Impelling Factors for Contracting COVID-19 Among Surgical Professionals During the Pandemic: A Multinational Cohort Study.

Background: Medical workers, including surgical professionals working in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treating hospitals, were under enormous stress during the pandemic. This global study investigated factors endowing COVID-19 amongst surgical professionals and students. Methods: This global cross-sectional survey was made live on February 18, 2021 and closed for analysis on March 13, 2021. It was freely shared on social and scientific media platforms and was sent via email groups and circulated through a personal network of authors. Chi-square test for independence, and binary logistic regression analysis were carried out on determining predictors of surgical professionals contracting COVID-19. Results: This survey captured the response of 520 surgical professionals from 66 countries. Of the professionals, 92.5% (481/520) reported practising in hospitals managing COVID-19 patients. More than one-fourth (25.6%) of the respondents (133/520) reported suffering from COVID-19 which was more frequent in surgical professionals practising in public sector healthcare institutions (P = 0.001). Thirty-seven percent of those who reported never contracting COVID-19 (139/376) reported being still asked to practice self-isolation and wear a shield without the diagnosis (P = 0.001). Of those who did not contract COVID-19, 75.7% (283/376) were vaccinated (P < 0.001). Surgical professionals undergoing practice in the private sector (odds ratio (OR): 0.33; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.14 - 0.77; P = 0.011) and receiving two doses of vaccine (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.32 - 0.95; P = 0.031) were identified to enjoy decreased odds of contracting COVID-19. Only 6.9% of those who reported not contracting COVID-19 (26/376) were calculated to have the highest "overall composite level of harm" score (P < 0.001). Conclusions: High prevalence of respondents got COVID-19, which was more frequent in participants working in public sector hospitals. Those who reported contracting COVID-19 were calculated to have the highest level of harm score. Self-isolation or shield, getting two doses of vaccines decreases the odds of contracting COVID-19.

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.

Impelling Factors for Contracting COVID-19 Among Surgical Professionals During the Pandemic: a Multinational Cohort Study

Background Medical workers, including surgical professionals working in COVID-19 treating hospitals, were under enormous stress during the pandemic. This global study investigated factors endowing COVID amongst surgical professionals and students. Methods This global cross-sectional survey was made live on the 18th of February, 2021, and closed for analysis on the 13th of March, 2021. It was freely shared on social and scientific media platforms. It was also sent via email groups and circulated through a personal network of authors. Chi-square test for independence, binary logistic regression analysis was carried on determining predictors of surgical professionals contracting COVID-19. Results This survey captured the response of 520 respondents from 66 countries. 92.29% (503/545) were working in a hospital receiving patients with COVID-19. More than one-fourth (25.5%) caught COVID-19, which was more frequent in participants working in public sector hospitals (P=0.001). 75.7% of those who did not contract Covid (283/376) were vaccinated (P<0.001). Surgical professionals undergoing practice in the private sector (OR: 0.33;95% CI: 0.14–0.77;p=0.011) and getting two doses of vaccines (OR: 0.55;95% CI: 0.32–0.95;p=0.031) had decreased odds of contracting COVID-19. Only 6.9% of those who reported not contracting COVID-19 (26/376) were calculated to have the highest Level of Harm score (LH4) (P<0.001). Conclusions High prevalence of respondents caught COVID-19, which was more frequent in participants working in public sector hospitals. Self-isolation or shield, getting two doses of vaccines decreases the odds of contracting COVID-19. Those who reported contracting COVID-19 were calculated to have the highest Level of Harm score.

The global level of harm among surgical professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multinational cross-sectional cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Health care workers, including surgical professionals, experienced psychological burnout and physical harm during the coronavirus 2019 pandemic. This global survey investigated the coronavirus 2019 pandemic impact on psychological and physical health. METHODS: We conducted a global cross-sectional survey between February 18, 2021 and March 13, 2021. The primary outcome was to assess the psychological burnout, fulfillment, and self-reported physical level of harm. A validated Stanford Professional Fulfilment Index score with a self-reported physical level of harm was employed. We used a practical overall composite level of harm score to calculate the level of harm gradient 1-4, combining psychological burnout with self-reported physical level of harm score. RESULTS: A total of 545 participants from 66 countries participated. The final analysis included 520 (95.4%) surgical professionals barring medical students. Most of the participants (81.3%) were professionally unfulfilled. The psychological burnout was evident in 57.7% and was significantly common in those <50 years (P = .002) and those working in the public sector (P = .005). Approximately 41.7% of respondents showed changes in the physical health with self-remedy and no impact on work, whereas 14.9% reported changes to their physical health with <2 weeks off work, and 10.1% reported changes in physical health requiring >2 weeks off work. Severe harm (level of harm 4) was detected in 10.6%, whereas moderate harm (level of harm 3) affected 40.2% of the participants. Low and no harm (level of harm 2 and level of harm 1) represented 27.5% and 21.7%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that high levels of psychological burnout, professional unfulfillment, work exhaustion, and severe level of harm was more frequent in younger professionals working in the public sector. The findings correlated with a high level of harm in surgical professionals impacting surgical services.

COVID-19 recommender system based on an annotated multilingual corpus.

Tracking the most recent advances in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related research is essential, given the disease's novelty and its impact on society. However, with the publication pace speeding up, researchers and clinicians require automatic approaches to keep up with the incoming information regarding this disease. A solution to this problem requires the development of text mining pipelines; the efficiency of which strongly depends on the availability of curated corpora. However, there is a lack of COVID-19-related corpora, even more, if considering other languages besides English. This project's main contribution was the annotation of a multilingual parallel corpus and the generation of a recommendation dataset (EN-PT and EN-ES) regarding relevant entities, their relations, and recommendation, providing this resource to the community to improve the text mining research on COVID-19-related literature. This work was developed during the 7th Biomedical Linked Annotation Hackathon (BLAH7).