Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 654
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0261358, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1623654

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Colchicine may inhibit inflammasome signaling and reduce proinflammatory cytokines, a purported mechanism of COVID-19 pneumonia. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to report on the state of the current literature on the use of colchicine in COVID-19 and to investigate the reported clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients by colchicine usage. METHODS: The literature was searched from January 2019 through January 28, 2021. References were screened to identify studies that reported the effect of colchicine usage on COVID-19 outcomes including mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, or mechanical ventilation. Studies were meta-analyzed for mortality by the subgroup of trial design (RCT vs observational) and ICU status. Studies reporting an risk ratio (RR), odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) were analyzed separately. RESULTS: Eight studies, reporting on 16,248 patients, were included in this review. The Recovery trial reported equivalent mortality between colchicine and non-colchicine users. Across the other studies, patients who received colchicine had a lower risk of mortality-HR of 0.25 (95% CI: 0.09, 0.66) and OR of 0.22 (95% CI: 0.09, 0.57). There was no statistical difference in risk of ICU admissions between patients with COVID-19 who received colchicine and those who did not-OR of 0.26 (95% CI: 0.06, 1.09). CONCLUSION: Colchicine may reduce the risk of mortality in individuals with COVID-19. Further prospective investigation may further determine the efficacy of colchicine as treatment in COVID-19 patients in various care settings of the disease, including post-hospitalization and long-term care.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Colchicine/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Respiration, Artificial , Risk , Treatment Outcome
2.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(2): 59-65, 2022 Jan 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1622894

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected people with diabetes, who are at increased risk of severe COVID-19.* Increases in the number of type 1 diabetes diagnoses (1,2) and increased frequency and severity of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) at the time of diabetes diagnosis (3) have been reported in European pediatric populations during the COVID-19 pandemic. In adults, diabetes might be a long-term consequence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (4-7). To evaluate the risk for any new diabetes diagnosis (type 1, type 2, or other diabetes) >30 days† after acute infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19), CDC estimated diabetes incidence among patients aged <18 years (patients) with diagnosed COVID-19 from retrospective cohorts constructed using IQVIA health care claims data from March 1, 2020, through February 26, 2021, and compared it with incidence among patients matched by age and sex 1) who did not receive a COVID-19 diagnosis during the pandemic, or 2) who received a prepandemic non-COVID-19 acute respiratory infection (ARI) diagnosis. Analyses were replicated using a second data source (HealthVerity; March 1, 2020-June 28, 2021) that included patients who had any health care encounter possibly related to COVID-19. Among these patients, diabetes incidence was significantly higher among those with COVID-19 than among those 1) without COVID-19 in both databases (IQVIA: hazard ratio [HR] = 2.66, 95% CI = 1.98-3.56; HealthVerity: HR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.20-1.44) and 2) with non-COVID-19 ARI in the prepandemic period (IQVIA, HR = 2.16, 95% CI = 1.64-2.86). The observed increased risk for diabetes among persons aged <18 years who had COVID-19 highlights the importance of COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination, for all eligible persons in this age group,§ in addition to chronic disease prevention and management. The mechanism of how SARS-CoV-2 might lead to incident diabetes is likely complex and could differ by type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Monitoring for long-term consequences, including signs of new diabetes, following SARS-CoV-2 infection is important in this age group.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Diabetic Ketoacidosis/diagnosis , Diabetic Ketoacidosis/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , Child , Child, Preschool , Cohort Studies , Databases, Factual , Female , Humans , Incidence , Infant , Male , Retrospective Studies , Risk , United States/epidemiology
3.
PLoS One ; 17(1): e0262319, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1606225

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic and the measures to counteract it have highlighted the role of individual differences in evaluating and reacting to emergencies, and the challenges inherent in promoting precautionary behaviours. We aimed to explore the psychological and cognitive factors modulating behaviour and intentions during the national lockdown in Italy. We administered an online questionnaire (N = 244) that included tests for assessing personality traits (Temperament and Character Inventory; Locus of Control of Behaviour) and moral judgment (Moral Foundations Questionnaire), alongside behavioural economics tasks addressing different facets of risk attitude (loss aversion, risk aversion and delay discounting). We then assessed the extent to which individual variations in these dimensions modulated participants' compliance with the lockdown norms. When assessing their joint contribution via multiple regressions, lockdown adherence was mostly predicted by internal locus of control, psycho-economic dimensions suggestive of long-sighted and loss-averse attitudes, as well as personality traits related to cautionary behaviour, such as harm avoidance, and the authority moral concern. These findings show that a multi-domain assessment of the factors underlying personal intentions, and thus driving compliance with government measures, can help predict individuals' actions during health emergencies. This evidence points to factors that should be considered when developing interventions and communication strategies to promote precautionary behaviours.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Communicable Disease Control , Adult , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Pandemics , Personality , Risk , Risk Assessment , Surveys and Questionnaires
4.
Am J Public Health ; 112(1): 154-164, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1599518

ABSTRACT

Objectives. To estimate the direct and indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on overall, race/ethnicity‒specific, and age-specific mortality in 2020 in the United States. Methods. Using surveillance data, we modeled expected mortality, compared it to observed mortality, and estimated the share of "excess" mortality that was indirectly attributable to the pandemic versus directly attributed to COVID-19. We present absolute risks and proportions of total pandemic-related mortality, stratified by race/ethnicity and age. Results. We observed 16.6 excess deaths per 10 000 US population in 2020; 84% were directly attributed to COVID-19. The indirect effects of the pandemic accounted for 16% of excess mortality, with proportions as low as 0% among adults aged 85 years and older and more than 60% among those aged 15 to 44 years. Indirect causes accounted for a higher proportion of excess mortality among racially minoritized groups (e.g., 32% among Black Americans and 23% among Native Americans) compared with White Americans (11%). Conclusions. The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on mortality and health disparities are underestimated when only deaths directly attributed to COVID-19 are considered. An equitable public health response to the pandemic should also consider its indirect effects on mortality. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(1):154-164. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306541).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Mortality , Statistics as Topic , Adolescent , Adult , Age Distribution , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Child , Child, Preschool , Humans , Infant , Middle Aged , Risk , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
5.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 24477, 2021 12 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1599359

ABSTRACT

Assessing the impact of temperature on COVID-19 epidemiology is critical for implementing non-pharmaceutical interventions. However, few studies have accounted for the nature of contagious diseases, i.e., their dependent happenings. We aimed to quantify the impact of temperature on the transmissibility and virulence of COVID-19 in Tokyo, Japan, employing two epidemiological measurements of transmissibility and severity: the effective reproduction number ([Formula: see text]) and case fatality risk (CFR). We estimated the [Formula: see text] and time-delay adjusted CFR and to subsequently assess the nonlinear and delayed effect of temperature on [Formula: see text] and time-delay adjusted CFR. For [Formula: see text] at low temperatures, the cumulative relative risk (RR) at the first temperature percentile (3.3 °C) was 1.3 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1-1.7). As for the virulence to humans, moderate cold temperatures were associated with higher CFR, and CFR also increased as the temperature rose. The cumulative RR at the 10th and 99th percentiles of temperature (5.8 °C and 30.8 °C) for CFR were 3.5 (95% CI: 1.3-10.0) and 6.4 (95% CI: 4.1-10.1). Our results suggest the importance to take precautions to avoid infection in both cold and warm seasons to avoid severe cases of COVID-19. The results and our proposed approach will also help in assessing the possible seasonal course of COVID-19 in the future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Temperature , Basic Reproduction Number , Cold Temperature , Humans , Mortality , Pandemics/prevention & control , Risk , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Seasons , Severity of Illness Index , Tokyo/epidemiology , Virulence
6.
Dis Markers ; 2021: 7686374, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1595046

