Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 341
Filter
1.
Int J Ment Health Addict ; 20(3): 1537-1545, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1899276

ABSTRACT

Background: The emergence of the COVID-19 and its consequences has led to fears, worries, and anxiety among individuals worldwide. The present study developed the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) to complement the clinical efforts in preventing the spread and treating of COVID-19 cases. Methods: The sample comprised 717 Iranian participants. The items of the FCV-19S were constructed based on extensive review of existing scales on fears, expert evaluations, and participant interviews. Several psychometric tests were conducted to ascertain its reliability and validity properties. Results: After panel review and corrected item-total correlation testing, seven items with acceptable corrected item-total correlation (0.47 to 0.56) were retained and further confirmed by significant and strong factor loadings (0.66 to 0.74). Also, other properties evaluated using both classical test theory and Rasch model were satisfactory on the seven-item scale. More specifically, reliability values such as internal consistency (α = .82) and test-retest reliability (ICC = .72) were acceptable. Concurrent validity was supported by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (with depression, r = 0.425 and anxiety, r = 0.511) and the Perceived Vulnerability to Disease Scale (with perceived infectability, r = 0.483 and germ aversion, r = 0.459). Conclusion: The Fear of COVID-19 Scale, a seven-item scale, has robust psychometric properties. It is reliable and valid in assessing fear of COVID-19 among the general population and will also be useful in allaying COVID-19 fears among individuals.

2.
Work ; 67(2): 269-279, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1725332

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy is a vulnerable period of growth and enrichment along with many physiological and psychological challenges. These changes can lead to complications if compounded by external stress and anxiety. COVID-19 has emerged as a chief stressor among the general population and is a serious threat among vulnerable populations. Therefore, there is a need for stress management tools, such as Yoga and physical exercises, both at home and at work. These can be adopted during the pandemic with proper maintenance of social distancing. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compile literature that has reported the health outcomes of Yoga intervention on pregnancy at the workplace and analyzes both the restrictions as well as advantages of its beneficial effects in comparison to physical exercises. METHODOLOGY: A comprehensive literature review was conducted utilizing PubMed and Google Scholar. The keywords used for the search include "Yoga", "work", "complications", "physical exercise", "drugs" and "COVID" indifferent permutations and combinations with "pregnancy". We compiled the literature with respect to pregnancy complications and the effects of drugs, physical activity and Yoga for preventing these complications. RESULTS: We noted that pregnancy-related complications are becoming more prevalent because of a sedentary lifestyle, restricted physical activity and growing stress. In such situations, a home or workplace Yoga protocol can combine both exercise and mindfulness-based alleviation of anxiety for both working and non-working women. CONCLUSION: Yoga can be effective for combating stress and anxiety besides boosting immunity in pregnant working women confronted with the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Pregnancy Complications/psychology , Stress, Psychological/psychology , Women, Working/psychology , Yoga/psychology , Anxiety/etiology , Anxiety/psychology , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Depression/etiology , Depression/psychology , Female , Humans , Mindfulness , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2 , Sedentary Behavior , Stress, Psychological/prevention & control
3.
Brain Behav Immun ; 87: 8-9, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1719343

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to high levels of psychological distress in the general public, including symptoms of anxiety and depression. Such distress is associated with alterations in immune function, including an elevated risk of viral respiratory tract infections. In this light, the possible effects of Ayurveda, a traditional system of medicine promoted by the Indian government as an "immune booster", are examined from the point of view of psychoneuroimmune mechanisms as well as the "meaning response" described by Moerman. It was found that many of the measures advocated in their guidelines could positively influence immunity either by direct effects on symptoms of depression or anxiety, or through their symbolic significance. Therefore, it is possible that such traditional practices could be beneficial both in terms of psychological quality of life, and in terms of moderating the risk of infection.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Depression/immunology , Medicine, Ayurvedic , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Psychoneuroimmunology , Stress, Psychological/immunology , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coriandrum , Cuminum , Curcuma , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/psychology , Garlic , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , India/epidemiology , Pandemics , Plant Preparations , Psychological Distress , SARS-CoV-2 , Spices , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Stress, Psychological/psychology , Teas, Herbal , Yoga
4.
Scand J Public Health ; 49(7): 797-803, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1631163

