Evaluation of Implementation and Effectiveness of China's Antibiotic Stewardship in the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University.

Antibiotic stewardship has been prioritized by governments and health care organizations in recent years as antibiotic resistance is markedly increasing. A tertiary hospital in Guangzhou, China was chosen as a study example to undertake an implementation and effectiveness evaluation of China's antibiotic stewardship to improve and promote antimicrobial stewardship nationwide. The general surgery department of the study hospital was utilized to examine surgical site infection, and samples from across the hospital were used to identify bloodstream infection. Data was analyzed using descriptive analysis, the Mann-Kendall trend test, logit model and panel data model, and t-tests. In terms of prophylactic and therapeutic antibiotic rational use, respectively, we evaluated implementation conditions, the correlation between implementation and corresponding disease progress, and the cost-effectiveness of China's antibiotic stewardship. For perioperative prophylactic antibiotic use, antibiotic stewardship was found to have been well-implemented, cost-effective, and reduced the incidence of surgical site infection. However, concerning therapeutic use and antibiotic-resistant bacterial infection prophylaxis, the complexity of influencing factors and the contradiction between stewardship implementation and clinical demand needs to be further evaluated.

The Trends of Psychological Status of People Entering from High-Risk Areas of COVID-19 Coronavirus During the Quarantine in Dedicated Hotels: A Longitudinal Survey Study from Guangzhou, China.

BACKGROUND: The quarantine in dedicated hotels has become an inevitable safety measure due to the frequent cross-border travel since the outbreak of COVID-19. The aim of the present study was to explore the trends in the psychological status of individuals entering from high-risk areas of COVID-19 coronavirus while quarantining in dedicated hotels. METHODS: A total of 591 individuals who isolated in dedicated hotels were recruited between March and June 2020. Participants self-reported mental symptoms [Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS)] every three days during the quarantine. A mixed-effects linear regression model was used to assess the trends. RESULTS: Participants reporting anxiety and depression symptoms at least one time during quarantine accounted for 4.5% and 18.4%, respectively. Their psychological status was alleviated during some first 9 days, and then it slightly deteriorated, which was suggested by SAS and SDS scores that were negatively correlated with the days of quarantine (T) (adjusted coefficient [ß] -0.81, 95% CI -1.00 to -0.62; and ß -0.75, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.53, respectively), and were positively correlated with the square of T (ß 0.04, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.06; and ß 0.04, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.06, respectively). The unemployed and 18~30-year-old participants were prone to greater levels of psychological distress. No significant difference in the trend of mental health was found among different subgroups. CONCLUSION: The mental health of the people entering Guangzhou from high-risk areas of COVID-19 coronavirus resulted positive during the early period of quarantine in dedicated hotels, after which it deteriorated. The psychological status of individuals should be closely monitored at the beginning and after more than 9 days of quarantine, especially for individuals who are unemployed and 18~30-year-old ones.

Gut Microbiome Alterations in COVID-19.

Since the outset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the gut microbiome in COVID-19 has garnered substantial interest, given its significant roles in human health and pathophysiology. Accumulating evidence is unveiling that the gut microbiome is broadly altered in COVID-19, including the bacterial microbiome, mycobiome, and virome. Overall, the gut microbial ecological network is significantly weakened and becomes sparse in patients with COVID-19, together with a decrease in gut microbiome diversity. Beyond the existence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the gut microbiome of patients with COVID-19 is also characterized by enrichment of opportunistic bacteria, fungi, and eukaryotic viruses, which are also associated with disease severity and presentation. Meanwhile, a multitude of symbiotic bacteria and bacteriophages are decreased in abundance in patients with COVID-19. Such gut microbiome features persist in a significant subset of patients with COVID-19 even after disease resolution, coinciding with 'long COVID' (also known as post-acute sequelae of COVID-19). The broadly-altered gut microbiome is largely a consequence of SARS-CoV-2infection and its downstream detrimental effects on the systemic host immunity and the gut milieu. The impaired host immunity and distorted gut microbial ecology, particularly loss of low-abundance beneficial bacteria and blooms of opportunistic fungi including Candida, may hinder the reassembly of the gut microbiome post COVID-19. Future investigation is necessary to fully understand the role of the gut microbiome in host immunity against SARS-CoV-2 infection, as well as the long-term effect of COVID-19 on the gut microbiome in relation to the host health after the pandemic.

The interval between onset and admission predicts disease progression in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic role of the interval between disease onset and hospital admission (O-A interval) was undetermined in patients with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: A total of 205 laboratory-confirmed inpatients admitted to Hankou hospital of Wuhan from January 11 to March 8, 2020 were consecutively included in this retrospective observational study. Demographic data, medical history, laboratory testing results were collected from medical records. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate the prognostic effect of the O-A interval (≤7 versus >7 days) on disease progression in mild-to-moderate patients. For severe-to-critical patients, the in-hospital mortality and the length of hospital stay were compared between the O-A interval subgroups using log-rank test and Mann-Whitney U test, respectively. RESULTS: Mild-to-moderate patients with a short O-A interval (≤7 days) are more likely to deteriorate to severe-to-critical stage compared to those with a long O-A interval (>7 days) [unadjusted odds ratio =2.93, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.32-6.55; adjusted odds ratio =3.44, 95% CI, 1.20-9.83]. No association was identified between the O-A interval and the mortality or the length of hospital stay of severe-to-critical patients. CONCLUSIONS: The O-A interval has predictive values for the disease progression in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients. Under circumstances of the specific health system in Wuhan, China, the spontaneous healthcare-seeking behavior is usually determined by patients' own heath conditions. Hence, the O-A interval can be reflective of the natural course of COVID-19 to some extent. However, our findings should be validated further in other cohorts and in other health systems.

Clinical applications of detecting IgG, IgM or IgA antibody for the diagnosis of COVID-19: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a devastating impact worldwide, and timely detection and quarantine of infected patients are critical to prevent spread of disease. Serological antibody testing is an important diagnostic method used increasingly in clinics, although its clinical application is still under investigation. METHODS: A meta-analysis was conducted to compare the diagnostic performance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 antibody tests in patients with COVID-19. The test results analysed included: (1) IgM-positive but IgG-negative (IgM+IgG-); (2) IgG-positive but IgM-negative (IgG+IgM-); (3) both IgM-positive and IgG-positive (IgM+IgG+); (4) IgM-positive without IgG information (IgM+IgG+/-); (5) IgG-positive without IgM information (IgG+IgM+/-); (6) either IgM-positive or IgG-positive (IgM+ or IgG+); and (7) IgA-positive (IgA+). RESULTS: Sixty-eight studies were included. Pooled sensitivities for IgM+IgG-, IgG+IgM-, IgM+IgG+, IgM+IgG+/-, IgG+IgM+/-, and IgM+ or IgG+ were 6%, 7%, 53%, 68%, 73% and 79% respectively. Pooled specificities ranged from 98% to 100%. IgA+ had a pooled sensitivity of 78% but a relatively low specificity of 88%. Tests conducted 2 weeks after symptom onset showed better diagnostic accuracy than tests conducted earlier. Chemiluminescence immunoassay and detection of S protein as the antigen could offer more accurate diagnostic results. DISCUSSION: These findings support the supplemental role of serological antibody tests in the diagnosis of COVID-19. However, their capacity to diagnose COVID-19 early in the disease course could be limited.