The Effect of COVID-19 on the Hospitality Industry: The Implication for Open Innovation

The current coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) has led the world toward severe socio-economic crisis and psychological distress. It has severely hit the economy;but the service sector, particularly the hospitality industry, is hard hit by it. It increases the sense of insecurity among the employees and their perception of being unemployed, adversely affecting their mental health. This research aims to contribute to the emerging debate by investigating the effect of economic crisis and non-employability on employees' mental health through perceived job insecurity under the pandemic situation. It empirically examines the underlying framework by surveying 372 employees of the hospitality industry during COVID-19. Results indicate that perceived job insecurity mediates the relationship of fear of economic crisis, non-employability, and mental health. Furthermore, the contingency of fear of COVID-19 strengthens the indirect relationship of fear of economic crisis on mental health through perceived job insecurity. The findings will provide a new dimension to the managers to deal with the psychological factors associated with the employees' mental health and add to the emerging literature of behavioral sciences. The study also highlights the increasing need for investment in the digital infrastructure and smart technologies for the hospitality industry.

Prevalence and predictors for adverse effects of Sinopharm and Sinovac COVID-19 Vaccines

Objective: To see the prevalence and potential predictors for side effects of Sinopharm and Sinovac COVID-19 vaccines among students of medical, and BS human nutrition and dietetics courses. Study Design: Cross-sectional Proforma-derived. Setting: Sialkot Medical College, Sialkot, Pakistan. Period: July and August, 2021. Material & Methods: Fifty students (MBBS = 30;Dietetics course = 20) with at least one dose of Sinopharm or Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine were recruited, purposively. The subjects were asked to report in an indigenously designed proforma on adverse effects using recall methodology for open time. Results: Forty nine subjects gave complete responses in the proforma. The rate of adverse effects increased from 75% (n = 3) against Sinopharm to 100% (n = 9) against Sinovac vaccine among 13 students of Dietetics who had only 1st dose. For rest of the 36 participants, the rate was found, as: 76.5% (n = 13) against each of the 1st and 2nd dose of Sinopharm;78.9% (n = 15) against 1st and 68.4 (n = 13) against 2nd doses of Sinovac vaccine. The frequency of different adverse effects per individual ranged 1-3 (Sinopharm) or 1-4 (Sinovac). Whereas, lower rate of injection site pain was recorded on 1st dose of Sinopharm than Sinovac (52.9 vs 57.9%, respectively). None of the variables was noted as potential predictor for the side effects (p >.05). Conclusion: Sinopharm, and Sinovac COVID-19 vaccines exhibit almost similar prevalence of self-manageable side effects. Moreover, there is no predictor for the effects. [ FROM AUTHOR]

Survey data of public in Sindh Pakistan regarding willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccination.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has badly affected the world with its devastating effects, including Sindh, Pakistan. A massive vaccination campaign against COVID-19 is considered one of the effective ways to curtail the spread of the disease. However, the acceptability of the COVID-19 vaccine is based on the general population's knowledge, attitude, perception and willingness for vaccination. Therefore, a survey among the public in Sindh, Pakistan, was done to evaluate their knowledge, attitude, perception and willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccination. METHOD: The online survey was conducted among the residents of Sindh, Pakistan, in July 2021 through a survey tool designed using Google Forms and sent to the population through various social media. RESULTS: Of 926 study participants, 59.0% were male, and 68.6% were aged between 18 and 31 years. Higher percentages of responses were recorded from the Hyderabad division (37.5%), and 60.0% of respondents were graduates, with 34.8% of them in the private sector. The results showed that 36.4% of respondents had good knowledge, and 30.3% had a positive attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination. Almost 77% of respondents perceived that everyone should get vaccinated in the country and those health care workers on priority. A majority (80.8%) of respondents were willing to accept COVID-19 vaccination. CONCLUSION: Despite having insufficient knowledge and a low percentage of positive attitude public in Sindh are willing to be vaccinated. Based on this finding, more effort has to be done to promote vaccination among the public, especially among the less educated population.

Effect of Remdesivir on mortality and length of stay in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: A single center study.

Objectives: To see the difference in mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients given Remdesivir (RDV) with those who were not given RDV. Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted on patients who were admitted to the COVID-19 isolation unit at The Indus Hospital, Korangi Campus Karachi between March and June 2020. Results: Groups were similar in age and gender distribution. RDV group was more hypoxic, had severe ARDS and needed higher Oxygen support compared to non-RDV group (p=0.000). Median SOFA score was 2 in RDV vs 5 in non-RDV (p=0.000). More than moderate COVID pneumonia was found in 92% of the RDV group while 89% of non-RDV group (p value=0.001). Median day of illness to administer Remdesivir was 10. There was no difference in mortality (45.5% in RDV vs 40.4% in non-RDV; p=0.4) between the two groups. Median length of hospital stay was 12 days (IQR=7.5-14.5) in RDV group compared to 10 days (IQR=6-14) in non-RDV group (p=0.009). Conclusion: RDV did not show any difference in in-hospital mortality in our patients. More patients had severe ARDS in the RDV group while patients in the non-RDV group had higher SOFA score and multi-organ failure. Length of stay was longer in patients receiving Remdesivir.

Comparison of clinical characteristics and outcomes between COVID-19 pneumonia and H1N1 influenza.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has been likened to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. We aim to study the similarities and differences between patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and H1N1 influenza in order to provide better care to patients, particularly during the co-circulation of Influenza A Subtype H1N1 and SARS-CoV-2. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in order to compare clinical characteristics, complications, and outcomes of hospitalized patients with PCR-confirmed H1N1 influenza pneumonia and COVID-19 at a tertiary care center in Karachi, Pakistan. RESULTS: A total of 115 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were compared with 55 patients with H1N1 Influenza A pneumonia. Median age was similar in both COVID-19 patients (54 years) and in patients with H1N1 influenza (59 years), but there was male predominance in COVID-19 patients (OR = 2.95; 95% CI: 1.12-7.79). Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were 1.34 (95% CI: 1.14-1.62) times more likely to have a greater duration of illness prior to presentation compared to H1N1 influenza patients. COVID-19 patients were 4.59 times (95% CI: 1.32-15.94) more likely to be admitted to a general ward compared to H1N1 pneumonia patients. Moreover, patients with COVID-19 were 7.62 times (95% CI: 2.42-24.00) more likely to be treated with systemic steroids compared to patients with H1N1 pneumonia. The rate of nosocomial infections as well as mortality was similar in both H1N1 and COVID-19 pneumonia. CONCLUSION: Our study found a male predominance and longer duration of illness in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 compared to H1N1 influenza patients but no difference in outcomes with either infection.