The Vitamin D Serum Levels in Pregnant Women Affected by COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Vitamin D can modulate immune responses, and its deficiency is linked to increased autoimmunity and susceptibility to infection. In the general population, it has been observed that serum vitamin D levels are connected with the risk of COVID-19 and its severity. Our study aims to examine reported findings on the effect of vitamin D serum levels on infection of COVID-19 during pregnancy. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies. Serum vitamin D serum levels in COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative pregnant women were 24.61 ± 20.86 ng/mL and 24.12 ± 17.33 ng/mL, respectively. In mild vs. moderate to critical COVID-19 pregnant women, vitamin D serum levels were 16.71 ± 9.04 ng/mL vs. 10.7 ± 9.37 ng/mL and severe vs. non-severe were 13.21 ± 11.47 ng/mL vs. 15.76 ± 10.0 ng/mL. Only one study reported vitamin D serum levels in the placenta of COVID-19-positive pregnant women compared with the control and results varied and amounted to 14.06 ± 0.51 ng/mL vs. 12.45 ± 0.58 ng/mL, respectively. Vitamin D deficiency tends to be common in pregnant women who have COVID-19, and the level of this vitamin has been demonstrated to have a strong correlation with the severity of the illness. As vitamin D serum levels correlate with COVID-19 symptoms and even with its occurrence, appropriate vitamin D supplementation in the prenatal period is suggested.

Diagnostic performance of point-of-use ultrasound of resuscitation outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 3265 patients.

BACKGROUND: Echocardiography in the setting of resuscitation can provide information as to the cause of the cardiac arrest, as well as indicators of futility. This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to determine the value of point-of-care ultrasonography (PoCUS) in the assessment of survival for adult patients with cardiac arrest. METHODS: This meta-analysis was performed in adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane have been searched from databases inception until March 2nd 2021. The search was limited to adult patients with cardiac arrest and without publication dates or country restrictions. Papers were chosen if they met the required criteria relating to the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of this diagnostic technique concerning resuscitation outcomes. RESULTS: This systematic review identified 20 studies. Overall, for survival to hospital discharge, PoCUS was 6.2% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.7% to 8.0%) and 2.1% specific (95% CI 0.8-4.2%). PoCUS sensitivity and specificity for return of spontaneous circulation were 23.8% (95% CI 21.4-26.4%) and 50.7% (95% CI 45.8-55.7%) respectively, and for survival to admission 13.8% (95% CI 12.2-15.5%) and 20.1% (95% CI 16.2-24.3%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results do not allow unambiguous recommendation of PoCUS as a predictor of resuscitation outcomes and further studies based on a large number of patients with full standardization of operators, their training and procedures performed were necessary.

Efficiency rating of SG Diagnostics COVID-19 antigen rapid test kit.

Aim: Rapid detection is crucial in complementing vaccination to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Materials & methods: Nasopharyngeal swabs (n = 213) and oropharyngeal swabs (n = 98) were tested. with the antigen rapid test kit. Results: Overall sensitivity (97.96%), specificity (100.00%) and coincidence rate (98.71%) were high, which translated into a positive predictive value of 100.00% and a negative predictive value of 96.64%. Conclusion: Antigen rapid tests have a great potential for screening in different settings to deliver results with high sensitivity and specificity.

This study evaluated SG Diagnostics COVID-19 antigen rapid test kit. The overall sensitivity, specificity and coincidence rate were found very high with SG Diagnostics COVID-19 antigen rapid test kit performing better.