ABSTRACT

Objective: S-Adenosylmethionine (SAM) and S-adenosylhomocysteine (SAH) are indicators of global transmethylation and may play an important role as markers of severity of COVID-19. Methods: The levels of plasma SAM and SAH were determined in patients admitted with COVID-19 (n = 56, mean age = 61). Lung injury was identified by computed tomography (CT) in accordance with the CT0-4 classification. Results: SAM was found to be a potential marker of lung damage risk in COVID-19 patients (SAM > 80 nM; CT3,4 vs. CT 0-2: relative ratio (RR) was 3.0; p = 0.0029). SAM/SAH > 6.0 was also found to be a marker of lung injury (CT2-4 vs. CT0,1: RR = 3.47, p = 0.0004). There was a negative association between SAM and glutathione level (ρ = -0.343, p = 0.011). Interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels were associated with SAM (ρ = 0.44, p = 0.01) and SAH (ρ = 0.534, p = 0.001) levels. Conclusions: A high SAM level and high methylation index are associated with the risk of lung injury in patients with COVID-19. The association of SAM with IL-6 and glutathione indicates an important role of transmethylation in the development of cytokine imbalance and oxidative stress in patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Lung Injury/blood , S-Adenosylhomocysteine/blood , S-Adenosylmethionine/blood , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Atherosclerosis/epidemiology , Biomarkers , COVID-19/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Female , Glutathione/blood , Humans , Hypertension/epidemiology , Interleukin-6/blood , Lung Injury/diagnostic imaging , Lung Injury/etiology , Male , Methylation , Middle Aged , Military Personnel , Risk , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Young Adult
7.
PLoS Med ; 18(12): e1003874, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1581902

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The recommendations in several countries to stop using the ChAdOx1 vaccine has led to vaccine programs combining different Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine types, which necessitates knowledge on vaccine effectiveness (VE) of heterologous vaccine schedules. The aim of this Danish nationwide population-based cohort study was therefore to estimate the VE against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and COVID-19-related hospitalization and death following the first dose of the ChAdOx1 vaccine and the combination of the ChAdOx1/mRNA vaccines. METHODS AND FINDINGS: All individuals alive in or immigrating to Denmark from 9 February 2021 to 23 June 2021 were identified in the Danish Civil Registration System. Information on exposure, outcomes, and covariates was obtained from Danish national registries. Poisson and Cox regression models were used to calculate crude and adjusted VE, respectively, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalization or death comparing vaccinated versus unvaccinated individuals. The VE estimates were adjusted for calendar time as underlying time and for sex, age, comorbidity, country of origin, and hospital admission. The analyses included 5,542,079 individuals (97.6% of the total Danish population). A total of 144,360 individuals were vaccinated with the ChAdOx1 vaccine as the first dose, and of these, 136,551 individuals received an mRNA vaccine as the second dose. A total of 1,691,464 person-years and 83,034 SARS-CoV-2 infections were included. The individuals vaccinated with the first dose of the ChAdOx1 vaccine dose had a median age of 45 years. The study population was characterized by an equal distribution of males and females; 6.7% and 9.2% originated from high-income and other countries, respectively. The VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection when combining the ChAdOx1 and an mRNA vaccine was 88% (95% CI: 83; 92) 14 days after the second dose and onwards. There were no COVID-19-related hospitalizations or deaths among the individuals vaccinated with the combined vaccine schedule during the study period. Study limitations including unmeasured confounders such as risk behavior and increasing overall vaccine coverage in the general population creating herd immunity are important to take into consideration when interpreting the results. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed a large reduction in the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection when combining the ChAdOx1 and an mRNA vaccine, compared with unvaccinated individuals.


Subject(s)
/administration & dosage , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Comorbidity , Denmark , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Risk , Treatment Outcome , Vaccination
10.
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
11.
Gac Med Mex ; 157(3): 231-236, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1535078

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The scarcity of person-centered applications aimed at developing awareness on the risk posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, stimulates the exploration and creation of preventive tools that are accessible to the population. OBJECTIVE: To develop a predictive model that allows evaluating the risk of mortality in the event of SARS-CoV-2 virus infection. METHODS: Exploration of public data from 16,000 COVID-19-positive patients to generate an efficient discriminant model, evaluated with a score function and expressed by a self-rated preventive interest questionnaire. RESULTS: A useful linear function was obtained with a discriminant capacity of 0.845; internal validation with bootstrap and external validation, with 25 % of tested patients showing marginal differences. CONCLUSION: The predictive model with statistical support, based on 15 accessible questions, can become a structured prevention tool.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Models, Statistical , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , Child , Child, Preschool , Discriminant Analysis , Female , Humans , Infant , Linear Models , Male , Middle Aged , Risk , Young Adult
12.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(11): e2133090, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1516696

ABSTRACT

Importance: Antidepressant use may be associated with reduced levels of several proinflammatory cytokines suggested to be involved with the development of severe COVID-19. An association between the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)-specifically fluoxetine hydrochloride and fluvoxamine maleate-with decreased mortality among patients with COVID-19 has been reported in recent studies; however, these studies had limited power due to their small size. Objective: To investigate the association of SSRIs with outcomes in patients with COVID-19 by analyzing electronic health records (EHRs). Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used propensity score matching by demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and medication indication to compare SSRI-treated patients with matched control patients not treated with SSRIs within a large EHR database representing a diverse population of 83 584 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from January to September 2020 and with a duration of follow-up of as long as 8 months in 87 health care centers across the US. Exposures: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and specifically (1) fluoxetine, (2) fluoxetine or fluvoxamine, and (3) other SSRIs (ie, not fluoxetine or fluvoxamine). Main Outcomes and Measures: Death. Results: A total of 3401 adult patients with COVID-19 prescribed SSRIs (2033 women [59.8%]; mean [SD] age, 63.8 [18.1] years) were identified, with 470 receiving fluoxetine only (280 women [59.6%]; mean [SD] age, 58.5 [18.1] years), 481 receiving fluoxetine or fluvoxamine (285 women [59.3%]; mean [SD] age, 58.7 [18.0] years), and 2898 receiving other SSRIs (1733 women [59.8%]; mean [SD] age, 64.7 [18.0] years) within a defined time frame. When compared with matched untreated control patients, relative risk (RR) of mortality was reduced among patients prescribed any SSRI (497 of 3401 [14.6%] vs 1130 of 6802 [16.6%]; RR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99]; adjusted P = .03); fluoxetine (46 of 470 [9.8%] vs 937 of 7050 [13.3%]; RR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.54-0.97]; adjusted P = .03); and fluoxetine or fluvoxamine (48 of 481 [10.0%] vs 956 of 7215 [13.3%]; RR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.55-0.99]; adjusted P = .04). The association between receiving any SSRI that is not fluoxetine or fluvoxamine and risk of death was not statistically significant (447 of 2898 [15.4%] vs 1474 of 8694 [17.0%]; RR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.84-1.00]; adjusted P = .06). Conclusions and Relevance: These results support evidence that SSRIs may be associated with reduced severity of COVID-19 reflected in the reduced RR of mortality. Further research and randomized clinical trials are needed to elucidate the effect of SSRIs generally, or more specifically of fluoxetine and fluvoxamine, on the severity of COVID-19 outcomes.


Subject(s)
Antidepressive Agents , COVID-19/mortality , Fluoxetine , Fluvoxamine , Serotonin Uptake Inhibitors , Severity of Illness Index , Adult , Aged , Antidepressive Agents/pharmacology , COVID-19/metabolism , Citalopram/pharmacology , Cytokines/metabolism , Female , Fluoxetine/pharmacology , Fluvoxamine/pharmacology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prescription Drugs , Retrospective Studies , Risk , SARS-CoV-2 , Serotonin Uptake Inhibitors/pharmacology , Sertraline , United States
13.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 21(5): e112, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1510459

Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Fomites , Humans , Risk
14.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 21888, 2021 11 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506965

ABSTRACT

Hypercoagulability and the need for prioritizing coagulation markers for prognostic abilities have been highlighted in COVID-19. We aimed to quantify the associations of D-dimer with disease progression in patients with COVID-19. This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020186661.We included 113 studies in our systematic review, of which 100 records (n = 38,310) with D-dimer data) were considered for meta-analysis. Across 68 unadjusted (n = 26,960) and 39 adjusted studies (n = 15,653) reporting initial D-dimer, a significant association was found in patients with higher D-dimer for the risk of overall disease progression (unadjusted odds ratio (uOR) 3.15; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.64). The time-to-event outcomes were pooled across 19 unadjusted (n = 9743) and 21 adjusted studies (n = 13,287); a strong association was found in patients with higher D-dimers for the risk of overall disease progression (unadjusted hazard ratio (uHR) 1.41; adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.10). The prognostic use of higher D-dimer was found to be promising for predicting overall disease progression (studies 68, area under curve 0.75) in COVID-19. Our study showed that higher D-dimer levels provide prognostic information useful for clinicians to early assess COVID-19 patients at risk for disease progression and mortality outcomes. This study, recommends rapid assessment of D-dimer for predicting adverse outcomes in COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/chemistry , Adult , Aged , Area Under Curve , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Progression , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Prognosis , Proportional Hazards Models , Respiration, Artificial , Risk , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Thrombophilia/blood
15.
Front Immunol ; 12: 740260, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506482

ABSTRACT

Increased left ventricular fibrosis has been reported in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It is unclear whether this fibrosis is a consequence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection or a risk factor for severe disease progression. We observed increased fibrosis in the left ventricular myocardium of deceased COVID-19 patients, compared with matched controls. We also detected increased mRNA levels of soluble interleukin-1 receptor-like 1 (sIL1-RL1) and transforming growth factor ß1 (TGF-ß1) in the left ventricular myocardium of deceased COVID-19 patients. Biochemical analysis of blood sampled from patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) with COVID-19 revealed highly elevated levels of TGF-ß1 mRNA in these patients compared to controls. Left ventricular strain measured by echocardiography as a marker of pre-existing cardiac fibrosis correlated strongly with blood TGF-ß1 mRNA levels and predicted disease severity in COVID-19 patients. In the left ventricular myocardium and lungs of COVID-19 patients, we found increased neuropilin-1 (NRP-1) RNA levels, which correlated strongly with the prevalence of pulmonary SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid. Cardiac and pulmonary fibrosis may therefore predispose these patients to increased cellular viral entry in the lung, which may explain the worse clinical outcome observed in our cohort. Our study demonstrates that patients at risk of clinical deterioration can be identified early by echocardiographic strain analysis and quantification of blood TGF-ß1 mRNA performed at the time of first medical contact.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/physiopathology , Heart Ventricles/pathology , Myocardium/pathology , Pulmonary Fibrosis/physiopathology , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/immunology , Female , Fibrosis , Heart Ventricles/metabolism , Humans , Interleukin-1 Receptor-Like 1 Protein/genetics , Interleukin-1 Receptor-Like 1 Protein/metabolism , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardium/metabolism , Neuropilin-1/genetics , Neuropilin-1/metabolism , Pulmonary Fibrosis/immunology , Risk , Severity of Illness Index , Transforming Growth Factor beta1/genetics , Transforming Growth Factor beta1/metabolism , Viral Load
16.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0258700, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1504697

ABSTRACT

Protecting healthcare professionals is crucial in maintaining a functioning healthcare system. The risk of infection and optimal preventive strategies for healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic remain poorly understood. Here we report the results of a cohort study that included pre- and asymptomatic healthcare workers. A weekly testing regime has been performed in this cohort since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic to identify infected healthcare workers. Based on these observations we have developed a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission that integrates the sources of infection from inside and outside the hospital. The data were used to study how regular testing and a desynchronisation protocol are effective in preventing transmission of COVID-19 infection at work, and compared both strategies in terms of workforce availability and cost-effectiveness. We showed that case incidence among healthcare workers is higher than would be explained solely by community infection. Furthermore, while testing and desynchronisation protocols are both effective in preventing nosocomial transmission, regular testing maintains work productivity with implementation costs.


Subject(s)
Asymptomatic Infections , COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/economics , Health Personnel , SARS-CoV-2 , Algorithms , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Cross Infection , Data Collection , Delivery of Health Care , Hospitals , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Models, Theoretical , Occupational Exposure , Pandemics , Risk , Stochastic Processes , Switzerland/epidemiology
17.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0259362, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1504217

ABSTRACT

We analyze whether and to what extent strategies employed by governments to fight the COVID-19 pandemic made a difference for GDP growth developments in 2020. Based on the strength and speed with which governments imposed non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) when confronted with waves of infections we distinguish between countries pursuing an elimination strategy and countries following a suppression / mitigation strategy. For a sample of 44 countries fixed effect panel regression results show that NPI changes conducted by elimination strategy countries had a less severe effect on GDP growth than NPI changes in suppression / mitigation strategy countries: strategy matters. However, this result is sensitive to the countries identified as "elimination countries" and to the sample composition. Moreover, we find that exogenous country characteristics drive the choice of strategy. At the same time our results show that countries successfully applying the elimination strategy achieved better health outcomes than their peers without having to accept lower growth.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Federal Government , Government , Humans , Internationality , Models, Economic , Pandemics , Physical Distancing , Public Policy , Quarantine , Regression Analysis , Risk , SARS-CoV-2
18.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0259514, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1502075

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Famotidine is a competitive histamine H2-receptor antagonist most commonly used for gastric acid suppression but thought to have potential efficacy in treating patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis are to summarize the current literature and report clinical outcomes on the use of famotidine for treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Five databases were searched through February 12, 2021 to identify observational studies that reported on associations of famotidine use with outcomes in COVID-19. Meta-analysis was conducted for composite primary clinical outcome (e.g. rate of death, intubation, or intensive care unit admissions) and death separately, where either aggregate odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR) was calculated. RESULTS: Four studies, reporting on 46,435 total patients and 3,110 patients treated with famotidine, were included in this meta-analysis. There was no significant association between famotidine use and composite outcomes in patients with COVID-19: HR 0.63 (95% CI: 0.35, 1.16). Across the three studies that reported mortality separated from other endpoints, there was no association between famotidine use during hospitalization and risk of death-HR 0.67 (95% CI: 0.26, 1.73) and OR 0.79 (95% CI: 0.19, 3.34). Heterogeneity ranged from 83.69% to 88.07%. CONCLUSION: Based on the existing observational studies, famotidine use is not associated with a reduced risk of mortality or combined outcome of mortality, intubation, and/or intensive care services in hospitalized individuals with COVID-19, though heterogeneity was high, and point estimates suggested a possible protective effect for the composite outcome that may not have been observed due to lack of power. Further randomized controlled trials (RCTs) may help determine the efficacy and safety of famotidine as a treatment for COVID-19 patients in various care settings of the disease.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Famotidine/therapeutic use , Hospitalization , Adult , Aged , Data Management , Female , Histamine H2 Antagonists/therapeutic use , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Observational Studies as Topic , Odds Ratio , Proportional Hazards Models , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk , SARS-CoV-2
20.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(43): 1520-1524, 2021 Oct 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1498054

ABSTRACT

By September 21, 2021, an estimated 182 million persons in the United States were fully vaccinated against COVID-19.* Clinical trials indicate that Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273), and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson; Ad.26.COV2.S) vaccines are effective and generally well tolerated (1-3). However, daily vaccination rates have declined approximately 78% since April 13, 2021†; vaccine safety concerns have contributed to vaccine hesitancy (4). A cohort study of 19,625 nursing home residents found that those who received an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) had lower all-cause mortality than did unvaccinated residents (5), but no studies comparing mortality rates within the general population of vaccinated and unvaccinated persons have been conducted. To assess mortality not associated with COVID-19 (non-COVID-19 mortality) after COVID-19 vaccination in a general population setting, a cohort study was conducted during December 2020-July 2021 among approximately 11 million persons enrolled in seven Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) sites.§ After standardizing mortality rates by age and sex, this study found that COVID-19 vaccine recipients had lower non-COVID-19 mortality than did unvaccinated persons. After adjusting for demographic characteristics and VSD site, this study found that adjusted relative risk (aRR) of non-COVID-19 mortality for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 0.41 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.38-0.44) after dose 1 and 0.34 (95% CI = 0.33-0.36) after dose 2. The aRRs of non-COVID-19 mortality for the Moderna vaccine were 0.34 (95% CI = 0.32-0.37) after dose 1 and 0.31 (95% CI = 0.30-0.33) after dose 2. The aRR after receipt of the Janssen vaccine was 0.54 (95% CI = 0.49-0.59). There is no increased risk for mortality among COVID-19 vaccine recipients. This finding reinforces the safety profile of currently approved COVID-19 vaccines in the United States.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Mortality/trends , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Risk , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...