ABSTRACT

AIM: This study aimed to explore experiences of awaiting a test result for COVID-19 among individuals from the general population. METHODS: Fifteen participants were recruited from COVID-19 testing tents in the Capital Region of Denmark in March and April 2020. A phenomenological-hermeneutic approach inspired by Ricoeur's theory of interpretation was used. RESULTS: The analysis revealed five themes. (1) The participants' experiences of awaiting a COVID-19 test result illuminated concerns related to infecting others rather than their own health. Experiences of guilt for not taking all possible precautions to avoid the spread of COVID-19 were described and thoughts of potentially having exposed others bothered the participants. (2) The test result would guide their precautions and therefore regulate behaviour at home and in society. (3) Even though the participants did not take all possible precautions they made some changes in their everyday lives. (4) Leaving the individual with the responsibility for taking precautions based on their subjective experiences created feelings of insecurity and uncertainty. (5) Being met by health professionals was an experience that meant for the particpants that behaviour towards limiting the infection became very clear. The seriousness experienced around the test situation facilitated this attitude and behaviour in the participants. Conclusion: This study illuminated how testing for COVID-19 regulates behavior in the general population. The testing was both important for the individual's cautious behavior towards other people, work and in getting around in society but also a way to regulate behavior from a societal perspective to quicken suppression and avoid transmission of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19 , Health Personnel , Humans , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2
5.
J Clin Gastroenterol ; 56(1): e38-e46, 2022 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1605073

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), who were attending the emergency department (ED), before hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID-19 patients diagnosed with UGB in 62 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, case group) during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 outbreak. We formed 2 control groups: COVID-19 patients without UGB (control group A) and non-COVID-19 patients with UGB (control group B). Fifty-three independent variables and 4 outcomes were compared between cases and controls. RESULTS: We identified 83 UGB in 74,814 patients with COVID-19 who were attending EDs (1.11%, 95% CI=0.88-1.38). This incidence was lower compared with non-COVID-19 patients [2474/1,388,879, 1.78%, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.71-1.85; odds ratio (OR)=0.62; 95% CI=0.50-0.77]. Clinical characteristics associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 patients presenting with UGB were abdominal pain, vomiting, hematemesis, dyspnea, expectoration, melena, fever, cough, chest pain, and dysgeusia. Compared with non-COVID-19 patients with UGB, COVID-19 patients with UGB more frequently had fever, cough, expectoration, dyspnea, abdominal pain, diarrhea, interstitial lung infiltrates, and ground-glass lung opacities. They underwent fewer endoscopies in the ED (although diagnoses did not differ between cases and control group B) and less endoscopic treatment. After adjustment for age and sex, cases showed a higher in-hospital all-cause mortality than control group B (OR=2.05, 95% CI=1.09-3.86) but not control group A (OR=1.14, 95% CI=0.59-2.19) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of UGB in COVID-19 patients attending EDs was lower compared with non-COVID-19 patients. Digestive symptoms predominated over respiratory symptoms, and COVID-19 patients with UGB underwent fewer gastroscopies and endoscopic treatments than the general population with UGB. In-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients with UGB was increased compared with non-COVID patients with UGB, but not compared with the remaining COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastroscopy , Humans , Incidence , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Curr Psychol ; 40(12): 6324-6332, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525630

ABSTRACT

The prevalence of COVID-19 disease continues to be a significant psychosocial status among health care workers (HCWs) and the general population worldwide. This cross sectional study aimed to compare the psychosocial status between healthcare workers and general population during the prevalence of COVID-19 disease in southeast Iran. Totally 415 health care workers of a medical service center for COVID-19 patients and 1023 people of general population participated in the study. An online socio-demographic characteristics questionnaire, General Health Questionnaire (GHQ -28), and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) were utilized to evaluate psychosocial status. According to GHQ, the psychological disorders of the HCWs were significantly higher than that of the general population (P < 0.001). According to GAD-7, no significant difference was found between general population and HCWs. Multivariate logistic analysis showed no difference between general population and HCWs in the psychological disorder. Although HCWs suffered from psychological disorders more than general population, nearly one third to half of the participants in both groups had psychosocial disorders.

7.
Evid Based Dent ; 21(3): 84-86, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526067

ABSTRACT

Aim This systematic review sought to assess and scrutinise the validity and practicality of published and preprint reports of prediction models for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with suspected infection, for prognosis of patients with COVID-19, and for identifying individuals in the general population at increased risk of infection with COVID-19 or being hospitalised with the illness.Data sources A systematic, online search was conducted in PubMed and Embase. In order to do so, the authors used Ovid as the host platform for these two databases and also investigated bioRxiv, medRxiv and arXiv as repositories for the preprints of studies. A public living systematic review list of COVID-19-related studies was used as the baseline searching platform (Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine's repository for living evidence on COVID-19).Study selection Studies which developed or validated a multivariable prediction model related to COVID-19 patients' data (individual level data) were included. The authors did not put any restrictions on the models included in their study regarding the model setting, prediction horizon or outcomes.Data extraction and synthesis Checklists of critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies (CHARMS) and prediction model risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST) were used to guide developing of a standardised data extraction form. Each model's predictive performance was extracted by using any summaries of discrimination and calibration. All these steps were done according to the aspects of the transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD) and preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA).Results One hundred and forty-five prediction models (107 studies) were selected for data extraction and critical appraisal. The most common predictors of diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19 were age, body temperature, lymphocyte count and lung imaging characteristics. Influenza-like symptoms and neutrophil count were regularly predictive in diagnostic models, while comorbidities, sex, C-reactive protein and creatinine were common prognostic items. C-indices (a measure of discrimination for models) ranged from 0.73 to 0.81 in prediction models for the general population, from 0.65 to more than 0.99 in diagnostic models, and from 0.68 to 0.99 in the prognostic models. All the included studies were reported to have high risks of bias.Conclusions Overall, this study did not recommend applying any of the predictive models in clinical practice yet. High risk of bias, reporting problems and (probably) optimistic reported performances are all among the reasons for the previous conclusion. Prompt actions regarding accurate data sharing and international collaborations are required to achieve more rigorous prediction models for COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus , Models, Theoretical , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Forecasting , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
8.
BMC Public Health ; 20(1): 1571, 2020 Oct 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511736

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged as a major global public health challenge. This study aimed to investigate on how people perceive the COVID-19 outbreak using the components of the Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) and to find out how this might contribute to possible behavioral responses to the prevention and control of the disease. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in Iran during March and April 2020. Participants were recruited via online applications using a number of platforms such as Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram asking people to take part in the study. To collect data an electronic self-designed questionnaire based on the EPPM was used in order to measure the risk perception (efficacy, defensive responses, perceived treat) related to the COVID-19. Descriptive statistics, chi-square, t-test and analysis of variance (ANOVA), were used to explore the data. RESULTS: A total of 3727 individuals with a mean age (SD) of 37.0 (11.1) years participated in the study. The results revealed significant differences in efficacy, defensive responses and perceived treat among different population groups particularly among those aged 60 and over. Women had significantly higher scores than men on some aspects such as self-efficacy, reactance, and avoidance but men had higher perceived susceptibility scores compared to women. Overall 56.4% of participants were engaged in danger control (preventive behavior) while the remaining 43.6% were engaged in fear control (non-preventive behavior) process. CONCLUSION: More than half of all participants motivated by danger control. This indicated that more than half of participants had high perceived efficacy (i.e., self-efficacy and response efficacy). Self-efficacy scores were significantly higher among participants who were older, female, single, lived in rural areas, and had good economic status. The results suggest that socioeconomic and demographic factors are the main determinants of the COVID-19 risk perception. Indeed, targeted interventions are essential for controlling the pandemic.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Models, Psychological , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Risk Assessment , Adult , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Iran , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
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.
Rev Rhum Ed Fr ; 88(5): 377-381, 2021 Oct.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1447100

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIF: Cette étude a pour objectif de déterminer la prévalence du coronavirus 2 du syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère (SARS-CoV-2) 2019 (COVID-19) chez des patients adultes traités par biothérapies ou inhibiteurs des JAK pour des rhumatismes inflammatoires chroniques, en particulier des arthrites inflammatoires chroniques. MÉTHODES: Pour cela, une étude basée sur la population, dans la province d'Udine (466 700 habitants d'âge > 15 ans, région du Frioul-Vénétie-Julienne, Italie) a été planifiée. Le critère principal de jugement était la prévalence du COVID-19 durant les deux premiers mois de l'épidémie. Tous les patients de notre province atteints de maladies rhumatismales et traités par biothérapies ou inhibiteurs des JAK au cours des 6 mois précédents ont été inclus (n = 1051). RÉSULTATS: Du 29 février au 25 avril 2020, 4 patients adultes (4/1051, 3,8/1000, IC 95 % 1,5-9,7/1000) ont été testés positifs au COVID-19 par RT-PCR et écouvillon. Au total, 47/1051 patients (4,5 %) ont été soumis au test COVID-19 par RT-PCR durant la même période, en raison de symptômes compatibles avec le COVID-19 pour 15 d'entre eux. Dans la population générale, la prévalence était de 937 cas/466700 (2/1000, IC 95 % 1,9-2,1/1000, valeur p = 0,33, test du Chi2), et 20 179/466 700 (4,3 %) prélèvements COVID-19 sur écouvillon ont été effectués. CONCLUSION: Le risque de COVID-19 chez les patients atteints de maladies rhumatismales et traités par biothérapies ou inhibiteurs des JAK n'apparaît pas différent de celui observé dans la population générale. Les patients doivent être encouragés à poursuivre en toute sécurité leur traitement et à respecter les mesures de prévention et de protection contre le COVID-19.

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.
Mult Scler ; : 1352458520978354, 2021 Feb 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1394352

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Little information is available regarding the incidence and clinical outcome of the SARS-CoV2 infection in patients with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence, clinical outcome, and impact of COVID-19 on pwMS. METHODS: This observational study was prospectively performed on a cohort of pwMS (N = 11,560) followed up by 47 out of 51 Brazilian MS referral centers that registered pwMS with COVID-19 at the REDONE platform from 13 March to 4 June 2020. RESULTS: The incidence of COVID-19 for pwMS patients was 27.7/10,000 patients and for the general population was 29.2/10,000 inhabitants. A total of 94 (77 women) pwMS patients, aged 40 ± 10.25 years, presenting 9.9 ± 8.6 years of MS disease duration, developed the COVID-19, most of them (87%) exhibited the mild form of the disease. Eighty (96%) patients maintained the use of MS disease-modifying treatment (DMT) during COVID-19 pandemic and 14 patients were not in use of DMTs. CONCLUSION: Incidence of COVID-19 in Brazilian pwMS was not different from those observed for the general Brazilian population. Most pwMS exhibited mild COVID-19, despite the maintenance of the underlying MS treatment.

13.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(35): 1221-1226, 2020 Sep 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1389852

ABSTRACT

Health care personnel (HCP) caring for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) might be at high risk for contracting SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Understanding the prevalence of and factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among frontline HCP who care for COVID-19 patients are important for protecting both HCP and their patients. During April 3-June 19, 2020, serum specimens were collected from a convenience sample of frontline HCP who worked with COVID-19 patients at 13 geographically diverse academic medical centers in the United States, and specimens were tested for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Participants were asked about potential symptoms of COVID-19 experienced since February 1, 2020, previous testing for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, and their use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in the past week. Among 3,248 participants, 194 (6.0%) had positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Seroprevalence by hospital ranged from 0.8% to 31.2% (median = 3.6%). Among the 194 seropositive participants, 56 (29%) reported no symptoms since February 1, 2020, 86 (44%) did not believe that they previously had COVID-19, and 133 (69%) did not report a previous COVID-19 diagnosis. Seroprevalence was lower among personnel who reported always wearing a face covering (defined in this study as a surgical mask, N95 respirator, or powered air purifying respirator [PAPR]) while caring for patients (5.6%), compared with that among those who did not (9.0%) (p = 0.012). Consistent with persons in the general population with SARS-CoV-2 infection, many frontline HCP with SARS-CoV-2 infection might be asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic during infection, and infection might be unrecognized. Enhanced screening, including frequent testing of frontline HCP, and universal use of face coverings in hospitals are two strategies that could reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , Betacoronavirus/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Personnel, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Academic Medical Centers , Adult , Asymptomatic Diseases , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Professional-to-Patient/prevention & control , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic Studies , United States/epidemiology
14.
Eur J Intern Med ; 91: 53-58, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1375935

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The elderly multi-morbid patient is at high risk of adverse outcomes with COVID-19 complications, and in the general population, the development of incident AF is associated with worse outcomes in such patients. There is therefore the need to identify those patients with COVID-19 who are at highest risk of developing incident AF. We therefore investigated incident AF risks in a large prospective population of elderly patients with/without incident COVID-19 cases and baseline cardiovascular/non-cardiovascular multi-morbidities. We used two approaches: main effect modeling and secondly, a machine-learning (ML) approach, accounting for the complex dynamic relationships among comorbidity variables. METHODS: We studied a prospective elderly US cohort of 280,592 patients from medical databases in an 8-month investigation of with/without newly incident COVID19 cases. Incident AF outcomes were examined in relationship to diverse multi-morbid conditions, COVID-19 status and demographic variables, with ML accounting for the dynamic nature of changing multimorbidity risk factors. RESULTS: Multi-morbidity contributed to the onset of confirmed COVID-19 cases with cognitive impairment (OR 1.69; 95%CI 1.52-1.88), anemia (OR 1.41; 95%CI 1.32-1.50), diabetes mellitus (OR 1.35; 95%CI 1.27-1.44) and vascular disease (OR 1.30; 95%CI 1.21-1.39) having the highest associations. A main effect model (C-index value 0.718) showed that COVID-19 had the highest association with incident AF cases (OR 3.12; 95%CI 2.61-3.710, followed by congestive heart failure (1.72; 95%CI 1.50-1.96), then coronary artery disease (OR 1.43; 95%CI 1.27-1.60) and valvular disease (1.42; 95%CI 1.26-1.60). The ML algorithm demonstrated improved discriminatory validity incrementally over the statistical main effect model (training: C-index 0.729, 95%CI 0.718-0.740; validation: C-index 0.704, 95%CI 0.687-0.72). Calibration of the ML based formulation was satisfactory and better than the main-effect model. Decision curve analysis demonstrated that the clinical utility for the ML based formulation was better than the 'treat all' strategy and the main effect model. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 status has major implications for incident AF in a cohort with diverse cardiovascular/non-cardiovascular multi-morbidities. Our ML approach accounting for dynamic multimorbidity changes had good prediction for new onset AF amongst incident COVID19 cases.


Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , COVID-19 , Aged , Algorithms , Atrial Fibrillation/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Machine Learning , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
15.
J Clin Med ; 10(9)2021 Apr 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1369769

ABSTRACT

At the moment of writing this communication, the health crisis derived from the COVID-19 pandemic has affected more than 120 million cases, with 40 million corresponding to Europe. In total, the number of deaths is almost 3 million, but continuously rising. Although COVID-19 is primarily a respiratory disease, SARS-CoV-2 infects also endothelial cells in the pulmonary capillaries. This affects the integrity of the endothelium and increases vascular permeability. In addition, there are serious indirect consequences, like disruption of endothelial cells' junctions leading to micro-bleeds and uncontrolled blood clotting. The impact of COVID-19 in people with rare chronic cardiovascular diseases is unknown so far, and interesting to assess, because the virus may cause additional complications in these patients. The aim of the present work was to study the COVID-19 infection among the patients with Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia (HHT). A retrospective study was carried out in a 138 HHT patients' sample attending an Ear Nose and Throat (ENT) reference consult. The evaluation of the COVID-19 infection in them reveals milder symptoms; among the 25 HHT patients who were infected, only 3 cases were hospitalized, and none of them required ICU or ventilation assistance. The results are discussed in the light of macrophage immune response.

16.
Int J Infect Dis ; 108: 145-155, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1351697

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Earlier serosurveys in India revealed seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) of 0.73% in May-June 2020 and 7.1% in August-September 2020. A third serosurvey was conducted between December 2020 and January 2021 to estimate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among the general population and healthcare workers (HCWs) in India. METHODS: The third serosurvey was conducted in the same 70 districts as the first and second serosurveys. For each district, at least 400 individuals aged ≥10 years from the general population and 100 HCWs from subdistrict-level health facilities were enrolled. Serum samples from the general population were tested for the presence of immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies against the nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S1-RBD) proteins of SARS-CoV-2, whereas serum samples from HCWs were tested for anti-S1-RBD. Weighted seroprevalence adjusted for assay characteristics was estimated. RESULTS: Of the 28,598 serum samples from the general population, 4585 (16%) had IgG antibodies against the N protein, 6647 (23.2%) had IgG antibodies against the S1-RBD protein, and 7436 (26%) had IgG antibodies against either the N protein or the S1-RBD protein. Weighted and assay-characteristic-adjusted seroprevalence against either of the antibodies was 24.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 23.0-25.3%]. Among 7385 HCWs, the seroprevalence of anti-S1-RBD IgG antibodies was 25.6% (95% CI 23.5-27.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one in four individuals aged ≥10 years from the general population as well as HCWs in India had been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 by December 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Health Personnel , Humans , Seroepidemiologic Studies
18.
J Nerv Ment Dis ; 209(7): 491-496, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1334305

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: The COVID-19 epidemic has both physical and psychosocial consequences for the general population. The present study aimed to investigate the relationship between the prevalence of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and social dysfunction during the COVID-19 epidemic in Iran. This cross-sectional web-based study was conducted on 1000 Rafsanjani citizens in southeastern Iran. Data were collected by using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 and the General Health Questionnaire from March 15 to March 30, 2020. The prevalence of GAD was 27.8%. The mean score of social functioning was 9.71 ± 2.66, and all participants had social dysfunction. Multivariate logistic regression test showed a significant correlation between anxiety and social functioning (confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.30; p < 0.001), sex (CI, 1.49-3.04; p < 0.001), and concern about COVID-19 (CI, 1.38-2.73; p < 0.001). The COVID-19 epidemic had negative psychosocial consequences in the general population in Iran.


Subject(s)
Anomie , Anxiety Disorders/etiology , COVID-19/complications , Adolescent , Adult , Anxiety Disorders/ethnology , COVID-19/psychology , Female , Humans , Iran/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Health Questionnaire , Prevalence , Risk Factors , Young Adult
19.
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
20.
J Clin Invest ; 131(14)2021 07 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1311204

ABSTRACT

Autoantibodies against IFN-α and IFN-ω (type I IFNs) were recently reported as causative for severe COVID-19 in the general population. Autoantibodies against IFN-α and IFN-ω are present in almost all patients with autoimmune polyendocrine syndrome type 1 (APS-1) caused by biallelic deleterious or heterozygous dominant mutations in AIRE. We therefore hypothesized that autoantibodies against type I IFNs also predispose patients with APS-1 to severe COVID-19. We prospectively studied 6 patients with APS-1 between April 1, 2020 and April 1, 2021. Biobanked pre-COVID-19 sera of APS-1 subjects were tested for neutralizing autoantibodies against IFN-α and IFN-ω. The ability of the patients' sera to block recombinant human IFN-α and IFN-ω was assessed by assays quantifying phosphorylation of signal transducer and activator of transcription 1 (STAT1) as well as infection-based IFN-neutralization assays. We describe 4 patients with APS-1 and preexisting high titers of neutralizing autoantibodies against IFN-α and IFN-ω who contracted SARS-CoV-2, yet developed only mild symptoms of COVID-19. None of the patients developed dyspnea, oxygen requirement, or high temperature. All infected patients with APS-1 were females and younger than 26 years of age. Clinical penetrance of neutralizing autoantibodies against type I IFNs for severe COVID-19 is not complete.


Subject(s)
Autoantibodies/immunology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/immunology , Interferon Type I/antagonists & inhibitors , Interferon Type I/immunology , Polyendocrinopathies, Autoimmune/complications , Polyendocrinopathies, Autoimmune/immunology , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , Adult , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Autoantibodies/blood , Female , Humans , In Vitro Techniques , Interferon-alpha/antagonists & inhibitors , Interferon-alpha/immunology , Male , Polyendocrinopathies, Autoimmune/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Severity of Illness Index , Transcription Factors/genetics , Virus Replication/immunology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL