Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 32
Filter
Add filters

Year range
1.
Epidemiol Prev ; 44(5-6 Suppl 2): 369-373, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1068159

ABSTRACT

During a pandemic, pregnancy and the postnatal period are complicated by multiple factors. On the one hand, worries about one's own health and the health of loved ones, in particular of the newborn child, can increase the risk of some mental disorders, such as depression and anxiety in the pregnant woman. On the other hand, as happened for the COVID-19 epidemic in Italy, given the need for physical distancing, the maintenance of the social and family network, so important for new parents in the perinatal period, is lacking. In addition, health services are forced to reorganize their offerings to ensure maximum safety for their operators and patients. This work proposes a model of screening and treatment aimed at identifying women at risk and providing them with effective and safe treatment.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/diagnosis , Depression/diagnosis , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Pandemics , Perinatal Care/organization & administration , Pregnancy Complications/diagnosis , Pregnant Women/psychology , Puerperal Disorders/diagnosis , Adult , Anxiety/epidemiology , Depression/etiology , Depression/therapy , Depression, Postpartum/diagnosis , Depression, Postpartum/epidemiology , Depression, Postpartum/psychology , Depression, Postpartum/therapy , Diagnostic Self Evaluation , Empowerment , Evidence-Based Medicine , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Perinatal Care/methods , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications/psychology , Pregnancy Complications/therapy , Program Evaluation , Puerperal Disorders/epidemiology , Puerperal Disorders/psychology , Puerperal Disorders/therapy , Risk Factors , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Stress, Psychological/etiology , Stress, Psychological/psychology , Telemedicine
2.
Clin Lab ; 67(1)2021 Jan 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1045292

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 outbreak, which began in late 2019, continues to ravage the globe and has become the greatest threat to human health. As nucleic acid test is the primary means of screening for COVID-19, this makes the laboratory the most important node in the epidemic prevention and control system. METHODS: As a small laboratory in the hospital, we can meet a large number of demands for nucleic acid test by optimizing staff process, strictly disinfecting experimental batches and changing experimental methods. RESULTS: Through the improvement of the above aspects, our daily maximum detection quantity has been increased from 256/day to 1,012/day. Besides, none of the medical staff has been infected. And there have been no nosocomial infections. CONCLUSIONS: Nucleic acid laboratories, especially small laboratories, should promptly adjust their strategies in the face of unexpected outbreaks and conduct risk assessment in accordance with laboratory activities.


Subject(s)
/diagnosis , Health Services Needs and Demand/organization & administration , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Specimen Handling , Workflow , Workload , Humans , Infection Control/organization & administration , Occupational Health , Predictive Value of Tests
5.
Pan Afr Med J ; 35(Suppl 2): 144, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-946294

ABSTRACT

Introduction: since the first spread of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) in Morocco in March 2020, the Moroccan Health System underwent an important pressure and remarkable efforts were spent to provide efficient reactions to this emergency. Public hospitals have set adapted strategies dedicated to overcoming the overload of COVID-19 patients, and our Oncology and Hematology Center (OHC) has implemented a flexible adapted strategy aiming to reduce the burden of COVID-19. We report our single-center experience on the detailed infection control measures undertaken to minimize virus transmission. Methods: we reviewed all patients treated at the OHC from March 2nd to April 20th, 2020 as measures were taken since the detection of the first COVID-19 case to ensure the protection of patients and healthcare providers, especially a screening zone for any patient entering the center. The patient's data were retrospectively collected and anonymized. Results: we notified a significant decrease in patients' admissions during the lockdown period at the different units of our center. The screening area received a total of 5267 patients during our study period, with an average of 105 patients per day. Interestingly, no healthcare professional was infected and only 8 patients showed symptoms of fever and cough, and all of them had a negative test for COVID-19 (RT-PCR). Thus, the OHC is considered as a COVID-19 free center with zero cases among patients and healthcare providers. Conclusion: by having a 0% rate of infection, the efficiency of our measures is proven, but efforts are still needed as we have to measure the impact of this pandemic in our cancer management.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Cancer Care Facilities/organization & administration , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Neoplasms/therapy , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Continuity of Patient Care , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Disease Management , Female , Health Services Accessibility , Hospital Departments/statistics & numerical data , Hospital Units/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infection Control/organization & administration , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Professional-to-Patient/prevention & control , Male , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Middle Aged , Morocco , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies
6.
J Diabetes Res ; 2020: 9036847, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-894922

ABSTRACT

Recently, telemedicine has become remarkably important, due to increased deployment and development of digital technologies. National and international guidelines should consider its inclusion in their updates. During the COVID-19 pandemic, mandatory social distancing and the lack of effective treatments has made telemedicine the safest interactive system between patients, both infected and uninfected, and clinicians. A few potential evidence-based scenarios for the application of telemedicine have been hypothesized. In particular, its use in diabetes and complication monitoring has been remarkably increasing, due to the high risk of poor prognosis. New evidence and technological improvements in telemedicine application in diabetic retinopathy (DR) have demonstrated efficacy and usefulness in screening. Moreover, despite an initial increase for devices and training costs, teleophthalmology demonstrated a good cost-to-efficacy ratio; however, no national screening program has yet focused on DR prevention and diagnosis. Lack of data during the COVID-19 pandemic strongly limits the possibility of tracing the real management of the disease, which is only conceivable from past evidence in normal conditions. The pandemic further stressed the importance of remote monitoring. However, the deployment of device and digital application used to increase screening of individuals and monitor progression of retinal disease needs to be easily accessible to general practitioners.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Diabetic Retinopathy/diagnosis , Diabetic Retinopathy/therapy , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Telemedicine , Betacoronavirus/physiology , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Diabetic Retinopathy/epidemiology , Humans , Mass Screening/economics , Mass Screening/methods , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Mass Screening/trends , Ophthalmology/economics , Ophthalmology/methods , Ophthalmology/organization & administration , Ophthalmology/trends , Telemedicine/economics , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Telemedicine/standards , Telemedicine/trends
7.
Work ; 66(4): 717-729, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-760843

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a highly contagious acute respiratory syndrome and has been declared a pandemic in more than 209 countries worldwide. At the time of writing, no preventive vaccine has been developed and tested in the community. This study was conducted to review studies aimed at preventing the spread of the coronavirus worldwide. METHODS: This study was a review of the evidence-based literature and was conducted by searching databases, including Google Scholar, PubMed, and ScienceDirect, until April 2020. The search was performed based on keywords including "coronavirus", "COVID-19", and "prevention". The list of references in the final studies has also been re-reviewed to find articles that might not have been obtained through the search. The guidelines published by trustworthy organizations such as the World Health Organization and Center for Disease Control have been used in this study. CONCLUSION: So far, no vaccine or definitive treatment for COVID-19 has been invented, and the disease has become a pandemic. Therefore, observation of hand hygiene, disinfection of high-touch surfaces, observation of social distance, and lack of presence in public places are recommended as preventive measures. Moreover, to control the situation and to reduce the incidence of the virus, some of the measures taken by the decision-making bodies and the guidelines of the deterrent institutions to strengthen telecommuting of employees and reduce the presence of people in the community and prevent unnecessary activities, are very important.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Guidelines as Topic , Infection Control/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Workplace/organization & administration , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Decision Making, Organizational , Disinfection/organization & administration , Disinfection/standards , Hand Hygiene/organization & administration , Hand Hygiene/standards , Humans , Incidence , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/organization & administration , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Mass Screening/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Telecommunications/organization & administration , Telecommunications/standards , Workplace/standards
8.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 17(18)2020 09 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-750686

ABSTRACT

Keeping the dynamic nature of Coronaviruses (COVID-19) pandemic in mind, we have opted to explore the importance of the decentralization of COVID-19 testing centers across the country of Bangladesh in order to combat the pandemic. In doing so, we considered quantitative, qualitative, and geographic information systems (GIS) datasets to identify the location of existing COVID-19 testing centers. Moreover, we attempted to collect data from the existing centers in order to demonstrate testing times at the divisional level of the country. Results show that the number of testing centers is not enough to cater to the vast population of the country. Additionally, we found that the number of days it takes to receive the results from the COVID-19 testing centers is not optimal at divisional cities, let alone the remote rural areas. Finally, we propose a set of recommendations in order to enhance the existing system to assist more people under a testing range of COVID-19 viruses at the local level.


Subject(s)
Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Bangladesh/epidemiology , Betacoronavirus , Geographic Information Systems , Humans , Pandemics
9.
Emerg Med Australas ; 32(5): 809-813, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-733269

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Early during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Australian EDs experienced an unprecedented surge in patients seeking screening. Understanding what proportion of these patients require testing and who can be safely screened in community-based models of care is critical for workforce and infrastructure planning across the healthcare system, as well as public messaging campaigns. METHODS: In this cross-sectional survey, we screened patients presenting to a COVID-19 screening clinic in a tertiary ED. We assessed the proportion of patients who met testing criteria; self-reported symptom severity; reasons why they came to the ED for screening and views on community-based care. RESULTS: We include findings from 1846 patients. Most patients (55.3%) did not meet contemporaneous criteria for testing and most (57.6%) had mild or no (13.4%) symptoms. The main reason for coming to the ED was being referred by a telephone health service (31.3%) and 136 (7.4%) said they tried to contact their general practitioner but could not get an appointment. Only 47 (2.6%) said they thought the disease was too specialised for their general practitioner to manage. CONCLUSIONS: While capacity building in acute care facilities is an important part of pandemic planning, it is also important that patients not needing hospital level of care can be assessed and treated elsewhere. We have identified a significant proportion of people at this early stage in the pandemic who have sought healthcare at hospital but who might have been assisted in the community had services been available and public health messaging structured to guide them there.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Patient Preference , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Ambulatory Care Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Australia , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Public Health , Risk Assessment , Tertiary Care Centers
11.
Int J Mol Sci ; 21(12)2020 Jun 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-705276

ABSTRACT

Our work concerns the actual problem of spread of SARS- CoV-2 outbreak which requires fast and correct as possible answer. In current scenario, the need of rapid answer put away the imperative of proper methodology. We focus on the serogical immunoassay for diagnosis of Covid-19 as an important weapon not only for diagnostic purpose, but also for epidemiologic one. The right equilibrium between high speed, low cost and accuracy is obtained with easy-to-use decentralized point-of-care test as the colloidal gold-based immunochromatographic strip assay which detects IgM and IgG antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2. As our aim is to evaluate the efficacy of Covid-19 rapid tests and of serological assays in real-life settings, we designed a research protocol aimed to establish how to use correctly these diagnostics, taking into account the different possible clinical and epidemiological scenarios.


Subject(s)
Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Mass Screening/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Primary Prevention/methods , Primary Prevention/organization & administration , Primary Prevention/standards
14.
Clin Med (Lond) ; 20(5): e165-e169, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-652106

ABSTRACT

We describe the London community testing programme developed for COVID-19, audit its effectiveness and report patient acceptability and patient adherence to isolation guidance, based upon a survey conducted with participants.Any patients meeting the Public Health England (PHE) case definition for COVID-19 who did not require hospital admission were eligible for community testing. 2,053 patients with suspected COVID-19 were tested in the community between January and March 2020. Of those tested, 75 (3.6%) were positive. 88% of patients that completed a patient survey felt safe and 82% agreed that community testing was preferable to hospital admission. 97% were able to remain within their own home during the isolation period but just 41% were able to reliably isolate from other members of their household.The London community testing programme allowed widespread testing for COVID-19 while minimising patient transport, hospital admissions and staff exposures. Community testing was acceptable to patients and preferable to admission to hospital. Patients were able to reliably isolate in their home but not from household contacts. The authors believe in the importance, feasibility and acceptability of community testing for COVID-19 as a part of a package of interventions to mitigate a second wave of infection.


Subject(s)
Clinical Laboratory Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Community Health Services/organization & administration , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Patient Compliance/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , England , Female , Humans , London , Male , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Program Development , Program Evaluation , Public Health
17.
Clin Med (Lond) ; 20(5): e163-e164, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-634901

ABSTRACT

Widespread testing for the respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) will represent an important part of any strategy designed to safely reopen societies from lockdown. Healthcare settings have the potential to become reservoirs of infectivity, and therefore many hospital trusts are beginning to carry out routine screening of staff and patients. This could promote the effective cohorting of patients and reduce the rate of nosocomial infection. However, for various reasons, some individuals may refuse this testing. Here we highlight this as an emergent ethicolegal issue which we expect to become increasingly relevant as testing becomes ubiquitous. We explore this position from an ethical and legal perspective, determining whether refusal of testing is acceptable under UK law. Individual patients refusing testing could undermine a hospital's testing strategy; therefore clinicians and policy makers must prospectively determine the best course of action if this were to occur.


Subject(s)
Clinical Laboratory Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Compliance/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Refusal to Participate/statistics & numerical data , Risk Assessment , United Kingdom
19.
Elife ; 92020 06 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-607959

ABSTRACT

Previously, we showed that 3% (31/1032)of asymptomatic healthcare workers (HCWs) from a large teaching hospital in Cambridge, UK, tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in April 2020. About 15% (26/169) HCWs with symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) also tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (Rivett et al., 2020). Here, we show that the proportion of both asymptomatic and symptomatic HCWs testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 rapidly declined to near-zero between 25th April and 24th May 2020, corresponding to a decline in patient admissions with COVID-19 during the ongoing UK 'lockdown'. These data demonstrate how infection prevention and control measures including staff testing may help prevent hospitals from becoming independent 'hubs' of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and illustrate how, with appropriate precautions, organizations in other sectors may be able to resume on-site work safely.


Subject(s)
Clinical Laboratory Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Health Personnel , Mass Screening/statistics & numerical data , Occupational Diseases/prevention & control , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Adult , Asymptomatic Diseases , Betacoronavirus/genetics , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Community-Acquired Infections/transmission , Contact Tracing , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , England/epidemiology , Family Characteristics , Female , Hospital Units , Hospitals, Teaching/organization & administration , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, University/organization & administration , Hospitals, University/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infection Control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/statistics & numerical data , Male , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Prevalence , Program Evaluation , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction , Symptom Assessment
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL