Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 461
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
J Ethnopharmacol ; 285: 114905, 2022 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1611829

ABSTRACT

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: Tongue coating has been used as an effective signature of health in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). The level of greasy coating closely relates to the strength of dampness or pathogenic qi in TCM theory. Previous empirical studies and our systematic review have shown the relation between greasy coating and various diseases, including gastroenteropathy, coronary heart disease, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the objective and intelligent greasy coating and related diseases recognition methods are still lacking. The construction of the artificial intelligent tongue recognition models may provide important syndrome diagnosis and efficacy evaluation methods, and contribute to the understanding of ethnopharmacological mechanisms based on TCM theory. AIM OF THE STUDY: The present study aimed to develop an artificial intelligent model for greasy tongue coating recognition and explore its application in COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Herein, we developed greasy tongue coating recognition networks (GreasyCoatNet) using convolutional neural network technique and a relatively large (N = 1486) set of tongue images from standard devices. Tests were performed using both cross-validation procedures and a new dataset (N = 50) captured by common cameras. Besides, the accuracy and time efficiency comparisons between the GreasyCoatNet and doctors were also conducted. Finally, the model was transferred to recognize the greasy coating level of COVID-19. RESULTS: The overall accuracy in 3-level greasy coating classification with cross-validation was 88.8% and accuracy on new dataset was 82.0%, indicating that GreasyCoatNet can obtain robust greasy coating estimates from diverse datasets. In addition, we conducted user study to confirm that our GreasyCoatNet outperforms TCM practitioners, yet only consuming roughly 1% of doctors' examination time. Critically, we demonstrated that GreasyCoatNet, along with transfer learning, can construct more proper classifier of COVID-19, compared to directly training classifier on patient versus control datasets. We, therefore, derived a disease-specific deep learning network by finetuning the generic GreasyCoatNet. CONCLUSIONS: Our framework may provide an important research paradigm for differentiating tongue characteristics, diagnosing TCM syndrome, tracking disease progression, and evaluating intervention efficacy, exhibiting its unique potential in clinical applications.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures , Ethnopharmacology/methods , Medicine, Chinese Traditional/methods , Tongue , Artificial Intelligence , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Neural Networks, Computer , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Qi , SARS-CoV-2 , Tongue/microbiology , Tongue/pathology
2.
Respir Med ; 187: 106538, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1574473

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Analyses of COVID-19 infection outcomes in patients with preexisting pulmonary sarcoidosis are lacking and are limited to case reports or small case series with the largest study reporting outcomes of 37 patients. RESEARCH QUESTION: Retrospective cohort study to assess clinical outcomes of 945 patients with pulmonary sarcoidosis, presenting with COVID 19, compared to a propensity matched cohort of patients without sarcoidosis. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Analysis of a multi-center research network TriNETX was performed including patients more than 16 years of age diagnosed with COVID-19. Outcomes in COVID-19 positive patients with concurrent pulmonary sarcoidosis were compared with a propensity score matched cohort of patients without pulmonary sarcoidosis. RESULTS: A total of 278,271 patients with COVID-19 on the research network were identified, 954 patients (0.34 %) carried a diagnosis of pulmonary sarcoidosis. Mean age of patients with sarcoidosis was 56.3 ± 13.2 years, with female predominance (n = 619, 64.89 %). 49.69 % of the participants were African American (n = 474). Co-morbidities including hypertension, chronic lower respiratory diseases, diabetes mellitus, ischemic heart disease, nicotine dependence, and chronic kidney disease were more common in patients with pulmonary sarcoidosis when compared to the non-pulmonary sarcoidosis cohort (all p values < 0.01). In unmatched analysis, pulmonary sarcoidosis group had higher mortality, increased risk for hospitalization, intubation and need for renal replacement therapy. After propensity score matching, no difference in any of the outcome measures was observed. INTERPRETATION: Crude COVID-19 mortality and other clinical outcome measures are poor in pulmonary sarcoidosis cohort; however, propensity-matched analyses revealed no difference in outcomes, showing that higher mortality is driven by higher burden of comorbidities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Sarcoidosis, Pulmonary/complications , Sarcoidosis, Pulmonary/mortality , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Propensity Score , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Sarcoidosis, Pulmonary/therapy , Survival Rate
3.
CMAJ Open ; 9(4): E1149-E1158, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1575519

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There were large disruptions to health care services after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to describe the extent to which pandemic-related changes in service delivery and access affected use of primary care for children overall and by equity strata in the 9 months after pandemic onset in Manitoba and Ontario. METHODS: We performed a population-based study of children aged 17 years or less with provincial health insurance in Ontario or Manitoba before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (Jan. 1, 2017-Nov. 28, 2020). We calculated the weekly rates of in-person and virtual primary care well-child and sick visits, overall and by age group, neighbourhood material deprivation level, rurality and immigrant status, and assessed changes in visit rates after COVID-19 restrictions were imposed compared to expected baseline rates calculated for the 3 years before pandemic onset. RESULTS: Among almost 3 million children in Ontario and more than 300 000 children in Manitoba, primary care visit rates declined to 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-0.82) of expected in Ontario and 0.82 (95% CI 0.79-0.84) of expected in Manitoba in the 9 months after the onset of the pandemic. Virtual visits accounted for 53% and 29% of visits in Ontario and Manitoba, respectively. The largest monthly decreases in visits occurred in April 2020. Although visit rates increased slowly after April 2020, they had not returned to prerestriction levels by November 2020 in either province. Children aged more than 1 year to 12 years experienced the greatest decrease in visits, especially for well-child care. Compared to prepandemic levels, visit rates were lowest among rural Manitobans, urban Ontarians and Ontarians in low-income neighbourhoods. INTERPRETATION: During the study period, the pandemic contributed to rapid, immediate and inequitable decreases in primary care use, with some recovery and a substantial shift to virtual care. Postpandemic planning must consider the need for catch-up visits, and the long-term impacts warrant further study.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Pediatrics/statistics & numerical data , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Age Distribution , Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/virology , Child , Child, Preschool , Cross-Sectional Studies , Databases, Factual , Emigrants and Immigrants , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Manitoba/epidemiology , Ontario/epidemiology , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics , Population Surveillance , Rural Population
4.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(24)2021 12 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1572462

ABSTRACT

Green infrastructure (GI) has long been known to impact human health, and many academics have used past research to argue for the potential importance of GI as a mechanism for maintaining or improving health within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. This scoping review addresses the question: What evidence, if any, have researchers found of a relationship between green infrastructure use and health during the COVID-19 pandemic? Specifically, evaluating the (a) association of GI use with COVID-19 disease outcomes and (b) association of GI use with other health outcomes as impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Twenty-two studies were identified that measured GI use and studied it in relation to health outcomes during the pandemic. The studies were reviewed for the specific measures and types of GI use, level of analysis, specific types of health outcomes, and the conclusions reached with regard to GI use and health. Studies exploring COVID-19-specific health outcomes showed mixed results, while non-COVID health outcomes were more consistently improved through GI use, particularly with regard to improved mental health. While the evidence strongly suggests that GI use has played a protective role in non-COVID-19 physical and mental health during the pandemic, questions remain with regard to possible impacts on COVID transmission and mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Mental Health , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Psychiatry Res ; 307: 114328, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1556983

ABSTRACT

Hospitalization due to COVID-19 bears many psychological challenges. While focusing on infected patients, their relatives are being largely neglected. Here, we investigated the mental health implications of hospitalization among relatives, over a one-month course. A single center study was conducted to assess relatives of COVID-19 patients during the first month from their admission to the hospital, and elucidate risk and protective factors for mental health deterioration. Ninety-one relatives of the first patients to be hospitalized in Israel were contacted by phone and screened for anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) at three time points (25-72 hours, 7-18 days, and one month). We found that anxiety and depression decreased significantly during the first month from their admission. Risk factors for deteriorated mental health at one month included feelings of mental exhaustion, financial concerns, and social disconnection. Being an ultra-orthodox was a protective factor for anxiety and depression but not for PTSS. Our findings emphasize the importance of addressing the mental health status of close relatives and adjust support for the unique setting of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Anxiety/epidemiology , Depression/epidemiology , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm ; 9(1)2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1546818

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To understand the course of recovery from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and to determine its predictors, including patients' pre-COVID-19 physical and mental health status. METHODS: This prospective and longitudinal cohort study recruited patients with MS who reported COVID-19 from March 17, 2020, to March 19, 2021, as part of the United Kingdom MS Register (UKMSR) COVID-19 study. Participants used online questionnaires to regularly update their COVID-19 symptoms, recovery status, and duration of symptoms for those who fully recovered. Questionnaires were date stamped for estimation of COVID-19 symptom duration for those who had not recovered at their last follow-up. The UKMSR holds demographic and up-to-date clinical data on participants as well as their web-based Expanded Disability Status Scale (web-EDSS) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores. The association between these factors and recovery from COVID-19 was assessed using multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 7,977 patients with MS who participated in the UKMSR COVID-19 study, 599 reported COVID-19 and prospectively updated their recovery status. Twenty-eight hospitalized participants were excluded. At least 165 participants (29.7%) had long-standing COVID-19 symptoms for ≥4 weeks and 69 (12.4%) for ≥12 weeks. Participants with pre-COVID-19 web-EDSS scores ≥7, participants with probable anxiety and/or depression (HADS scores ≥11) before COVID-19 onset, and women were less likely to report recovery from COVID-19. DISCUSSION: Patients with MS are affected by postacute sequelae of COVID-19. Preexisting severe neurologic impairment or mental health problems appear to increase this risk. These findings can have implications in tailoring their post-COVID-19 rehabilitation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Multiple Sclerosis/epidemiology , Registries , Adult , COVID-19/therapy , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Risk , Time Factors , United Kingdom/epidemiology
8.
BMJ Open ; 11(11): e051065, 2021 11 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1518146

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in widespread morbidity and mortality with the consequences expected to be felt for many years. Significant variation exists in the care even of similar patients with COVID-19, including treatment practices within and between institutions. Outcome measures vary among clinical trials on the same therapies. Understanding which therapies are of most value is not possible unless consensus can be reached on which outcomes are most important to measure. Furthermore, consensus on the most important outcomes may enable patients to monitor and track their care, and may help providers to improve the care they offer through quality improvement. To develop a standardised minimum set of outcomes for clinical care, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled a working group (WG) of 28 volunteers, including health professionals, patients and patient representatives. DESIGN: A list of outcomes important to patients and professionals was generated from a systematic review of the published literature using the MEDLINE database, from review of outcomes being measured in ongoing clinical trials, from a survey distributed to patients and patient networks, and from previously published ICHOM standard sets in other disease areas. Using an online-modified Delphi process, the WG selected outcomes of greatest importance. RESULTS: The outcomes considered by the WG to be most important were selected and categorised into five domains: (1) functional status and quality of life, (2) mental functioning, (3) social functioning, (4) clinical outcomes and (5) symptoms. The WG identified demographic and clinical variables for use as case-mix risk adjusters. These included baseline demographics, clinical factors and treatment-related factors. CONCLUSION: Implementation of these consensus recommendations could help institutions to monitor, compare and improve the quality and delivery of care to patients with COVID-19. Their consistent definition and collection could also broaden the implementation of more patient-centric clinical outcomes research.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Quality of Life , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
9.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0259803, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511832

ABSTRACT

Racial/ethnic disparities are among the top-selective underlying determinants associated with the disproportional impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on human mobility and health outcomes. This study jointly examined county-level racial/ethnic differences in compliance with stay-at-home orders and COVID-19 health outcomes during 2020, leveraging two-year geo-tracking data of mobile devices across ~4.4 million point-of-interests (POIs) in the contiguous United States. Through a set of structural equation modeling, this study quantified how racial/ethnic differences in following stay-at-home orders could mediate COVID-19 health outcomes, controlling for state effects, socioeconomics, demographics, occupation, and partisanship. Results showed that counties with higher Asian populations decreased most in their travel, both in terms of reducing their overall POIs' visiting and increasing their staying home percentage. Moreover, counties with higher White populations experienced the lowest infection rate, while counties with higher African American populations presented the highest case-fatality ratio. Additionally, control variables, particularly partisanship, median household income, percentage of elders, and urbanization, significantly accounted for the county differences in human mobility and COVID-19 health outcomes. Mediation analyses further revealed that human mobility only statistically influenced infection rate but not case-fatality ratio, and such mediation effects varied substantially among racial/ethnic compositions. Last, robustness check of racial gradient at census block group level documented consistent associations but greater magnitude. Taken together, these findings suggest that US residents' responses to COVID-19 are subject to an entrenched and consequential racial/ethnic divide.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Status Disparities , Pandemics , Racism/psychology , African Americans/psychology , Aged , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Income , Mediation Analysis , Middle Aged , Minority Groups/psychology , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/standards , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity
10.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0258893, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511820

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Explore how previous work during the 2003 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak affects the psychological response of clinical and non-clinical healthcare workers (HCWs) to the current COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional, multi-centered hospital online survey of HCWs in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada. Mental health outcomes of HCWs who worked during the COVID-19 pandemic and the SARS outbreak were assessed using Impact of Events-Revised scale (IES-R), Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7), and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). RESULTS: Among 3852 participants, moderate/severe scores for symptoms of post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (50.2%), anxiety (24.6%), and depression (31.5%) were observed among HCWs. Work during the 2003 SARS outbreak was reported by 1116 respondents (29.1%), who had lower scores for symptoms of PTSD (P = .002), anxiety (P < .001), and depression (P < .001) compared to those who had not worked during the SARS outbreak. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed non-clinical HCWs during this pandemic were at higher risk of anxiety (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.19-2.15, P = .01) and depressive symptoms (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.34-3.07, P < .001). HCWs using sedatives (OR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.61-4.03, P < .001), those who cared for only 2-5 patients with COVID-19 (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.06-2.38, P = .01), and those who had been in isolation for COVID-19 (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.96-1.93, P = .05), were at higher risk of moderate/severe symptoms of PTSD. In addition, deterioration in sleep was associated with symptoms of PTSD (OR, 4.68, 95% CI, 3.74-6.30, P < .001), anxiety (OR, 3.09, 95% CI, 2.11-4.53, P < .001), and depression (OR 5.07, 95% CI, 3.48-7.39, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Psychological distress was observed in both clinical and non-clinical HCWs, with no impact from previous SARS work experience. As the pandemic continues, increasing psychological and team support may decrease the mental health impacts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/epidemiology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/psychology , Adaptation, Psychological/physiology , Adolescent , Adult , Allied Health Personnel , Anxiety/psychology , Anxiety/virology , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , Anxiety Disorders/virology , COVID-19/virology , Canada , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/psychology , Depression/virology , Disease Outbreaks , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Health , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Patient Health Questionnaire , Psychological Distress , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/virology , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/psychology , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/virology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
11.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(11): e2134147, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1508585

ABSTRACT

Importance: COVID-19 has disproportionately affected racial and ethnic minority groups, and race and ethnicity have been associated with disease severity. However, the association of socioeconomic determinants with racial disparities in COVID-19 outcomes remains unclear. Objective: To evaluate the association of race and ethnicity with COVID-19 outcomes and to examine the association between race, ethnicity, COVID-19 outcomes, and socioeconomic determinants. Data Sources: A systematic search of PubMed, medRxiv, bioRxiv, Embase, and the World Health Organization COVID-19 databases was performed for studies published from January 1, 2020, to January 6, 2021. Study Selection: Studies that reported data on associations between race and ethnicity and COVID-19 positivity, disease severity, and socioeconomic status were included and screened by 2 independent reviewers. Studies that did not have a satisfactory quality score were excluded. Overall, less than 1% (0.47%) of initially identified studies met selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Associations were assessed using adjusted and unadjusted risk ratios (RRs) and odds ratios (ORs), combined prevalence, and metaregression. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main measures were RRs, ORs, and combined prevalence values. Results: A total of 4 318 929 patients from 68 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, 370 933 patients (8.6%) were African American, 9082 (0.2%) were American Indian or Alaska Native, 101 793 (2.4%) were Asian American, 851 392 identified as Hispanic/Latino (19.7%), 7417 (0.2%) were Pacific Islander, 1 037 996 (24.0%) were White, and 269 040 (6.2%) identified as multiracial and another race or ethnicity. In age- and sex-adjusted analyses, African American individuals (RR, 3.54; 95% CI, 1.38-9.07; P = .008) and Hispanic individuals (RR, 4.68; 95% CI, 1.28-17.20; P = .02) were the most likely to test positive for COVID-19. Asian American individuals had the highest risk of intensive care unit admission (RR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.60-2.34, P < .001). The area deprivation index was positively correlated with mortality rates in Asian American and Hispanic individuals (P < .001). Decreased access to clinical care was positively correlated with COVID-19 positivity in Hispanic individuals (P < .001) and African American individuals (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, members of racial and ethnic minority groups had higher risks of COVID-19 positivity and disease severity. Furthermore, socioeconomic determinants were strongly associated with COVID-19 outcomes in racial and ethnic minority populations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/ethnology , COVID-19/mortality , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Social Class , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Prevalence , /statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , United States/ethnology
12.
J Affect Disord ; 298(Pt A): 396-399, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1509917

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Worsening of anxiety and depressive symptoms have been widely described during the COVID-19 pandemic. It can be hypothesized that vaccination could link to reduced symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. However, to date, no study has assessed this. This study aims to examine anxiety and depressive symptoms after vaccination in US adults, meanwhile test sociodemographic disparities in these outcomes. METHODS: Data from the January 6-June 7 2021, cross-sectional Household Pulse Survey were analyzed. Using survey-weighted logistic regression, we assessed the relationships between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and anxiety and/or depressive symptoms, both on overall and sociodemographic subgroups. We controlled for a variety of potential socioeconomic and demographic confounding factors. RESULTS: Of the 453,167 participants studied, 52.2% of the participants had received the COVID-19 vaccine, and 26.5% and 20.3% of the participants reported anxiety and depression, respectively. Compared to those not vaccinated, the vaccinated participants had a 13% lower odds of anxiety (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.85, 95%CI 0.83-0.90) and 17% lower odds of depression (AOR = 0.83, 95%CI 0.79-0.85). Disparities on the above associations were identified in age, marital status, education level, ethnic/race, and income level, but not on gender. LIMITATIONS: The causal inference was not able to be investigated due to the cross-sectional study design. CONCLUSION: Being vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 was associated with lower odds of anxiety and/or depressive symptoms. While those more middle-aged or more affluent, were more likely to show these negative associations, the contrary was observed in ethnic minorities and those with lower educational attainment. More strategic and demography-sensitive public health communications could perhaps temper these issues.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Adult , Anxiety/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Humans , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology , Vaccination
13.
BMJ Open ; 11(10): e049981, 2021 10 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1504158

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Our study aims to describe differences or similarities in the scope, participant characteristics and methods used in core outcome sets (COS) development when only participants from high-income countries (HICs) were involved compared with when participants from low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) were also involved. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Annual Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials systematic reviews of COS which are updated based on SCOPUS and MEDLINE, searches. The latest systematic review included studies published up to the end of 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We included studies reporting development of a COS for use in research regardless of age, health condition or setting. Studies reporting the development of a COS for patient-reported outcomes or adverse events or complications were also included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted in relation to scope of the COS study, participant categories and the methods used in outcome selection. RESULTS: Studies describing 370 COS were identified in the database. Of these, 75 (20%) included participants from LMICs. Only four COS were initiated from an LMIC setting. More than half of COS with LMIC participants were developed in the last 5 years. Cancer and rheumatology were the dominant disease domains. Overall, over 259 (70%) of COS explicitly reported including clinical experts; this was higher where LMIC participants were also included 340 (92%). Most LMIC participants were from China, Brazil and South Africa. Mixed methods for consensus building were used across the two settings. CONCLUSION: Progress has been made in including LMIC participants in the development of COS, however, there is a need to explore how to enable initiation of COS development from a range of LMIC settings, how to ensure prioritisation of COS that better reflects the burden of disease in these contexts and how to improve public participation from LMICs.


Subject(s)
Developing Countries , Poverty , Consensus , Databases, Factual , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care
14.
BMJ Health Care Inform ; 28(1)2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1503762

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Digital systems have long been used to improve the quality and safety of care when managing acute kidney injury (AKI). The availability of digitised clinical data can also turn organisations and their networks into learning healthcare systems (LHSs) if used across all levels of health and care. This review explores the impact of digital systems i.e. on patients with AKI care, to gauge progress towards establishing LHSs and to identify existing gaps in the research. METHODS: Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched. Studies of real-time or near real-time digital AKI management systems which reported process and outcome measures were included. RESULTS: Thematic analysis of 43 studies showed that most interventions used real-time serum creatinine levels to trigger responses to enable risk prediction, early recognition of AKI or harm prevention by individual clinicians (micro level) or specialist teams (meso level). Interventions at system (macro level) were rare. There was limited evidence of change in outcomes. DISCUSSION: While the benefits of real-time digital clinical data at micro level for AKI management have been evident for some time, their application at meso and macro levels is emergent therefore limiting progress towards establishing LHSs. Lack of progress is due to digital maturity, system design, human factors and policy levers. CONCLUSION: Future approaches need to harness the potential of interoperability, data analytical advances and include multiple stakeholder perspectives to develop effective digital LHSs in order to gain benefits across the system.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury , Learning Health System , Patient Care , Acute Kidney Injury/diagnosis , Acute Kidney Injury/therapy , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Patient Care/instrumentation , Patient Care/methods
15.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(37): e27228, 2021 Sep 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501195

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Remdesivir is the only antiviral approved for lower respiratory tract infection produced by SARS-CoV-2. The main objective of this study was to determine the mortality rate, readmissions, mean hospital stay, need for higher levels of oxygen support, and adverse effect-induced abandonment rate in hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and treated with remdesivir (RDSV). The secondary objective was to determine mortality-related risk factors in these patients.The study included a prospective cohort of patients admitted to a third level Spanish hospital between July 5, 2020 and February 3, 2021 for COVID-19 diagnosed by SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction and/or antigen test and treated with RDSV.Remdesivir was received by 185 patients (69.7% males) with a mean age of 62.5 years, median Charlson index of 3 (interquartile range [IQR]: 1-4), and median ambient air oxygen saturation of 91% (IQR: 90-93); 61.6% of patients had hyper-inflammatory syndrome at admission. Median time with symptoms before RDSV treatment was 5 days (IQR: 3-6) and the median hospital stay was 10 days (IQR: 7-15); 19 patients (10.3%) died after a median stay of 13.5 days (IQR: 9.7-24 days), 58 patients (12.9%) were admitted to ICU, 58 (31.4%) needed higher levels of oxygen support, 0.5% abandoned the treatment due to adverse effects, and there were no readmissions. The only mortality-related factor was the need for higher levels of oxygen support (odds ratio 12.02; 95% confidence interval 2.25-64.2).All studied patients were admitted to hospital with a diagnosis of COVID-19 and in respiratory failure, needing initial low-flow oxygen support, and all received RDSV within 1 week of symptom onset. The percent mortality was lower in these patients than was observed in all patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to our center (10.3% vs 20.3%, respectively). Despite receiving RDSV, 1 in 3 patients needed higher levels of oxygen support, the sole mortality-related factor.


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , COVID-19/drug therapy , Adenosine Monophosphate/pharmacology , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Aged , Alanine/pharmacology , Alanine/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/pharmacology , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Spain , Statistics, Nonparametric
16.
J Occup Environ Med ; 63(8): e549-e555, 2021 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501191

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the level of psychological distress, using validated psychology tools, among British National healthcare workers (HCW) during the first wave of the Covid-19 crisis. METHODS: A multi-centre, anonymized, all-comer staff survey across 3 hospitals in Lancashire, England during the Covid-19 first wave (April to June 2020), consisting of Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Perceived Stress Scale-10 (PSS-10), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), and Impact of Events Scale (IES-6). RESULTS: Among 1113 HCW, median (IQR) PHQ-9, GAD-7, PSS-10, and IES-6 score was 7 (3 to 11), 6 (3 to 11), 19 (13 to 24), and 9 (5 to 14), respectively. Potential predictors of higher levels of psychological distress included living alone, disabled dependents, history of depression/anxiety, and being female. CONCLUSIONS: The study indicates a high prevalence of psychological distress during the acute Covid-19 period among HCW, identifies groups at risk and areas of future research.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , SARS-CoV-2
17.
Front Biosci (Landmark Ed) ; 26(10): 948-961, 2021 10 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1498509

ABSTRACT

Background: Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an acute respiratory infectious disease caused by severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The primary pathogenesis is over-activation of the immune system. SARS-CoV-2 continues to mutate and spread rapidly and no effective treatment options are yet available. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are known to induce anti-inflammatory macrophages, regulatory T cells and dendritic cells. There are a rapidly increasing number of clinical investigations of cell-based therapy approaches for COVID-19. Objective: To summarize the pathogenic mechanism of SARS-CoV-2, and systematically formulated the immunomodulation of COVID-19 by MSCs and their exosomes, as well as research progress. Method: Searching PubMed, clinicaltrials.gov and Chictr.cn for eligible studies to be published or registered by May 2021. Main keywords and search strategies were as follows: ((Mesenchymal stem cells) OR (MSCs)) AND (COVID-19). Results: MSCs regulate the immune system to prevent cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and to promote endogenous repair by releasing various paracrine factors and exosomes. Conclusions: MSC therapy is thus a promising candidate for COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Exosomes/transplantation , Immunomodulation/immunology , Lung Injury/therapy , Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation/methods , Mesenchymal Stem Cells/metabolism , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Clinical Trials as Topic , Exosomes/immunology , Exosomes/metabolism , Humans , Lung Injury/physiopathology , Lung Injury/virology , Mesenchymal Stem Cells/cytology , Mesenchymal Stem Cells/immunology , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Regeneration/immunology , Regeneration/physiology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/physiology
19.
J Affect Disord ; 297: 348-352, 2022 01 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1492206

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore whether aiding Wuhan experience of nurses was associated with adverse mental health outcome one year after the COVID-19 outbreak in China. METHODS: In this study, 100 nurses with and 100 nurses without aiding Wuhan experience a year ago were enrolled from February 1, 2021 to March 31, 2021 in Zhejiang Province, China. Depression, anxiety, insomnia, distress and psychological resilience of participants was assessed and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 100 participants from 112 aiding Wuhan nurses completed the survey, with a response rate of 89.3%. Another 100 nurses from the same hospitals without aiding Wuhan experience were enrolled as controls. In both groups, a considerable proportion of participants reported symptoms of depression (46.0% for the aiding Wuhan group vs. 49.0% for the controls, similarly hereinafter), anxiety (40.0% vs. 38.0%), and PTSD (61.0% vs. 56.0%). Aiding Wuhan nurses were more likely to suffer from insomnia (41.0% vs. 29.0%, P = 0.041). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that aiding Wuhan experience was not associated with depression (adjusted OR (AOR) 0.22; 95%CI, 0.05-1.01), anxiety (AOR 0.53; 95%CI, 0.12-2.43), insomnia (AOR 1.52; 95%CI, 0.76-3.02), PTSD (AOR 0.50; 95%CI, 0.19-1.34), or resilience (AOR 1.59; 95%CI, 0.78-3.26). Resilience was negatively correlated with depression, anxiety, insomnia, and PTSD. CONCLUSIONS: This survey indicated that aiding Wuhan experience a year ago did not cause additional adverse mental health outcomes in nurses, expect for insomnia. The psychological status of nurses in general calls for more attention.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Health , Anxiety/epidemiology , China/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...