Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 603
Filter
1.
Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi ; 37(2): 81-86, 2023 Feb.
Article in Chinese | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20236516

ABSTRACT

Respiratory tract viruses are the second leading cause of olfactory dysfunction. Between 2019 to 2022, the world has been plagued by the problem of olfaction caused by the COVID-19. As we learn more about the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2(SARS-CoV-2), with the recognition that olfactory dysfunction is a key symptom of this disease process, there is a greater need than ever for evidence-based management of postinfectious olfactory dysfunction(PIOD). The Clinical Olfactory Working Group has proposed theconsensus on the roles of PIOD. This paper is the detailed interpretation of the consensus.


Subject(s)
Asthma , COVID-19 , Hypersensitivity , Olfaction Disorders , Humans , United States , Smell , COVID-19/complications , SARS-CoV-2 , Olfaction Disorders/etiology , Olfaction Disorders/therapy , Consensus , Hypersensitivity/complications , Asthma/complications
2.
Disaster Med Public Health Prep ; 17: e396, 2023 05 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2327030

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A Mass Casualty Incident response (MCI) full scale exercise (FSEx) assures MCI first responder (FR) competencies. Simulation and serious gaming platforms (Simulation) have been considered to achieve and maintain FR competencies. The translational science (TS) T0 question was asked: how can FRs achieve similar MCI competencies as a FSEx through the use of MCI simulation exercises? METHODS: T1 stage (Scoping Review): PRISMA-ScR was conducted to develop statements for the T2 stage modified Delphi (mD) study. 1320 reference titles and abstracts were reviewed with 215 full articles progressing for full review leading to 97 undergoing data extraction.T2 stage (mD study): Selected experts were presented with 27 statements derived from T1 data with instruction to rank each statement on a 7-point linear numeric scale, where 1 = disagree and 7 = agree. Consensus amongst experts was defined as a standard deviation ≤ 1.0. RESULTS: After 3 mD rounds, 19 statements attained consensus and 8 did not attain consensus. CONCLUSIONS: MCI simulation exercises can be developed to achieve similar competencies as FSEx by incorporating the 19 statements that attained consensus through the TS stages of a scoping review (T1) and mD study (T2), and continuing to T3 implementation, and then T4 evaluation stages.


Subject(s)
Emergency Responders , Mass Casualty Incidents , Humans , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Exercise
3.
World J Emerg Surg ; 18(1): 32, 2023 04 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2322695

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Timely access to the operating room for emergency general surgery (EGS) indications remains a challenge across the globe, largely driven by operating room availability and staffing constraints. The "timing in acute care surgery" (TACS) classification was previously published to introduce a new tool to triage the timely and appropriate access of EGS patients to the operating room. However, the clinical and operational effectiveness of the TACS classification has not been investigated in subsequent validation studies. This study aimed to improve the TACS classification and provide further consensus around the appropriate use of the new TACS classification through a standardized Delphi approach with international experts. METHODS: This is a validation study of the new TACS by a selected international panel of experts using the Delphi method. The TACS questionnaire was designed as a web-based survey. The consensus agreement level was established to be ≥ 75%. The collective consensus agreement was defined as the sum of the percentage of the highest Likert scale levels (4-5) out of all participants. Surgical emergency diseases and correlated clinical scenarios were defined for each of the proposed classes. Subsequent rounds were carried out until a definitive level of consensus was reached. Frequencies and percentages were calculated to determine the degree of agreement for each surgical disease. RESULTS: Four polling rounds were carried out. The new TACS classification provides 6 colour-code classes correlated to a precise timing to surgery, defined scenarios and surgical condition. The WHITE colour-code class was introduced to rapidly (within a week) reschedule cancelled or postponed surgical procedures. Haemodynamic stability is the main tool to stratify patients for immediate surgery or not in the presence of sepsis/septic shock. Fifty-one surgical diseases were included in the different colour-code classes of priority. CONCLUSION: The new TACS classification is a comprehensive, simple, clear and reproducible triage system which can be used to assess the severity of the patient and the surgical disease, to reduce the time to access to the operating room, and to manage the emergency surgical patients within a "safe" timeframe. By including well-defined surgical diseases in the different colour-code classes of priority, validated through a Delphi consensus, the new TACS improves communication among surgeons, between surgeons and anaesthesiologists and decreases conflicts and waste and waiting time in accessing the operating room for emergency surgical patients.


Subject(s)
Surgeons , Triage , Humans , Delphi Technique , Triage/methods , Consensus , Operating Rooms
4.
BMC Neurol ; 23(1): 161, 2023 Apr 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2322628

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Digital twins, a form of artificial intelligence, are virtual representations of the physical world. In the past 20 years, digital twins have been utilized to track wind turbines' operations, monitor spacecraft's status, and even create a model of the Earth for climate research. While digital twins hold much promise for the neurocritical care unit, the question remains on how to best establish the rules that govern these models. This model will expand on our group's existing digital twin model for the treatment of sepsis. METHODS: The authors of this project collaborated to create a Direct Acyclic Graph (DAG) and an initial series of 20 DELPHI statements, each with six accompanying sub-statements that captured the pathophysiology surrounding the management of acute ischemic strokes in the practice of Neurocritical Care (NCC). Agreement from a panel of 18 experts in the field of NCC was collected through a 7-point Likert scale with consensus defined a-priori by ≥ 80% selection of a 6 ("agree") or 7 ("strongly agree"). The endpoint of the study was defined as the completion of three separate rounds of DELPHI consensus. DELPHI statements that had met consensus would not be included in subsequent rounds of DELPHI consensus. The authors refined DELPHI statements that did not reach consensus with the guidance of de-identified expert comments for subsequent rounds of DELPHI. All DELPHI statements that reached consensus by the end of three rounds of DELPHI consensus would go on to be used to inform the construction of the digital twin model. RESULTS: After the completion of three rounds of DELPHI, 93 (77.5%) statements reached consensus, 11 (9.2%) statements were excluded, and 16 (13.3%) statements did not reach a consensus of the original 120 DELPHI statements. CONCLUSION: This descriptive study demonstrates the use of the DELPHI process to generate consensus among experts and establish a set of rules for the development of a digital twin model for use in the neurologic ICU. Compared to associative models of AI, which develop rules based on finding associations in datasets, digital twin AI created by the DELPHI process are easily interpretable models based on a current understanding of underlying physiology.


Subject(s)
Artificial Intelligence , Stroke , Humans , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Intensive Care Units , Critical Care , Stroke/therapy
5.
Arch Cardiol Mex ; 91(Suplemento COVID): 047-054, 2021 Dec 20.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2315058

ABSTRACT

Coagulopathy and thrombosis associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) represent a major issue in the management of this disease. In the past months, clinical studies have demonstrated that COVID-19 patients present with a particular hypercoagulable state, in which a markedly increased D-dimer concomitant with increased levels of fibrinogen are observed. This hypercoagulable state leads to an increased risk of thrombosis, which seems to be higher among those patients with critical symptoms of COVID-19. The best therapeutic approach to prevent thrombotic events in COVID-19 has not been determined yet and several questions regarding thromboprophylaxis therapy, such as the time to initiate anticoagulation, type of anticoagulant and dose regimen, have emerged among physicians. To address these concerns, several medical societies have published position papers to provide the opinion of thrombosis experts on the management of coagulopathy and thrombosis associated with COVID-19. In line with this, the Latin America Cooperative Group of Hemostasis and Thrombosis (Grupo CLAHT) has constituted a panel of experts in thrombosis and hemostasis to discuss the available data on this topic. The aim of this review is to summarize the current evidence regarding hemostatic impairment and thrombotic risk in COVID-19 and to provide a carefully revised opinion of Latin American experts on the thromboprophylaxis and management of thrombotic events and coagulopathy in patients with suspected COVID-19.


La coagulopatía y la trombosis asociadas a la enfermedad por coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) representan un problema importante en el manejo de esta enfermedad. Los estudios clínicos de los últimos meses han demostrado que los pacientes con COVID-19 presentan un estado de hipercoagulabilidad particular, en el que se observa un aumento notable del dímero D concomitante con niveles elevados de fibrinógeno. El estado de hipercoagulabilidad conduce a un mayor riesgo de trombosis, que parece ser mayor entre aquellos pacientes con síntomas críticos de COVID-19. El mejor enfoque terapéutico para prevenir los eventos trombóticos en esta nueva enfermedad aún no se ha determinado y han surgido varias preguntas con respecto a la tromboprofilaxia, como el momento adecuado para iniciar la anticoagulación, el tipo de anticoagulante y el régimen de dosis. Para abordar estas preocupaciones, varias sociedades médicas han publicado artículos de posición para brindar la opinión de expertos en trombosis sobre el manejo de la coagulopatía y trombosis asociadas a COVID-19. Grupo Cooperativo Latinoamericano de Hemostasia y Trombosis (Grupo CLAHT) ha convocado a un panel de expertos en trombosis y hemostasia para discutir los datos disponibles sobre este tema. El objetivo de esta revisión es resumir la evidencia actual con respecto al deterioro hemostático y el riesgo trombótico en el COVID-19 y proporcionar una opinión cuidadosamente revisada de los expertos latinoamericanos sobre la tromboprofilaxis y el manejo de eventos trombóticos y coagulopatía en pacientes con sospecha de COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , COVID-19 , Thrombosis , Venous Thromboembolism , COVID-19/complications , Consensus , Hemostasis , Humans , Latin America , Thrombosis/prevention & control , Thrombosis/therapy , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , Venous Thromboembolism/therapy
6.
Trials ; 23(1): 764, 2022 Sep 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2315941

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Single-sided deafness (SSD) has functional, psychological, and social consequences. Interventions for adults with SSD include hearing aids and auditory implants. Benefits and harms (outcome domains) of these interventions are until now reported inconsistently in clinical trials. Inconsistency in reporting outcome measures prevents meaningful comparisons or syntheses of trial results. The Core Rehabilitation Outcome Set for Single-Sided Deafness (CROSSSD) international initiative used structured communication techniques to achieve consensus among healthcare users and professionals working in the field of SSD. The novel contribution is a set of core outcome domains that experts agree are critically important to assess in all clinical trials of SSD interventions. METHODS: A long list of candidate outcome domains compiled from a systematic review and published qualitative data, informed the content of a two-round online Delphi survey. Overall, 308 participants from 29 countries were enrolled. Of those, 233 participants completed both rounds of the survey and scored each outcome domain on a 9-point scale. The set of core outcome domains was finalised via a web-based consensus meeting with 12 participants. Votes involved all stakeholder groups, with an approximate 2:1 ratio of professionals to healthcare users participating in the Delphi survey, and a 1:1 ratio participating in the consensus meeting. RESULTS: The first round of the survey listed 44 potential outcome domains, organised thematically. A further five outcome domains were included in Round 2 based on participant feedback. The structured voting at round 2 identified 17 candidate outcome domains which were voted on at the consensus meeting. Consensus was reached for a core outcome domain set including three outcome domains: spatial orientation, group conversations in noisy social situations, and impact on social situations. Seventy-seven percent of the remaining Delphi participants agreed with this core outcome domain set. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of the internationally agreed core outcome domain set would promote consistent assessment and reporting of outcomes that are meaningful and important to all relevant stakeholders. This consistency will in turn enable comparison of outcomes reported across clinical trials comparing SSD interventions in adults and reduce research waste. Further research will determine how those outcome domains should best be measured.


Subject(s)
Deafness , Research Design , Adult , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Treatment Outcome
7.
Leukemia ; 37(6): 1175-1185, 2023 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2319828

ABSTRACT

In the post-pandemic COVID-19 period, human activities have returned to normal and COVID-19 cases are usually mild. However, patients with multiple myeloma (MM) present an increased risk for breakthrough infections and severe COVID-19 outcomes, including hospitalization and death. The European Myeloma Network has provided an expert consensus to guide patient management in this era. Vaccination with variant-specific booster vaccines, such as the bivalent vaccine for the ancestral Wuhan strain and the Omicron BA.4/5 strains, is essential as novel strains emerge and become dominant in the community. Boosters should be administered every 6-12 months after the last vaccine shot or documented COVID-19 infection (hybrid immunity). Booster shots seem to overcome the negative effect of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies on humoral responses; however, anti-BCMA treatment remains an adverse predictive factor for humoral immune response. Evaluation of the immune response after vaccination may identify a particularly vulnerable subset of patients who may need additional boosters, prophylactic therapies and prevention measures. Pre-exposure prophylaxis with tixagevimab/cilgavimab is not effective against the new dominant variants and thus is no longer recommended. Oral antivirals (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir) and remdesivir are effective against Omicron subvariants BA.2.12.1, BA.4, BA.5, BQ.1.1 and/or XBB.1.5 and should be administered in MM patients at the time of a positive COVID-19 test or within 5 days post symptoms onset. Convalescent plasma seems to have low value in the post-pandemic era. Prevention measures during SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks, including mask wearing and avoiding crowded places, seem prudent to continue for MM patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Multiple Myeloma , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Multiple Myeloma/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 Serotherapy , Consensus , Pandemics , Antibodies, Neutralizing
8.
Arch Virol ; 168(6): 156, 2023 May 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2319620

ABSTRACT

The currently dominant Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has swiftly diverged into clades. To predict the probable impact of these clades, the consensus insertions/deletions (indels) and amino acid substitutions of the whole genome of clades were compared with the original SARS-CoV-2 strain. The evolutionary history of representatives of clades and lineages was inferred using the maximum-likelihood method and tested using the bootstrap method. The indels and polymorphic amino acids were found to be either clade-specific or shared among clades. The 21K clade has unique indels and substitutions, which probably represent reverted indels/substitutions. Three variations that appear to be associated with SARS-CoV-2 attenuation in the Omicron clades included a deletion in the nucleocapsid gene, a deletion in the 3'untranslated region, and a truncation in open reading frame 8. Phylogenetic analysis showed that the Omicron clades and lineages form three separate clusters.


Subject(s)
Amino Acids , COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Consensus , Phylogeny , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
9.
Health Psychol ; 42(5): 285-286, 2023 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2318759

ABSTRACT

The BMRC has initiated a new initiative, the Behavioral Medicine Research Council (BMRC) Scientific Statement papers. The statement papers will move the field forward by guiding efforts to improve the quality of behavioral medicine research and practice and facilitate the dissemination and translation of behavioral medicine research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).


Subject(s)
Behavioral Medicine , Humans , Consensus , Behavioral Research
10.
BMJ Open ; 13(5): e069494, 2023 05 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2318188

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Emergency care services are rapidly expanding in Africa; however, development must focus on quality. The African Federation of Emergency Medicine consensus conference (AFEM-CC)-based quality indicators were published in 2018. This study sought to increase knowledge of quality through identifying all publications from Africa containing data relevant to the AFEM-CC process clinical and outcome quality indicators. DESIGN: We conducted searches for general quality of emergency care in Africa and for each of 28 AFEM-CC process clinical and five outcome clinical quality indicators individually in the medical and grey literature. DATA SOURCES: PubMed (1964-2 January 2022), Embase (1947-2 January 2022) and CINAHL (1982-3 January 2022) and various forms of grey literature were queried. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies published in English, addressing the African emergency care population as a whole or large subsegment of this population (eg, trauma, paediatrics), and matching AFEM-CC process quality indicator parameters exactly were included. Studies with similar, but not exact match, data were collected separately as 'AFEM-CC quality indicators near match'. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Document screening was done in duplicate by two authors, using Covidence, and conflicts were adjudicated by a third. Simple descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred and fourteen documents were reviewed, 314 in full text. 41 studies met a priori criteria and were included, yielding 59 unique quality indicator data points. Documentation and assessment quality indicators accounted for 64% of data points identified, clinical care for 25% and outcomes for 10%. An additional 53 'AFEM-CC quality indicators near match' publications were identified (38 new publications and 15 previously identified studies that contained additional 'near match' data), yielding 87 data points. CONCLUSIONS: Data relevant to African emergency care facility-based quality indicators are highly limited. Future publications on emergency care in Africa should be aware of, and conform with, AFEM-CC quality indicators to strengthen understanding of quality.


Subject(s)
Emergency Medical Services , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Humans , Child , Africa , Awareness , Consensus
11.
J Clin Epidemiol ; 156: 1-10, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2316176

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We aimed to develop a checklist to aid guideline developers in determining which scientific or societal cause ("triggers") are relevant when considering to initiate a rapid recommendation procedure. METHODS: We conducted a two-round modified Delphi procedure with a panel of Dutch guideline experts, clinicians, and patient representatives. A previously conducted systematic literature review and semistructured interviews with four science journalists were used to generate a list of potential items. This item list was submitted to the panel for discussion, reduction and refinement into a checklist. RESULTS: Thirteen experts took part. Two questionnaires were completed in which participants scored an initial list of 64 items based on relevance. During two online meetings, the scores were discussed, irrelevant items were removed, and relevant items were reformulated into seven questions. The final "quickscan assessment of the need for a rapid recommendation" covers user perspective, scientific evidence, clinical relevance, clinical practice variation, applicability, quality of care and public health outcomes, and ethical/legal considerations. CONCLUSION: The quickscan aids guideline developers in systematically assessing whether a trigger expresses a valid need for developing a rapid recommendation. Future research could focus on the applicability and validity of the checklist within guideline development programs.


Subject(s)
Checklist , Humans , Checklist/methods , Delphi Technique , Consensus , Surveys and Questionnaires
12.
Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am ; 34(3): 689-700, 2023 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2312897

ABSTRACT

Professional or governmental agencies and organizations have developed guidelines to define the problem and evaluate and manage patients with Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS CoV-2 (PASC). Multidisciplinary models largely exist in academic centers and larger cities; however, most care for PASC patients is provided by the primary care providers. The American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation has been in the forefront in releasing consensus statements as a part of the long COVID collaborative.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated , Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine , Humans , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome , Consensus , SARS-CoV-2 , Disease Progression
13.
Perspect Biol Med ; 65(4): 529-534, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2308502

ABSTRACT

This symposium contribution argues that politicized responses to the COVID-19 pandemic mark the fracturing of the consensus that bioethics has been built upon. This consensus involved the mutual dependence of principles and stories: principles need stories to become applicable in clinical action, and stories need to reflect principles if they are to make generalized claims. Two mid-20th-century theorists, Erving Goffman and Walter Benjamin, each predicted the thinness of appeals to principles and to stories, respectively; their skepticism describes our moment. Anti-public health responses to COVID restrictions show that principles now have radically different meanings within different factional groups, so appealing to them perpetuates divisions. Complementary to that, stories are told more as displays of group membership than as testimony of individual experience. The predictable future is that bioethics controversies will become more fraught.


Subject(s)
Bioethics , COVID-19 , Humans , Pandemics , Consensus , Public Health
15.
J Clin Epidemiol ; 155: 118-128, 2023 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2293921

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Producing living guidelines requires making important decisions about methods for evidence identification, appraisal, and integration to allow the living mode to function. Clarifying what these decisions are and the trade-offs between options is necessary. This article provides living guideline developers with a framework to enable them to choose the most suitable model for their living guideline topic, question, or context. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We developed this guidance through an iterative process informed by interviews, feedback, and a consensus process with an international group of living guideline developers. RESULTS: Several key decisions need to be made both before commencing and throughout the continual process of living guideline development and maintenance. These include deciding what approach is taken to the systematic review process; decisions about methods to be applied for the evidence appraisal process, including the use of unpublished data; and selection of "triggers" to incorporate new studies into living guideline recommendations. In each case, there are multiple options and trade-offs. CONCLUSION: We identify trade-offs and important decisions to be considered throughout the living guideline development process. The most appropriate, and most sustainable, mode of development and updating will be dependent on the choices made in each of these areas.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Humans , Consensus
16.
BMJ Open ; 13(4): e071150, 2023 04 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2292666

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Eating disorders (EDs) are complex psychiatric illnesses requiring multidisciplinary care across both mental and medical healthcare settings. Currently, no nationally comprehensive, consistent, agreed on or mandated data set or data collection strategy exists for EDs in Australia: thus, little is known about the outcomes of care nor treatment pathways taken by individuals with EDs. InsideOut Institute was contracted by the Australian Government Department of Health to develop a minimum dataset (MDS) for the illness group with consideration given to data capture mechanisms and the scoping of a national registry. DESIGN: A four-step modified Delphi methodology was used, including national consultations followed by three rounds of quantitative feedback by an expert panel. SETTING: Due to social distancing protocols throughout the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the study was conducted online using video conferencing (Zoom and Microsoft Teams) (Step 1), email communication and the REDCap secure web-based survey platform (Steps 2-4). PARTICIPANTS: 14 data management organisations, 5 state and territory government departments of health, 2 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander advising organisations and 28 stakeholders representing public and private health sectors across Australia participated in consultations. 123 ED experts (including lived experience) participated in the first quantitative round of the Delphi survey. Retention was high, with 80% of experts continuing to the second round and 73% to the third. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Items and categories endorsed by the expert panel (defined a priori as >85% rating an item or category 'very important' or 'imperative'). RESULTS: High consensus across dataset items and categories led to the stratification of an identified MDS. Medical status and quality of life were rated the most important outcomes to collect in an MDS. Other items meeting high levels of consensus included anxiety disorders, depression and suicidality; type of treatment being received; body mass index and recent weight change. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding presentation to and outcomes from ED treatment is vital to drive improvements in healthcare delivery. A nationally agreed MDS has been defined to facilitate this understanding and support improvements.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Feeding and Eating Disorders , Humans , Australia , Consensus , Quality of Life , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Feeding and Eating Disorders/therapy
18.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab ; 108(5): 1034-1042, 2023 04 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2292302

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This work aims to review and discuss controversial topics in the field of vitamin D, SARS-CoV-2 infection, and COVID-19. METHODS: The International Conferences "Controversies in Vitamin D" are a series of workshops that started in 2017 featuring international experts and leaders in vitamin D research and clinical practice. The fifth annual conference was held in Stresa, Italy, September 15 to 18, 2021. EVIDENCE: Before the event, participants reviewed available studies on their assigned topic, drafted a related abstract, and presented their findings at the time of the conference. Relevant literature that became available since was also discussed within the panel and updated accordingly. CONSENSUS: Before the event, the drafted abstracts had been merged to prepare a preliminary document. After the conference presentations, in-depth discussions in open sessions led to consensus. The document was subsequently modified according to discussions and up-to-date literature inclusion. CONCLUSIONS: There is quite consistent evidence for an association between low 25 OH vitamin D (25(OH)D) levels and poor COVID-19 outcomes, despite heterogeneous publications of variable quality. However, the low vitamin D status in COVID-19 patients might also reflect reverse causality. Vitamin D supplementation might have a positive role in COVID-19 prevention. The evidence supporting a beneficial effect of vitamin D treatment in decreasing the risk of COVID-19 complications is conflicting. Conclusive statements regarding the beneficial effect of vitamin D in this context await high-quality, randomized controlled trials.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vitamin D Deficiency , Humans , Consensus , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Vitamin D/therapeutic use , Vitamin D Deficiency/drug therapy , Vitamins/therapeutic use
19.
Front Public Health ; 11: 1075210, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2305385

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Different measures to prevent and control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 have been implemented in German schools. Decisions regarding such measures should be informed by evidence regarding their effectiveness, and their unintended consequences for health and society. A multi-stakeholder panel was convened to develop an evidence- and consensus-based guideline for school measures, using the novel WHO-INTEGRATE framework. Developing a guideline to inform decision-making outside of the clinical realm during a public health emergency was unprecedented in Germany. This study aims to identify lessons learnt for similar endeavours by addressing the following research question: What were the strengths and weaknesses of the guideline development process as perceived by the different groups involved? Methods: Fifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted virtually. We recruited participants aiming to include the perspectives of all groups contributing to the guideline development, including both panel members (scientists, practitioners, school family and observers) and the guideline secretariat. For analysis, we carried out deductive-inductive thematic qualitative text analysis according to Kuckartz, structuring findings using a category system. Results: Due to time pressure, the guideline secretariat was heavily involved not only in synthesising the evidence but also in developing and drafting recommendations. Participants critically reflected on certain methods-related decisions, including the development of draft recommendations and application of the WHO-INTEGRATE framework by scientists only. The full potential of the framework might not have been harnessed. Participants' understanding of relevant and valid evidence varied, and the available evidence base was limited. Participants represented different types of expertise, notably expertise informed by scientific evidence and expertise grounded in lived experience, influencing their involvement in the guideline development process and discussions during meetings. Conclusion: Developing an evidence- and consensus-based public health guideline in only three months was challenging, notably because of the involvement of a broad range of stakeholders and the use of a novel Evidence-to-Decision framework, both unprecedented in Germany. Learning from this process with a view to "institutionalising" the development of public health guidelines and refining methods can contribute to more evidence-informed public health decision-making in Germany and beyond, in general and during a public health emergency.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Public Health , Consensus , COVID-19/prevention & control , Schools
20.
Semin Hematol ; 60(2): 107-112, 2023 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2304695

ABSTRACT

Consensus Panel 5 (CP5) of the 11th International Workshop on Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia (IWWM-11; held in October 2022) was tasked with reviewing the current data on the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) prophylaxis and management in patients with Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia (WM). The key recommendations from IWWM-11 CP5 included the following: Booster vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 should be recommended to all patients with WM. Variant-specific booster vaccines, such as the bivalent vaccine for the ancestral Wuhan strain and the Omicron BA.4.5 strain, are important as novel mutants emerge and become dominant in the community. A temporary interruption in Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase-inhibitor (BTKi) or chemoimmunotherapy before vaccination might be considered. Patients under treatment with rituximab or BTK-inhibitors have lower antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2; thus, they should continue to follow preventive measures, including mask wearing and avoiding crowded places. Patients with WM are candidates for preexposure prophylaxis, if available and relevant to the dominant SARS-CoV-2 strains in a specific area. Oral antivirals should be offered to all symptomatic WM patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 regardless of vaccination, disease status or treatment, as soon as possible after the positive test and within 5 days of COVID-19-related symptom onset. Coadministration of ibrutinib or venetoclax with ritonavir should be avoided. In these patients, remdesivir offers an effective alternative. Patients with asymptomatic or oligosymptomatic COVID-19 should not interrupt treatment with a BTK inhibitor. Infection prophylaxis is essential in patients with WM and include general preventive measures, prophylaxis with antivirals and vaccination against common pathogens including SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and S. pneumoniae.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia , Humans , Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia/drug therapy , Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia/prevention & control , Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia/diagnosis , COVID-19 Vaccines , Consensus , SARS-CoV-2 , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL