Clinical efficacy of Azithromycin for COVID-19 management: A systematic meta-analysis of meta-analyses

Background Azithromycin has been adopted as a component of the COVID-19 management protocol throughout the global healthcare settings but with a questionable if not downright unsubstantiated evidence base. Objectives In order to amalgamate and critically appraise the conflicting evidence around the clinical efficacy of Azithromycin (AZO) vis a vis COVID-19 management outcomes, a meta-analysis of meta-analyses was carried out to establish an evidence-based holistic status of AZO vis a vis its efficacy as a component-in-use of the COVID-19 management protocol. Methods A comprehensive systematic search was carried out through PubMed/Medline, Cochrane and Epistemonikos with a subsequent appraisal of abstracts and full-texts, as required. The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) checklist and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) methodology were adopted to assess the methodological quality of the included meta-analyses. Random-effects models were developed to calculate summarized pool Odds Ratios (with 95% confidence interval) for the afore determined primary and secondary outcomes. Results AZO, when compared with best available therapy (BAT) including or excluding Hydroxychloroquine, exhibited statistically insignificant reduction in mortality [(n= 27,204 patients) OR= 0.77 (95% CI: 0.51-1.16) (I2= 97%)], requirement of mechanical ventilation [(n= 14,908 patients) OR= 1.4 (95% CI: 0.58-3.35) (I2= 98%)], induction of arrhythmia [(n= 9,723 patients) OR= 1.21 (95% CI: 0.63-2.32) (I2= 92%)] and QTc prolongation (a surrogate for torsadogenic effect) [(n= 6,534 patients) OR= 0.62 (95% CI: 0.23-1.73) (I2= 96%)]. Conclusion The meta-analysis of meta-analyses portrays AZO as a pharmacological agent that does not appear to have a comparatively superior clinical efficacy than BAT when it comes to COVID-19 management. Secondary to a very real threat of anti-bacterial resistance, it is suggested that AZO be discontinued and removed from COVID-19 management protocols.

Clinical efficacy of Azithromycin for COVID-19 management: A systematic meta-analysis of meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Azithromycin has been adopted as a component of the COVID-19 management protocol throughout the global healthcare settings but with a questionable if not downright unsubstantiated evidence base. OBJECTIVES: In order to amalgamate and critically appraise the conflicting evidence around the clinical efficacy of Azithromycin (AZO) vis a vis COVID-19 management outcomes, a meta-analysis of meta-analyses was carried out to establish an evidence-based holistic status of AZO vis a vis its efficacy as a component-in-use of the COVID-19 management protocol. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic search was carried out through PubMed/Medline, Cochrane and Epistemonikos with a subsequent appraisal of abstracts and full-texts, as required. The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) checklist and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) methodology were adopted to assess the methodological quality of the included meta-analyses. Random-effects models were developed to calculate summarized pool Odds Ratios (with 95% confidence interval) for the afore determined primary and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: AZO, when compared with best available therapy (BAT) including or excluding Hydroxychloroquine, exhibited statistically insignificant reduction in mortality [(n= 27,204 patients) OR= 0.77 (95% CI: 0.51-1.16) (I2= 97%)], requirement of mechanical ventilation [(n= 14,908 patients) OR= 1.4 (95% CI: 0.58-3.35) (I2= 98%)], induction of arrhythmia [(n= 9,723 patients) OR= 1.21 (95% CI: 0.63-2.32) (I2= 92%)] and QTc prolongation (a surrogate for torsadogenic effect) [(n= 6,534 patients) OR= 0.62 (95% CI: 0.23-1.73) (I2= 96%)]. CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis of meta-analyses portrays AZO as a pharmacological agent that does not appear to have a comparatively superior clinical efficacy than BAT when it comes to COVID-19 management. Secondary to a very real threat of anti-bacterial resistance, it is suggested that AZO be discontinued and removed from COVID-19 management protocols.

Exploring medical students' perceptions of the challenges and benefits of volunteering in the intensive care unit during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: In March 2020, the WHO declared SARS-CoV-2 a pandemic. Hospitals across the world faced staff, bed and supply shortages, with some European hospitals calling on medical students to fill the staffing gaps. This study aimed to document the impact of volunteering during the COVID-19 pandemic on students' professional development, resilience and future perceived career choices. DESIGN: This is a retrospective, qualitative study of student reflections, using purposive sampling.The Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) University of Medicine and Health Sciences recruited 26 medical student volunteers to assist in pronation and supination of ventilated patients affected by SARS-CoV-2. These students were invited to complete an anonymous survey based on their experiences as volunteers. Thematic analysis was performed on these written reflections. RESULTS: The results showed that volunteering during the COVID-19 pandemic developed key skills from RCSI's medical curriculum, significantly fostered medical students' resilience and guided their career choices. Major areas of development included communication, teamwork, compassion and altruism, which are not easily developed through the formal curriculum. A further area that was highlighted was the importance of evidence-based health in a pandemic. Finally, our respondents were early stage medical students with limited clinical exposure. Some found the experience difficult to cope with and therefore supports should be established for students volunteering in such a crisis. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that clinical exposure is an important driver in developing students' resilience and that volunteering during a pandemic has multiple benefits to students' professional development and professional identity formation.