most patients presented with high levels of C reactive protein (CRP) (67% of patients >50 mg/L), D-dimer (98%>upper limit of normal (ULN)), ferritin (65%>ULN), lactate dehydrogenase (90%>ULN) and low lymphocyte counts (81%

Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Biomarkers , Cohort Studies , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers , United Kingdom
17.
BMJ Open ; 12(2): e052893, 2022 02 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1673433

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has renewed interest in the use of inhaled anaesthetics for sedation of ventilated critically ill patients. Preliminary data show that inhaled anaesthetics reduce lung inflammation, time to extubation and intensive care unit length of stay compared with intravenous sedatives. However, the impact of inhaled anaesthetics on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes is not well described in this setting. Randomised controlled trials are underway to establish if inhaled anaesthetics affect these and other patient and health system outcomes. Our aim is to summarise the known effects of inhaled sedatives on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this systematic review, we will use MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO to identify studies from 1970 to 2021 that assessed cognitive and psychiatric outcomes in critically ill adult patients sedated with inhaled anaesthetics. We will include case series, observational and cohort studies and randomised controlled trials. We will exclude case studies due to the heterogeneity of reporting in these studies. For randomised controlled trials comparing inhaled to intravenous sedation, we will report cognitive and psychiatric outcomes for both study arms. Studies will be selected based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist. Data will be extracted using a standardised data extraction tool by two independent reviewers. Studies will be assessed for bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised controlled trials, or the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort and case-control studies. Findings will be reported according to outcome and descriptive statistics will be used to illustrate findings in a narrative fashion. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The systematic review uses published data and therefore does not require ethics approval. Results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentation at conferences related to the field. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021236455.


Subject(s)
Anesthetics , COVID-19 , Adult , Cognition , Critical Illness , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Systematic Reviews as Topic
18.
BMJ Open ; 12(1): e056599, 2022 01 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1613011

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic forced hospital organisation and healthcare professionals to prepare for large quantities of patients in isolation rooms. In situ simulation may seem promising in order to manage the organisational changes that the pandemic require. This study aims to investigate in situ simulations influence on healthcare professional's self-perceived preparedness to face the pandemic. DESIGN: A qualitative focus group study. SETTING: We conducted full scale in situ simulations over a 3-week period in April 2020, including 277 healthcare professionals, at a Danish University Hospital. Subsequently, six semistructured focus group interviews, including 22 participants from the simulations, were conducted in May 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 22 healthcare professionals participated in the focus group interviews. METHODS: The simulations consisted of a briefing, two scenarios focusing on acute respiratory insufficiency and correct use of personal protective equipment (PPE), and a debriefing. We conducted six focus group interviews using comparable semistructured interview guides focusing on the organisational restructuring of the departments and outcomes of the needs-driven simulation-based programme. We used thematic analysis to identify main themes. RESULTS: The informants perceived that the simulations resulted in positive experiences for the healthcare professionals and perceived the organisational changes as effective. They highlighted that simulation enhanced teamwork, demystified the COVID-19 disease, and improved skills, in correct use of PPE and acute treatment of COVID-19 patients. Data revealed that a predefined simulation task force including both experienced simulators and medical experts for facilitation of in situ simulation would be beneficial. CONCLUSION: In situ simulation may be useful to enhance learning on organisation and individual level during a pandemic. This educational activity could serve an important role in facilitating hospital preparation and education of large numbers of healthcare professionals during a healthcare crisis. Introduction of a simulation task force is suggested to handle coordination and rapid enrolment across the hospital.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Simulation Training , Delivery of Health Care , Denmark , Focus Groups , Hospitals , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
19.
BMJ Open ; 11(12): e054442, 2021 12 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1583096

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is a new viral-induced pneumonia caused by infection with a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. At present, there are few proven effective treatments. This early-phase experimental medicine protocol describes an overarching and adaptive trial designed to provide safety data in patients with COVID-19, pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) information and exploratory biological surrogates of efficacy, which may support further development and deployment of candidate therapies in larger scale trials of patients positive for COVID-19. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Define is an ongoing exploratory multicentre-platform, open-label, randomised study. Patients positive for COVID-19 will be recruited from the following cohorts: (a) community cases; (b) hospitalised patients with evidence of COVID-19 pneumonitis; and (c) hospitalised patients requiring assisted ventilation. The cohort recruited from will be dependent on the experimental therapy, its route of administration and mechanism of action. Randomisation will be computer generated in a 1:1:n ratio. Twenty patients will be recruited per arm for the initial two arms. This is permitted to change as per the experimental therapy. The primary statistical analyses are concerned with the safety of candidate agents as add-on therapy to standard of care in patients with COVID-19. Secondary analysis will assess the following variables during treatment period: (1) the response of key exploratory biomarkers; (2) change in WHO ordinal scale and National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) score; (3) oxygen requirements; (4) viral load; (5) duration of hospital stay; (6) PK/PD; and (7) changes in key coagulation pathways. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Define trial platform and its initial two treatment and standard of care arms have received a favourable ethical opinion from Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (REC) (20/SS/0066), notice of acceptance from The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) (EudraCT 2020-002230-32) and approval from the relevant National Health Service (NHS) Research and Development (R&D) departments (NHS Lothian and NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde). Appropriate processes are in place in order to be able to consent adults with and without capacity while following the necessary COVID-19 safe procedures. Patients without capacity could be recruited via a legal representative. Witnessed electronic consent of participants or their legal representatives following consent discussions was established. The results of each study arm will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal as soon as the treatment arm has finished recruitment, data input is complete and any outstanding patient safety follow-ups have been completed. Depending on the results of these or future arms, data will be shared with larger clinical trial networks, including the Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy trial (RECOVERY), and to other partners for rapid roll-out in larger patient cohorts. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN14212905, NCT04473053.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research , COVID-19 , Clinical Trials, Phase I as Topic , Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic , Electronics , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , State Medicine
20.
BMJ Open ; 11(10): e053268, 2021 10 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1495473

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To test the feasibility and acceptability of a short-term reminder and incentives intervention in adolescents with low adherence to asthma medications. METHODS: Mixed-methods feasibility study in a tertiary care clinic. Adolescents recruited to a 24-week programme with three 8-weekly visits, receiving electronic reminders to prompt inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) inhalation through a mobile app coupled with electronic monitoring devices (EMD). From the second visit, monetary incentives based on adherence of ICS inhalation: £1 per dose, maximum £2 /day, up to £112/study, collected as gift cards at the third visit. End of study interviews and questionnaires assessing perceptions of asthma and ICS, analysed using the Perceptions and Practicalities Framework. PARTICIPANTS: Adolescents (11-18 years) with documented low ICS adherence (<80% by EMD), and poor asthma control at the first clinic visit. RESULTS: 10 out of 12 adolescents approached were recruited (7 males, 3 females, 12-16 years). Eight participants provided adherence measures up to the fourth visits and received rewards. Mean study duration was 281 days, with 7/10 participants unable to attend their fourth visit due to COVID-19 lockdown. Only 3/10 participants managed to pair the app/EMD up to the fourth visit, which was associated with improved ICS adherence (from 0.51, SD 0.07 to 0.86, SD 0.05). Adherence did not change in adolescents unable to pair the app/EMD. The intervention was acceptable to participants and parents/guardians. Exit interviews showed that participants welcomed reminders and incentives, though expressed frustration with app/EMD technological difficulties. Participants stated the intervention helped through reminding ICS doses, promoting self-monitoring and increasing motivation to take inhalers. CONCLUSIONS: An intervention using electronic reminders and incentives through an app coupled with an EMD was feasible and acceptable to adolescents with asthma. A pilot randomised controlled trial is warranted to better estimate the effect size on adherence, with improved technical support for the EMD.


Subject(s)
Asthma , COVID-19 , Adolescent , Asthma/drug therapy , Communicable Disease Control , Electronics , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Medication Adherence , Reward , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Healthcare
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL