Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 184
Filter
1.
Infect Drug Resist ; 14: 2113-2119, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1808755

ABSTRACT

AIM: The global impact of COVID-19 on mental health increases from time to time. Several studies show that depression is highly prevalent among quarantined individuals. COVID-19 is a pandemic with a rapidly increasing incidence of infections and deaths. People are depressed and psychologically overwhelmed by the illness and possible loss of their friends and loved ones. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence and associated factors of depression symptoms among quarantined individuals in Tigrai treatment center, Tigrai, Ethiopia, 2020. METHODS: A multicenter Institution-based cross-sectional study was employed among individuals in the Tigrai quarantine centers. A simple random sampling technique was used between April and October 2020 until an adequate sample size was reached. Depression was assessed by using the depression, anxiety, and stress scale (DASS). Epi data manager version 4.4 was used to enter data and data was analyzed using SPSS version 20. Logistic regression was carried out and an odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was computed to identify factors associated with depression. A P-value of less than 0.05 was considered as statistically significant and the strength of the association was presented by an odds ratio of 95% CI. RESULTS: The finding of the present study on the prevalence of depression among quarantined individuals was 18.1 with 95% CI (14.8-22.9). Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed and factors such as being female, duration of quarantine, unemployment, and having perceived stigma were significantly associated with depression. RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION: The prevalence of depression symptoms among quarantined individuals during the COVID-19 pandemic was 18.1%. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, being female, duration of quarantine, unemployment, and having perceived stigma were significantly associated with depression. So, clinicians, mental health professionals, and policymakers should work together to address the problem.

2.
J Clin Med ; 10(7)2021 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1753628

ABSTRACT

Postprandial hypotension (PPH) is defined as a fall of ≥20 mmHg in systolic blood pressure (SBP) or a SBP of <90 mmHg after having been >100 mmHg before the meal within two hours after a meal. The prevalence of PPH among persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) is unknown. Ambulatory blood pressure measurement was performed in 158 persons with SCI, 109 men, median age was 59.1 years (min.:13.2; max.: 86.2). In total, 78 persons (49.4%) had PPH after 114 out of 449 meals (25.4%). The median change in SBP during PPH was -28 mmHg (min.: -87; max.: -15 mmHg) and 96% of the PPH episodes were asymptomatic. The occurrence of PPH was correlated to older age (p = 0.001), level of injury (p = 0.023), and complete SCI (p = 0.000), but not, gender or time since injury. Further studies are needed to elucidate if PPH contributes to the increased cardiovascular mortality in the SCI population.

3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(4): 622-629, 2022 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1713621

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Serological assays detecting anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies are being widely deployed in studies and clinical practice. However, the duration and effectiveness of the protection conferred by the immune response remains to be assessed in population-based samples. To estimate the incidence of newly acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections in seropositive individuals as compared to seronegative controls, we conducted a retrospective longitudinal matched study. METHODS: A seroprevalence survey including a representative sample of the population was conducted in Geneva, Switzerland, between April and June 2020, immediately after the first pandemic wave. Seropositive participants were matched one-to-two to seronegative controls, using a propensity-score including age, gender, immunodeficiency, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, and education level. Each individual was linked to a state-registry of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Our primary outcome was confirmed infections occurring from serological status assessment to the end of the second pandemic wave (January 2021). RESULTS: Among 8344 serosurvey participants, 498 seropositive individuals were selected and matched with 996 seronegative controls. After a mean follow-up of 35.6 (standard deviation [SD] 3.2) weeks, 7 out of 498 (1.4%) seropositive subjects had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, of whom 5 (1.0%) were classified as reinfections. In contrast, the infection rate was higher in seronegative individuals (15.5%, 154/996) during a similar follow-up period (mean 34.7 [SD 3.2] weeks), corresponding to a 94% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 86%- 98%, P < .001) reduction in the hazard of having a positive SARS-CoV-2 test for seropositives. CONCLUSIONS: Seroconversion after SARS-CoV-2 infection confers protection against reinfection lasting at least 8 months. These findings could help global health authorities establishing priority for vaccine allocation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Humans , Reinfection , Retrospective Studies , Seroconversion , Seroepidemiologic Studies
4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(1): 83-91, 2022 01 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1621573