Prediction value of soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) in COVID-19 patients - a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: In COVID-19, the rapid prediction of the severity of a patient's condition using modern biomarkers can accelerate the implementation of appropriate therapy, and thus improve the patient's prognosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A meta-analysis was conducted of data available in the literature on the differences in baseline suPAR blood concentration between patients (1) who tested positive and negative for COVID-19, (2) who had severe and non-severe COVID-19, and (3) COVID-19 survivors and non-survivors. RESULTS: SuPAR levels in SARS-CoV-2 negative and positive patients varied and amounted to 3.61±1.59 ng/ml vs. 6.45±3.13 ng/ml, respectively (MD = -3.18; 95%CI: -4.71 to -1.66; p<0.001). suPAR levels among non-severe and severe COVID-19 patients were 7.06±2.64 ng/ml and 5.06±3.16 ng/ml (MD = 0.18; 95%CI: -2.48 to 2.83; p=0.90), respectively. Pooled analysis showed that suPAR levels between severe versus critical COVID-19 patients to be 5.59±1.54 ng/ml and 6.49±1.43 ng/ml, respectively (MD = -1.00; 95%CI: -1.31 to -0.70; p<0.001). The suPAR levels between ICU survivors versus non-survivors amounted to 5.82±2.33 ng/ml and 8.43±4.66 ng/ml (MD = -3.59; 95%CI: -6.19 to -1.00; p=0.007). In the case of in-hospital mortality, the mean suPAR level among survivors to hospital discharge was 5.63±1.27 ng/ml, compared to 7.85±2.61 ng/ml for patients who did not survive (MD = -3.58; 95%CI: -5.42 to -1.74; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: SuPAR levels are significantly elevated in severe COVID-19 illness and maybe useful in predicting mortality. Further studies are needed to determine cut-off points and clarify the association of suPAR levels with disease progression. This is of utmost importance given the ongoing pandemic and overburdened health care systems.

The sFlt-1/PlGF Ratio in Pregnant Patients Affected by COVID-19.

COVID-19 in pregnant women increases the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, including preeclampsia. This meta-analysis aimed to examine the effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection on sFlt-1/PIGF ratio during pregnancy. The study was designed as a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies reporting the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio in pregnant women with COVID-19. Results were compared using meta-analysis by the Mantel-Haenszel method. A total of 7 studies were included in the analysis. sFlt-1/PlGF ratios between COVID-19 positive vs. negative women were 45.8 ± 50.3 vs. 37.4 ± 22.5, respectively (SMD = 1.76; 95% CI: 0.43 to 3.09; p = 0.01). sFlt-1/PlGF ratios between asymptomatic vs. symptomatic patients were 49.3 ± 35.7 vs. 37.1 ± 25.6 (SMD = 0.30; 95% CI: -0.35 to 0.95; p = 0.36). sFlt-1/PlGF ratio in non-severe group was 30.7 ± 56.5, compared to 64.7 ± 53.5 for severe patients (SMD = -1.88; 95% CI: -3.77 to 0.01; p = 0.05). sFlt-1/PlGF ratios in COVID-19 patients, with and without hypertensive disease of pregnancy, were 187.0 ± 121.8 vs. 21.6 ± 8.6, respectively (SMD = 2.46; 95% CI: 0.99 to 3.93; p = 0.001). Conclusions: Patients with COVID-19, as compared to patients without COVID-19, were characterized by higher sFlt-1/PlGF ratio. Moreover, severe COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 infection in hypertensive pregnant women was related to significantly higher sFlt-1/PlGF ratio.

The effect of zinc supplementation on the course of COVID-19 - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Zinc is a trace element that plays a role in stimulating innate and acquired immunity. The aim of the study was to determine the antiviral effect of the administration of zinc in COVID-19 patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature search was performed in P Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases from 1 January 2020 - 22 August 2022. In addition, reference lists of the included articles and their related citations in PubMed were also reviewed for additional pertinent studies. RESULTS: A total of 9 eligible studies were identified. In-hospital mortality in zinc supplementation patients, and patients treated without zinc, varied and amounted to 21.6% vs. 23.04% difference (OR=0.71; 95%CI: 0.62-0.81; p<0.001). 28-day to 30-day mortality in patients treated with zinc was 7.7%, compared to 11.9% for patients treated without zinc (OR=0.61; 95%CI: 0.35-1.06; p=0.08). In-hospital adverse events among patients treated with and without COVID-19 did not show any statistically significant differences in relation to acute kidney injury occurrence (12.8% vs. 12.4%, respectively; OR=0.63; 95%CI: 0.19-2.12; p=0.45, as well as need for mechanical ventilation (13.2% vs. 14.1%; OR=0.83; 95%CI: 0.52-1.32; p=0.43). CONCLUSIONS: Zinc supplementation is associated with lower COVID-19 in-hospital mortality. Additionally, it is risk-free in COVID-19 patients since there have been no negative side effects, such as acute renal damage or the requirement for mechanical ventilation compared to patients without COVID-19. Due to scientific evidence and the role it represents in the human body, zinc supplementation should be taken into consideration for COVID-19 patients as an adjunct therapy.

Impact of isolation on the biopsychosocial functioning of older people with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is a highly contagious coronavirus disease that has had a significant impact on the functioning of society. On 11 March 2020, due to the rapid spread of the virus, the WHO declared a global pandemic. By the end of 2021, 5 variants of SARS-CoV-2 had been identified since the beginning of the pandemic. The course of the disease varied depending on the age of the patients and the presence of possible comorbidities. Most patients were asymptomatic or sparsely symptomatic of the infection; however, in about 6% of cases, the course of the disease was critical. Typical symptoms of COVID-19 include: fever, muscle pain and headache, lack of smell and taste, cough, dyspnea, diarrhoea and nausea. According to epidemic guidelines, infected patients were subjected to isolation, which harmed their mental state, especially the elderly. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess the impact of isolation on the biopsychosocial functioning of elderly patients with COVID-19. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was conducted among 360 elderly patients in hospital wards operating as a unit in a hospital complex dedicated to patients infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Data were collected using standardized questionnaires: ADL Scale, IADL, GDS, SF-36 Quality of Life Scale, Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, and supplementary questions about, among others, the oxygen therapy provided, length of stay in the unit, and the support received from relatives. RESULTS: Almost half (48%) of the subjects received oxygen therapy, and 36% had a length of disease of 7-14 days. A correlation was observed between the quality of life and the above-mentioned factors. Correlations of quality of life indicators with the length of illness were moderate (except for the level of pain) and positive, meaning that the longer the patients were ill, the lower their quality of life. Correlations of disease severity were moderate for pain, vitality, and emotional limitations, while vital for physical functioning and limitations and general and mental health. The intensity of oxygen therapy was moderately correlated with physical and emotional limitations and general health and strongly correlated with physical functioning, vitality and mental health. Correlations between functional status and mental status of elderly patients were also studied. Analysis of variance showed that the constructed model was an excellent fit to the data, F = 37.14; p < 0.001, explaining 42% of the variance in the dependent variable (R2= 0.42). As many as 80% of the respondents felt that isolation harmed their well-being. Examining the impact of quality of life on their well-being showed that most of the associations tested were statistically significant, and all were positive. Associations of moderate strength were shown for physical functioning, physical limitations and general health, while strong associations were shown for vitality, emotional limitations and mental health. Pain complaints were associated with changes in well-being at the level of statistical trend (p = 0.055). This means that the lower the patients' quality of life, especially in terms of vitality and mental health, the more significant the impact of isolation on their well-being. The study also investigated the effect of social support on mental state. The model proved to be an excellent fit to the data, F = 5.91, p = 0.002, and explained 23% of the variance in the dependent variable (Adjusted R² = 0.23). At the same time, support from friends turned out to be the only significant predictor (Beta = 0.53), and this means that the more support the subjects received from them, the lower the level of depression they manifested. CONCLUSIONS: 1) The better the functional state of a senior and the support received from relatives, the lower the severity of depression. 2) The lower the quality of a senior's life, especially in terms of mental state, the greater the negative impact on his/her well-being in isolation. 3) The low quality of life of a senior increased the likelihood of depression. 4) The quality of life of older Covid-19 patients was higher in those without chronic disease. 5) The quality-of-life level was lower in patients with a more severe course of COVID-19, and longer duration of disease and oxygen therapy.

COVID-19-induced coagulopathy: Experience, achievements, prospects.

The presence of coagulopathy as part of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome is a characteristic feature of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hematological changes (increased D-dimer [DD], prolonged activated partial thromboplastin clotting time [APTT] and prothrombin time [PT], high fibrinogen levels) have been observed in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, which characterize the risk of thrombotic events. Against the background of COVID-19 there is endothelial dysfunction, hypoxia and pulmonary congestion, mediated by thrombosis and microvascular occlusion. Up to 71.4% of patients who died from COVID-19 had disseminated intravascular coagulation syndrome, compared with only 0.6% of survivors. The main manifestation of COVID-19-associated coagulopathy is a significant increase in DD without a decrease in platelet count or prolongation of APTT and PT, indicating increased thrombin formation and the development of local fibrinolysis. An increase in DD levels of more than 3-4 times was associated with higher in-hospital mortality. Therefore, COVID-19 requires assessment of the severity of the disease for further tactics of thromboprophylaxis. The need for continued thromboprophylaxis, or therapeutic anticoagulation, in patients after inpatient treatment for two weeks using imaging techniques to assess of thrombosis assessment.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Pediatric Cardiac Arrest Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused a global pandemic, required the donning of personal protective equipment during clinical contact, and continues to be a significant worldwide public health concern. Pediatric cardiac arrest is a rare but critical condition with a high mortality rate, the outcomes of which may be negatively affected by donning personal protective equipment. The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pediatric cardiac arrest outcomes. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis in the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from their inception to 1 October 2022. We included studies published in English on pediatric patients with cardiac arrest, dichotomized by the pre- and during-COVID-19 periods and then stratified by COVID-19 positive or negative status, to evaluate clinical outcomes associated with cardiac arrest. Six studies were included in the meta-analysis. In witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients, there were no differences between the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods for witnessed cardiac arrest (28.5% vs. 28.7%; odds ratio (OR) = 0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.87 to 1.14; p = 0.93), administration of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (61.5 vs. 63.6%; OR = 1.11; 95%CI: 0.98 to 1.26; p = 0.11), bystander automated external defibrillator use (both 2.8%; OR = 1.00; 95%CI: 0.69 to 1.45; p = 0.99), return of spontaneous circulation(8.4 vs. 8.9%; OR = 0.93; 95%CI: 0.47 to 1.88; p = 0.85), survival to hospital admission (9.0 vs. 10.2%, OR = 0.81; 95%CI: 0.45 to 1.44; p = 0.47), or survival to hospital discharge (13.4 vs. 12.4%; OR = 0.62; 95%CI: 0.22 to 1.72; p = 0.35). COVID-19 did not change pediatric cardiac arrest bystander interventions or outcomes.

Systematic review with meta-analysis of mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proadm) as a prognostic marker in Covid-19-hospitalized patients.

BACKGROUND: Mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proADM) is useful for risk stratification in patients with sepsis and respiratory infections. The study's purpose was to assess the available data and determine the association between MR-proADM levels and mortality in COVID-19 participants. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of medical electronic databases was performed including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, and grey literature for relevant data published from 1 January 2020, to 20 November 2022. Mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: Fourteen studies reported MR-proADM levels in survivors vs. non-survivors of COVID-19 patients. Pooled analysis showed that MR-proADM level in the survivor group was 0.841 ± 0.295 nmol/L for patients who survive COVID-19, compared to 1.692 ± 0.761 nmol/L for non-survivors (MD = -0.78; 95%CI: -0.92 to -0.64; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The main finding of this study is that mortality of COVID-19 is linked to MR-proADM levels, according to this meta-analysis. The use of MR-proADM might be extremely beneficial in triaging, assessing probable therapy escalation, predicting potential complications during therapy or significant clinical deterioration of patients, and avoiding admission which may not be necessary. Nevertheless, in order to confirm the obtained data, it is necessary to conduct large prospective studies that will address the potential diagnostic role of MR-proADM as a marker of COVID-19 severity.KEY MESSAGESSeverity of COVID-19 seems to be linked to MR-proADM levels and can be used as a potential marker for predicting a patient's clinical course.The use of MR-proADM might be beneficial in triaging, assessing probable therapy escalation, predicting potential complications during therapy or significant clinical deterioration of patients, and avoiding admission which may not be necessary.For patients with COVID-19, MR-proADM may be an excellent prognostic indicator because it is a marker of endothelial function that may predict the precise impact on the equilibrium between vascular relaxation and contraction and lowers platelet aggregation inhibitors, coagulation inhibitors, and fibrinolysis activators in favor of clotting factors.

Prediction Value of KREBS Von Den Lungen-6 (KL-6) Biomarker in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic is a major issue that necessitates the use of cutting-edge disease prediction models. The aim of the study was to assess the existing evidence regarding association between Krebs von den Lungen-6 levels and COVID-19 severity. A literature search was performed on Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from 1 January 2020 up to 2 August 2022. The electronic database search was supplemented by searching Google Scholar. In addition, reference lists of relative articles were also reviewed. KL-6 levels among COVID-19 positive vs. negative patients varied and amounted to 443.37 ± 249.33 vs. 205.73 ± 86.8 U/mL (MD = 275.33; 95%CI: 144.57 to 406.09; p < 0.001). The KL-6 level was 402.82 ± 261.16 U/mL in the severe group and was statistically significantly higher than in the non-severe group (297.38 ± 90.46 U/mL; MD = 192.45; 95%CI: 118.19 to 266.72; p < 0.001). The KL-6 level in the mild group was 272.28 ± 95.42 U/mL, compared to 268.04 ± 55.04 U/mL in the moderate COVID-19 group (MD = -12.58; 95%CI: -21.59 to -3.57; p = 0.006). Our meta-analysis indicates a significant association between increased KL-6 levels and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Moreover, KL-6 levels are significantly higher in patients with a more severe course of COVID-19, indicating that KL-6 may be a useful predictor to identify patients at risk for severe COVID-19.

Protecting hospitals from SARS-CoV-2 infection: A review-based comprehensive strategy for COVID-19 prevention and control.

SUMMARY: SARS-CoV-2-related infection can determine hospital-acquired infections among patients and healthcare workers. Aim of this paper was to review the literature for developing a strategy for protecting healthcare workers, patients, and visitors by COVID-19 hospital infection. A critical and rapid revision of the literature and international standards and Regulations on this topic allowed us to propose an evidencebased strategy in the framework of the workplace risk assessment for preventing nosocomial COVID-19 outbreaks. The virus' high transmissibility, the high prevalence of asymptomatic carriers and false-negative Covid-19 rates on naso- and oropharingeal swabs, put hospitals at high-risk of COVID-19 outbreaks. A comprehensive strategy based on standard precautions, administrative, environmental, and engineering controls, a screening protocol for patients on their admission to hospital, and a testing-based strategy for HCWs within health surveillance programs may prevent the onset of hospital outbreaks, which are a threat to community, patients and HCWs, compromising the sustainability of healthcare facilities.

Prognostic Performance of Cystatin C in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Cystatin C is a specific biomarker of kidney function. We perform this meta-analysis to determine the association of Cystatin C with the COVID-19 severity. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Web of Science for studies published until 2nd September 2022 that reported associations between Cystatin C levels and COVID-19 severity. The analysis was performed using a random-effects model to calculate pooled standard mean difference (SMD). Twenty-five studies were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed statistically significant differences of Cystatin C levels among survive vs. decreased patients (0.998 ± 0.225 vs. 1.328 ± 0.475 mg/dL, respectively; SMD = -2.14; 95%CI: -3.28 to -1.01; p < 0.001). Cystatin C levels in COVID-19 severe vs. non-severe groups varied and amounted to 1.485 ± 1.191 vs. 1.014 ± 0.601 mg/dL, respectively (SMD = 1.81; 95%CI: 1.29 to 2.32; p < 0.001). Additionally, pooled analysis showed that Cystatin C levels in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) was 1.562 ± 0.885 mg/dL, compared to 0.811 ± 0.108 mg/dL for patients without AKI (SMD = 4.56; 95%CI: 0.27 to 8.85; p = 0.04). Summing up, Cystatin C is a potentially very good marker to be used in the context of COVID-19 disease due to the prognosis of patients' serious condition, risk of AKI and mortality. In addition, Cystatin C could be used as a marker of renal complications in COVID-19 other than AKI due to the need to monitor patients even longer after leaving the hospital.

Vitamin C Supplementation for the Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Since the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), millions of people have died, and the medical system has faced significant difficulties. Our purpose was to perform a meta-analysis to estimate the effect of vitamin C on in-hospital mortality and the ICU or hospital length of stay for patients diagnosed with COVID-19. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis in the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included studies that evaluated the effect of vitamin C supplementation, compared with standard treatment in COVID-19 patients who are ≥18 y of age. Nineteen trials were included in the meta-analysis. In-hospital mortality with and without vitamin C supplementation was 24.1% vs. 33.9% (OR = 0.59; 95%CI: 0.37 to 0.95; p = 0.03), respectively. Sub-analysis showed that, in randomized clinical trials, in-hospital mortality varied and amounted to 23.9% vs. 35.8% (OR = 0.44; 95%CI: 0.25 to 0.76; p = 0.003), respectively. In the non-randomized trials, in-hospital mortality was 24.2% vs. 33.5% (OR = 0.72; 95%CI: 0.38 to 1.39; p = 0.33), respectively. The ICU length of stay was longer in patients treated with vitamin C vs. standard therapy, 11.1 (7.3) vs. 8.3 (4.7) days (MD = 1.91; 95%CI: 0.89 to 2.93; p < 0.001), respectively. Acute kidney injury in patients treated with and without vitamin C varied and amounted to 27.8% vs. 45.0% (OR = 0.56; 95%CI: 0.40 to 0.78; p < 0.001), respectively. There were no differences in the frequency of other adverse events among patients' treatment with and without vitamin C (all p > 0.05). The use of vitamin C reduces hospital mortality. The length of stay in the ICU is longer among patients treated with vitamin C. In terms of patient safety, vitamin C has an acceptable profile. Low doses of vitamin C are effective and safe. Despite some evidence of the usefulness of vitamin C in modifying the course of COVID-19, it is too early to modify guidelines and recommendations. Further studies, in particular randomized clinical trials, are necessary.

Diagnostic value of lactate dehydrogenase in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis outlines the role of elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels in assessing the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: The current study was designed as a systematic review and meta-analysis. Embase, Pub- Med, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify the usefulness of LDH as a marker of COVID-19 severity. All extracted data were analyzed using RevMan V.5.4 or STATA V.14 software. RESULTS: A total of 264 records were selected for this meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed that LDH levels were statistically significantly lower in the group of survivors compared to patients who died in hospital (standardized mean differences [SMD] = -3.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.40 to -2.79; I2 = 99%; p < 0.001). Lower LDH levels were observed in non-severe groups compared to severe course of COVID-19 (SMD = -2.38; 95% CI: -2.61 to -2.14; I2 = 99%; p < 0.001). The level of LDH was statistically significantly lower in the severe group compared to the critical group (SMD = -1.48; 95% CI: -2.04 to -0.92; I2 = 98%; p < 0.001). Patients who did not require treatment in the intensive care unit (ICU) showed significantly lower levels of LDH compared to patients who required treatment in the ICU (SMD = -3.78; 95% CI: -4.48 to -3.08; I2 = 100%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis showed that elevated LDH was associated with a poor outcome in COVID-19.

Determinants of Place of Delivery during the COVID-19 Pandemic-Internet Survey in Polish Pregnant Women.

Background and Objectives: COVID-19 is a pandemic disease, and its unpredictable outcome makes it particularly dangerous, especially for pregnant women. One of the decisions they have to make is where they will give birth. This study aimed to determine the factors influencing the choice of place of delivery and the impact of the COVID 19 pandemic on these factors. Materials and Methods: The study was conducted on 517 respondents from Poland. The research methods comprised the authors' own survey questionnaire distributed via the Internet from 8 to 23 June 2021. The survey was fully anonymous, voluntary, and addressed to women who gave birth during the pandemic or will give birth shortly. Results: A total of 440 (85.1%) respondents were afraid of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The most frequently indicated factors were fear of complications in the newborn, fear of intrauterine fetal death, and congenital disabilities in a newborn. A total of 74 (14.3%) women considered home delivery. The main factors that discouraged the choice of home birth were the lack of professional medical care 73.1% (N = 378), the lack of anesthesia 23.6% (N = 122), and the presence of indications for caesarean section 23.4% (N = 121). The possibility of mother-child isolation caused the greatest fear about hospital delivery. During the COVID-19 pandemic, pregnant women concerned about SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to consider home delivery than those without such fears. The most important factors affecting the choice of the place of delivery included the possibility of a partner's presence, excellent sanitary conditions and optimal distance from the hospital, and the availability of epidural analgesia for delivery. Conclusions: Our study identifies the determinants of place of delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic. The data we obtained can result in the healthcare system considering patients' needs in case of similar crisis in the future.

Determinants of Place of Delivery during the COVID-19 Pandemic-Internet Survey in Polish Pregnant Women

Background and Objectives: COVID-19 is a pandemic disease, and its unpredictable outcome makes it particularly dangerous, especially for pregnant women. One of the decisions they have to make is where they will give birth. This study aimed to determine the factors influencing the choice of place of delivery and the impact of the COVID 19 pandemic on these factors. Materials and Methods: The study was conducted on 517 respondents from Poland. The research methods comprised the authors' own survey questionnaire distributed via the Internet from 8 to 23 June 2021. The survey was fully anonymous, voluntary, and addressed to women who gave birth during the pandemic or will give birth shortly. Results: A total of 440 (85.1%) respondents were afraid of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The most frequently indicated factors were fear of complications in the newborn, fear of intrauterine fetal death, and congenital disabilities in a newborn. A total of 74 (14.3%) women considered home delivery. The main factors that discouraged the choice of home birth were the lack of professional medical care 73.1% (N = 378), the lack of anesthesia 23.6% (N = 122), and the presence of indications for caesarean section 23.4% (N = 121). The possibility of mother–child isolation caused the greatest fear about hospital delivery. During the COVID-19 pandemic, pregnant women concerned about SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to consider home delivery than those without such fears. The most important factors affecting the choice of the place of delivery included the possibility of a partner's presence, excellent sanitary conditions and optimal distance from the hospital, and the availability of epidural analgesia for delivery. Conclusions: Our study identifies the determinants of place of delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic. The data we obtained can result in the healthcare system considering patients' needs in case of similar crisis in the future.

Point-of-care testing as the future of pre-hospital emergency medicine: an overview

Point-of-care testing (POCT) plays an increasingly important role in pre-emergency medicine by ensuring that patient's continuum of care is commenced before arrival at health facilities. Given the benefits of POCT during the COVID-19 pandemic, this commentary described the advantages and disadvantages of POCT, and its current practices in pre-hospital emergency medicine. Point-of-care tests are easy to operate, cost-effective, and yield quick and accurate response, but are posed with challenges such as safety errors, poor adherence to quality control standards, and inspection errors. To optimize the benefits of POCT in pre-emergency medicine, it is required that regular trainings are conducted for POCT operators, and total compliance to POCT handling and management guidelines should be considered by each POCT operator. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Signa Vitae is the property of Pharmamed Mado Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)