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) occurs in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Risks and outcomes remain poorly understood. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of mechanically ventilated adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to 5 Johns Hopkins hospitals was conducted between March and August 2020. CAPA was defined using composite clinical criteria. Fine and Gray competing risks regression was used to analyze clinical outcomes and, multilevel mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression was used to compare longitudinal disease severity scores. RESULTS: In the cohort of 396 people, 39 met criteria for CAPA. Patients with CAPA were more likely than those without CAPA to have underlying pulmonary vascular disease (41% vs 21.6%, respectively; P = .01), liver disease (35.9% vs 18.2%; P = .02), coagulopathy (51.3% vs 33.1%; P = .03), solid tumors (25.6% vs 10.9%; P = .02), multiple myeloma (5.1% vs 0.3%; P = .03), and corticosteroid exposure during the index admission (66.7% vs 42.6%; P = .005), and had lower body mass indexes (median, 26.6 vs 29.9 [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared]; P = .04). Patients with CAPA had worse outcomes, as measured by ordinal severity of disease scores, requiring longer time to improvement (adjusted odds ratio, 1.081.091.1; P < .001), and advancing in severity almost twice as quickly (subhazard ratio, 1.31.82.5; P < .001). They were intubated twice as long as those without CAPA (subhazard ratio, 0.40.50.6; P < .001) and had longer hospital stays (median [interquartile range], 41.1 [20.5-72.4) vs 18.5 [10.7-31.8] days; P < .001). CONCLUSION: CAPA is associated with poor outcomes. Attention to preventive measures (screening and/or prophylaxis) is warranted in people with high risk of CAPA.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis , Pulmonary Aspergillosis , Adult , Humans , Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis/diagnosis , Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis/epidemiology , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
6.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 52(4): 999-1006, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525574

ABSTRACT

A high incidence of thrombosis in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 was identified early during the pandemic. Accurately quantifying thrombotic risk may assist prognosis and guide appropriate thromboprophylaxis. Observational studies have estimated the rate of thrombosis in both hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients with COVID-19, and how this corresponds to the severity of illness. In this review, we provide an overview of the incidence and prevalence of arterial and venous thrombotic events in patients with COVID-19 and highlight the limitations in the studies to date. Asymptomatic individuals with COVID-19 and those with mild symptoms are at very low risk of thrombotic complications. However, rates of thrombosis are substantially increased in hospitalised patients, and are strikingly high in those patients who are critically-ill requiring treatment on the intensive care unit and especially those requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Clinicians managing such patients need to be aware of these risks and take appropriate steps with respect to thromboprophylaxis and heightened clinical vigilance. Large prospective observational studies will more accurately quantify thrombotic rate, and randomized controlled trials are currently investigating optimal thromboprophylactic strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Thrombosis , Venous Thromboembolism , Anticoagulants , Biomarkers , COVID-19/complications , Humans , Incidence , Observational Studies as Topic , Thrombosis/epidemiology , Thrombosis/virology , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiology , Venous Thromboembolism/virology
7.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(9): e2985-e2991, 2021 11 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501042

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It is currently unclear whether severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reinfection will remain a rare event, only occurring in individuals who fail to mount an effective immune response, or whether it will occur more frequently when humoral immunity wanes following primary infection. METHODS: A case of reinfection was observed in a Belgian nosocomial outbreak involving 3 patients and 2 healthcare workers. To distinguish reinfection from persistent infection and detect potential transmission clusters, whole genome sequencing was performed on nasopharyngeal swabs of all individuals including the reinfection case's first episode. Immunoglobulin A, immunoglobulin M, and immunoglobulin G (IgG) and neutralizing antibody responses were quantified in serum of all individuals, and viral infectiousness was measured in the swabs of the reinfection case. RESULTS: Reinfection was confirmed in a young, immunocompetent healthcare worker as viral genomes derived from the first and second episode belonged to different SARS-CoV-2 clades. The symptomatic reinfection occurred after an interval of 185 days, despite the development of an effective humoral immune response following symptomatic primary infection. The second episode, however, was milder and characterized by a fast rise in serum IgG and neutralizing antibodies. Although contact tracing and viral culture remained inconclusive, the healthcare worker formed a transmission cluster with 3 patients and showed evidence of virus replication but not of neutralizing antibodies in her nasopharyngeal swabs. CONCLUSIONS: If this case is representative of most patients with coronavirus disease 2019, long-lived protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2 after primary infection might not be likely.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Belgium/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Reinfection , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(9): e2978-e2984, 2021 11 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1500992

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In response to reported coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks among people experiencing homelessness (PEH) in other US cities, we conducted multiple, proactive, facility-wide testing events for PEH living sheltered and unsheltered and homelessness service staff in Atlanta, Georgia. We describe the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) prevalence and associated symptoms, and review shelter infection prevention and control (IPC) policies. METHODS: PEH and staff were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) during 7 April-6 May 2020. A subset of PEH and staff was screened for symptoms. Shelter assessments were conducted concurrently at a convenience sample of shelters using a standardized questionnaire. RESULTS: Overall, 2875 individuals at 24 shelters and 9 unsheltered outreach events underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing, and 2860 (99.5%) had conclusive test results. The SARS-CoV-2 prevalences were 2.1% (36/1684) among PEH living sheltered, 0.5% (3/628) among PEH living unsheltered, and 1.3% (7/548) among staff. Reporting fever, cough, or shortness of breath in the last week during symptom screening was 14% sensitive and 89% specific for identifying COVID-19 cases, compared with RT-PCR. Prevalences by shelter ranged 0-27.6%. Repeat testing 3-4 weeks later at 4 shelters documented decreased SARS-CoV-2 prevalences (0-3.9%). Of 24 shelters, 9 completed shelter assessments and implemented IPC measures as part of the COVID-19 response. CONCLUSIONS: PEH living in shelters experienced a higher SARS-CoV-2 prevalence compared with PEH living unsheltered. Facility-wide testing in congregate settings allowed for the identification and isolation of COVID-19 cases, and is an important strategy to interrupt SARS-CoV-2 transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Homeless Persons , COVID-19 Testing , Georgia/epidemiology , Humans , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 60(SI): SI59-SI67, 2021 10 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462480

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the incidence of COVID-19 hospitalization in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease (IRD); in patients with RA treated with specific DMARDs; and the incidence of severe COVID-19 infection among hospitalized patients with RA. METHODS: A nationwide cohort study from Denmark between 1 March and 12 August 2020. The adjusted incidence of COVID-19 hospitalization was estimated for patients with RA; spondyloarthritis including psoriatic arthritis; connective tissue disease; vasculitides; and non-IRD individuals. Further, the incidence of COVID-19 hospitalization was estimated for patients with RA treated and non-treated with TNF-inhibitors, HCQ or glucocorticoids, respectively. Lastly, the incidence of severe COVID-19 infection (intensive care, acute respiratory distress syndrome or death) among hospital-admitted patients was estimated for RA and non-IRD sp - individudals. RESULTS: Patients with IRD (n = 58 052) had an increased partially adjusted incidence of hospitalization with COVID-19 compared with the 4.5 million people in the general population [hazard ratio (HR) 1.46, 95% CI: 1.15, 1.86] with strongest associations for patients with RA (n = 29 440, HR 1.72, 95% CI: 1.29, 2.30) and vasculitides (n = 4072, HR 1.82, 95% CI: 0.91, 3.64). There was no increased incidence of COVID-19 hospitalization associated with TNF-inhibitor, HCQ nor glucocorticoid use. COVID-19 admitted patients with RA had a HR of 1.43 (95% CI: 0.80, 2.53) for a severe outcome. CONCLUSION: Patients with IRD were more likely to be admitted with COVID-19 than the general population, and COVID-19 admitted patients with RA could be at higher risk of a severe outcome. Treatment with specific DMARDs did not affect the risk of hospitalization.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Rheumatic Diseases/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Adult , Aged , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , Cohort Studies , Denmark/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Rheumatic Diseases/virology
10.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 6: CD013333, 2020 06 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1453528

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Demodex blepharitis is a chronic condition commonly associated with recalcitrant dry eye symptoms though many people with Demodex mites are asymptomatic. The primary cause of this condition in humans is two types of Demodex mites: Demodex folliculorum and Demodex brevis. There are varying reports of the prevalence of Demodex blepharitis among adults, and it affects both men and women equally. While Demodex mites are commonly treated with tea tree oil, the effectiveness of tea tree oil for treating Demodex blepharitis is not well documented. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of tea tree oil on ocular Demodex infestation in people with Demodex blepharitis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2019, Issue 6); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; PubMed; LILACS; ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We used no date or language restrictions in the electronic search for trials. We last searched the databases on 18 June 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared treatment with tea tree oil (or its components) versus another treatment or no treatment for people with Demodex blepharitis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts and then full text of records to determine their eligibility. The review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias using Covidence. A third review author resolved any conflicts at all stages. MAIN RESULTS: We included six RCTs (1124 eyes of 562 participants; 17 to 281 participants per study) from the US, Korea, China, Australia, Ireland, and Turkey. The RCTs compared some formulation of tea tree oil to another treatment or no treatment. Included participants were both men and women, ranging from 39 to 55 years of age. All RCTs were assessed at unclear or high risk of bias in one or more domains. We also identified two RCTs that are ongoing or awaiting publications. Data from three RCTs that reported a short-term mean change in the number of Demodex mites per eight eyelashes contributed to a meta-analysis. We are uncertain about the mean reduction for the groups that received the tea tree oil intervention (mean difference [MD] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.24 to 1.16) at four to six weeks as compared to other interventions. Only one RCT reported data for long-term changes, which found that the group that received intense pulse light as the treatment had complete eradication of Demodex mites at three months. We graded the certainty of the evidence for this outcome as very low. Three RCTs reported no evidence of a difference for participant reported symptoms measured on the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) between the tea tree oil group and the group receiving other forms of intervention. Mean differences in these studies ranged from -10.54 (95% CI - 24.19, 3.11) to 3.40 (95% CI -0.70 7.50). We did not conduct a meta-analysis for this outcome given substantial statistical heterogeneity and graded the certainty of the evidence as low. One RCT provided information concerning visual acuity but did not provide sufficient data for between-group comparisons. The authors noted that mean habitual LogMAR visual acuity for all study participants improved post-treatment (mean LogMAR 1.16, standard deviation 0.26 at 4 weeks). We graded the certainty of evidence for this outcome as low. No RCTs provided data on mean change in number of cylindrical dandruff or the proportion of participants experiencing conjunctival injection or experiencing meibomian gland dysfunction. Three RCTs provided information on adverse events. One reported no adverse events. The other two described a total of six participants randomized to treatment with tea tree oil who experienced ocular irritation or discomfort that resolved with re-educating the patient on application techniques and continuing use of the tea tree oil. We graded the certainty of the evidence for this outcome as very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current review suggests that there is uncertainty related to the effectiveness of 5% to 50% tea tree oil for the short-term treatment of Demodex blepharitis; however, if used, lower concentrations may be preferable in the eye care arena to avoid induced ocular irritation. Future studies should be better controlled, assess outcomes at long term (e.g. 10 to 12 weeks or beyond), account for patient compliance, and study the effects of different tea tree oil concentrations.


Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents, Local/therapeutic use , Blepharitis/drug therapy , Mite Infestations/drug therapy , Tea Tree Oil/therapeutic use , Adult , Blepharitis/parasitology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mite Infestations/complications , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
11.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(8): 909-923, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1411740

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggested that the prevalence of chronic respiratory disease in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 was lower than its prevalence in the general population. The aim of this study was to assess whether chronic lung disease or use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) affects the risk of contracting severe COVID-19. METHODS: In this population cohort study, records from 1205 general practices in England that contribute to the QResearch database were linked to Public Health England's database of SARS-CoV-2 testing and English hospital admissions, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and deaths for COVID-19. All patients aged 20 years and older who were registered with one of the 1205 general practices on Jan 24, 2020, were included in this study. With Cox regression, we examined the risks of COVID-19-related hospitalisation, admission to ICU, and death in relation to respiratory disease and use of ICS, adjusting for demographic and socioeconomic status and comorbidities associated with severe COVID-19. FINDINGS: Between Jan 24 and April 30, 2020, 8 256 161 people were included in the cohort and observed, of whom 14 479 (0·2%) were admitted to hospital with COVID-19, 1542 (<0·1%) were admitted to ICU, and 5956 (0·1%) died. People with some respiratory diseases were at an increased risk of hospitalisation (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] hazard ratio [HR] 1·54 [95% CI 1·45-1·63], asthma 1·18 [1·13-1·24], severe asthma 1·29 [1·22-1·37; people on three or more current asthma medications], bronchiectasis 1·34 [1·20-1·50], sarcoidosis 1·36 [1·10-1·68], extrinsic allergic alveolitis 1·35 [0·82-2·21], idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis 1·59 [1·30-1·95], other interstitial lung disease 1·66 [1·30-2·12], and lung cancer 2·24 [1·89-2·65]) and death (COPD 1·54 [1·42-1·67], asthma 0·99 [0·91-1·07], severe asthma 1·08 [0·98-1·19], bronchiectasis 1·12 [0·94-1·33], sarcoidosis 1·41 [0·99-1·99), extrinsic allergic alveolitis 1·56 [0·78-3·13], idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis 1·47 [1·12-1·92], other interstitial lung disease 2·05 [1·49-2·81], and lung cancer 1·77 [1·37-2·29]) due to COVID-19 compared with those without these diseases. Admission to ICU was rare, but the HR for people with asthma was 1·08 (0·93-1·25) and severe asthma was 1·30 (1·08-1·58). In a post-hoc analysis, relative risks of severe COVID-19 in people with respiratory disease were similar before and after shielding was introduced on March 23, 2020. In another post-hoc analysis, people with two or more prescriptions for ICS in the 150 days before study start were at a slightly higher risk of severe COVID-19 compared with all other individuals (ie, no or one ICS prescription): HR 1·13 (1·03-1·23) for hospitalisation, 1·63 (1·18-2·24) for ICU admission, and 1·15 (1·01-1·31) for death. INTERPRETATION: The risk of severe COVID-19 in people with asthma is relatively small. People with COPD and interstitial lung disease appear to have a modestly increased risk of severe disease, but their risk of death from COVID-19 at the height of the epidemic was mostly far lower than the ordinary risk of death from any cause. Use of inhaled steroids might be associated with a modestly increased risk of severe COVID-19. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre and the Wellcome Trust.


Subject(s)
Adrenal Cortex Hormones , COVID-19 , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Administration, Inhalation , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/administration & dosage , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/adverse effects , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19 Testing , Comorbidity , England/epidemiology , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/drug therapy , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Social Class
12.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(4): 622-629, 2022 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1387824

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Serological assays detecting anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies are being widely deployed in studies and clinical practice. However, the duration and effectiveness of the protection conferred by the immune response remains to be assessed in population-based samples. To estimate the incidence of newly acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections in seropositive individuals as compared to seronegative controls, we conducted a retrospective longitudinal matched study. METHODS: A seroprevalence survey including a representative sample of the population was conducted in Geneva, Switzerland, between April and June 2020, immediately after the first pandemic wave. Seropositive participants were matched one-to-two to seronegative controls, using a propensity-score including age, gender, immunodeficiency, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, and education level. Each individual was linked to a state-registry of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Our primary outcome was confirmed infections occurring from serological status assessment to the end of the second pandemic wave (January 2021). RESULTS: Among 8344 serosurvey participants, 498 seropositive individuals were selected and matched with 996 seronegative controls. After a mean follow-up of 35.6 (standard deviation [SD] 3.2) weeks, 7 out of 498 (1.4%) seropositive subjects had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, of whom 5 (1.0%) were classified as reinfections. In contrast, the infection rate was higher in seronegative individuals (15.5%, 154/996) during a similar follow-up period (mean 34.7 [SD 3.2] weeks), corresponding to a 94% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 86%- 98%, P < .001) reduction in the hazard of having a positive SARS-CoV-2 test for seropositives. CONCLUSIONS: Seroconversion after SARS-CoV-2 infection confers protection against reinfection lasting at least 8 months. These findings could help global health authorities establishing priority for vaccine allocation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Humans , Reinfection , Retrospective Studies , Seroconversion , Seroepidemiologic Studies
13.
Clin Med (Lond) ; 21(1): e52-e53, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1357639

ABSTRACT

Protective immunity following COVID-19 infection is not yet fully understood. An understanding of COVID-19 reinfection will be key in guiding government and public health policy decisions in the coming months. This report describes two distinct infective episodes of COVID-19 occurring in the same individual, at the time of writing the first published case in the UK. In April 2020 a 25-year-old UK doctor exhibited classical COVID-19 symptoms, including fevers, headaches, and fatigue. A COVID-19 nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) at the time returned negative. However, a follow-up antibody test in May 2020 returned positive. In October 2020 the same individual exhibited coryzal symptoms and headaches. He was COVID-19 NAAT tested and found to be positive. There was exposure to high viral load prior to reinfection. Overall the second infection was symptomatically milder, with a faster recovery. This evidence for reinfection poses challenges for public health and vaccination efforts to protect against the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/analysis , COVID-19/diagnosis , Pandemics , Reinfection/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Male , Reinfection/epidemiology , Reinfection/virology , United Kingdom/epidemiology
14.
Am J Infect Control ; 49(2): 238-246, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1336188

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: On February 11, 2020 WHO designated the name "COVID-19" for the disease caused by "severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2" (SARS-CoV-2), a novel virus that quickly turned into a global pandemic. Risks associated with acquiring the virus have been found to most significantly vary by age and presence of underlying comorbidity. In this rapid literature review we explore the prevalence of comorbidities and associated adverse outcomes among individuals with COVID-19 and summarize our findings based on information available as of May 15, 2020. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic search was performed on PubMed, Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar to find articles published until May 15, 2020. All relevant articles providing information on PCR tested COVID-19 positive patient population with clinical characteristics and epidemiological information were selected for review and analysis. RESULTS: A total of 27 articles consisting of 22,753 patient cases from major epicenters worldwide were included in the study. Major comorbidities seen in overall population were CVD (8.9%), HTN (27.4%), Diabetes (17.4%), COPD (7.5%), Cancer (3.5%), CKD (2.6%), and other (15.5%). Major comorbidity specific to countries included in the study were China (HTN 39.5%), South Korea (CVD 25.6%), Italy (HTN 35.9%), USA (HTN 38.9%), Mexico, (Other 42.3%), UK (HTN 27.8%), Iran (Diabetes 35.0%). Within fatal cases, an estimated 84.1% had presence of one or more comorbidity. Subgroup analysis of fatality association with having comorbidity had an estimated OR 0.83, CI [0.60-0.99], p<0.05. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, hypertension followed by diabetes and cardiovascular diseases were the most common comorbidity seen in COVID-19 positive patients across major epicenters world-wide. Although having one or more comorbidity is linked to increased disease severity, no clear association was found between having these risk factors and increased risk of fatality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , Hypertension/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/virology , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/virology , Female , Humans , Hypertension/virology , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/virology , Prevalence , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/virology , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/epidemiology , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/virology , Young Adult
15.
Neurol Clin Pract ; 10(4): 371-374, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1337533

ABSTRACT

The rapid spread of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has become a public health emergency of international concern. The outbreak was characterized as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) in March 2020. The most characteristic symptom of patients with COVID-19 is respiratory distress. Some patients may also show neurologic signs and symptoms ranging from headache, nausea, vomiting, and confusion to anosmia, ageusia, encephalitis, and stroke. Coronaviruses are known pathogens with neuroinvasive potential. There is increasing evidence that coronavirus infections are not always confined to the respiratory tract. CNS involvement can occur in susceptible individuals and may contribute overall morbidity and mortality in the acute setting. In addition, postinfectious, immune-mediated complications in the convalescent period are possible. Awareness and recognition of neurologic manifestations is essential to guide therapeutic decision-making because the current outbreak continues to unfold.

16.
Exp Clin Transplant ; 19(7): 744-748, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1323413

ABSTRACT

Acute respiratory distress syndrome remains the main cause of death among people with COVID-19. Although many immunomodulatory and antiviral drug therapies have been tested, the only effective therapy against severe COVID-19 pneumonia among the general population is a regimen of high-dose corticosteroids for cases of severe associated inflammation. In solid-organ transplant recipients with long-term immunosuppression, data on disease presentation and evolution are scarce, and the benefit of high-dose corticosteroids remains uncertain for cases of severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Here, we report 2 cases of COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome that occurred in lung transplant recipients in March and April 2020, respectively. Both cases of acute respiratory distress syndrome occurred in patients with long-term azithromycin treatment prescribed to prevent chronic allograft dysfunction. Acute respiratory distress syndrome was associated with severe inflammation and was cured after early administration of high-dose corticosteroids in both cases, with progressive and complete resolution of lung lesions evidenced on thoracic computed tomography scan. Our findings support the benefit of early high-dose corticosteroids in COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome with hyperinflammation in patients with long-term immunosuppression such as lung transplant recipients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Lung Transplantation , Methylprednisolone/therapeutic use , Postoperative Complications/drug therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/drug therapy , COVID-19/complications , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Postoperative Complications/virology , Remission Induction , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology
17.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 27(11): 1666-1671, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1284003

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to estimate the prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the general population of Iran. METHODS: The target population was all Iranian people aged 6 years and older in the country. A stratified random sampling design was used to select 28 314 people from among the individuals registered in the electronic health record systems used in primary health care in Iran. Venous blood was taken from each participant and tested for the IgG antibody against COVID-19. The prevalence of COVID-19 was estimated at provincial and national levels after adjusting for the measurement error of the laboratory test, non-response bias and sampling design. RESULTS: Of the 28 314 Iranians selected, 11 256 (39.75%) participated in the study. Of these, 5406 (48.0%) were male and 6851 (60.9%) lived in urban areas. The mean (standard deviation) participant age was 35.89 (18.61) years. The adjusted prevalence of COVID-19 until 20 August 2020 was estimated as 14.2% (95% uncertainty interval 13.3%-15.2%), which was equal to 11 958 346 (95% CI 11 211 011-12 746 776) individuals. The adjusted prevalences of infection were 14.6%, 13.8%, 16.6%, 11.7% and 19.4% among men, women, urban population, rural population and individuals aged 60 years or more, respectively. Ardabil, Golestan and Khuzestan provinces had the highest prevalence and Alborz, Hormozgan and Kerman provinces had the lowest. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the study results, a large proportion of the Iranian population had not yet been infected by COVID-19. The observance of hygienic principles and social restrictions should therefore continue until the majority of the population has been vaccinated.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Iran/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Young Adult
18.
Brain Behav Immun Health ; 15: 100268, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1272308

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Among Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) manifestations, Olfactory (OD) and Gustatory (GD) Dysfunctions (OGD) have drawn considerable attention, becoming a sort of hallmark of the disease. Many have speculated on the pathogenesis and clinical characteristics of these disturbances; however, no definite answers have been produced on the topic. With this systematic review, we aimed to collect all the available evidence regarding the prevalence of OGD, the timing of their onset and their resolution, their rate of recovery and their role as diagnostic and prognostic tools for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. METHODS: A systematic review comprising all the observational studies that reported the prevalence and/or the longitudinal trajectories of OGD in COVID-19 patients, as self-reported by patients or measured through objective psychophysical tests. RESULTS: After the selection process, 155 studies were included, with a total of 70,920 patients and 105,291 not-infected individuals. Prevalence reports were extremely variable across studies, with wide ranges for OD (0%-98%) and GD (0-89%) prevalence. OGD occurred early during the disease course and only rarely preceded other symptoms; out of 30 studies with a follow-up time of at least 20 days, only in 5 studies OGD fully resolved in more than 90% of patients. OGD had low sensitivity and high specificity for SARS-CoV-2 infection; accuracy of OD and GD for infection identification was higher than 80% in 10 out of 33 studies and in 8 out of 22 studies considered, respectively. 28 out of 30 studies that studied the association between OGD and disease severity found how OGD were associated with lower rates of severe pneumonia, hospitalization and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: OGD seem to be highly prevalent in SARS-CoV-2 infection. They occur early, concomitantly with other symptoms and often persist after recovery, in some cases for months; whether a full recovery eventually occurs in all cases is not clear yet. OGD are good predictors of SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with a milder disease course.

19.
Am J Case Rep ; 22: e931800, 2021 Jun 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1271059

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND Pneumomediastinum and pneumopericardium have been reported to occur in people who regularly smoke marijuana and have also been reported in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia due to infection with SARS-CoV-2. This report is of a 17-year-old girl with a history of marijuana use who presented with pneumomediastinum and pneumopericardium and was found to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection on hospital admission by Abbott ID NOW testing. CASE REPORT A 17-year-old girl presented to the emergency room with a 3-day history of abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting and a 1-day history of diarrhea. She had a history of daily marijuana use and lived with her grandmother who was presumed to be positive for COVID-19, based on symptoms. Her admission laboratory results were unremarkable except for pyuria, which was suspicious for urinary tract infection. The patient's nasopharyngeal swab was positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Owing to abdominal pain, a computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen and pelvis was obtained, which was concerning for pneumomediastinum and pneumopericardium. A CT scan of the thorax confirmed the findings. A contrast-enhanced barium esophagogram was performed and was unremarkable. The patient was admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit for observation and supportive care. CONCLUSIONS This report shows the importance of current testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients of all ages who present acutely to the hospital. It also highlights the importance of obtaining a full social and medical history so that symptoms and signs from causes other than SARS-CoV-2 infection are not missed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Marijuana Use , Mediastinal Emphysema , Pneumopericardium , Adolescent , Child , Female , Hospitals , Humans , Mediastinal Emphysema/chemically induced , Mediastinal Emphysema/diagnostic imaging , Pneumopericardium/diagnostic imaging , Pneumopericardium/etiology , SARS-CoV-2
20.
Blood Purif ; 51(3): 199-212, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1270907

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The recent worldwide pandemic of COVID-19 has been a serious, multidimensional problem that has left a detrimental worldwide impact on individuals of all ages and several organ systems. The typical manifestation of kidney involvement is acute kidney injury (AKI); however, there is a lack of consensus data regarding AKI epidemiology in COVID-19. This systematic literature review aims to bridge this knowledge gap. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASUREMENTS: MEDLINE and Cochrane library were systematically searched for the literature related to AKI in COVID-19 patients of all ages. MedRxIV was searched for relevant unpublished manuscripts. Two reviewers independently assessed the literature on the incidence of AKI and mortality, extracting the need for kidney replacement therapy (KRT). RESULTS: Sixty studies (n = 43,871 patients) were included in this review. The pooled incidence of AKI among COVID-19 patients was 19.45% (95% confidence intervals [95% CI]: 14.63-24.77%), while the pooled incidence of AKI COVID-19 patients requiring KRT was 39.04% (16.38-64.57%). The pooled proportion of COVID+ patients was significantly lower at 8.83% (5.64% to 12/66%). The overall mortality of COVID-19 patients was calculated to be 17.71% (95% CI: 11.49-24.93%), while the mortality among patients with AKI was higher at 54.24% (95% CI: 44.70-63.63%). CONCLUSION: This comprehensive systematic review summarizes the available literature pertaining to AKI epidemiology in COVID-19 patients and highlights the incidence, associated mortality, and the need for KRT in this susceptible population.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury , COVID-19 , Renal Replacement Therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Acute Kidney Injury/epidemiology , Acute Kidney Injury/etiology , Acute Kidney Injury/therapy , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL