ABSTRACT
Most public health measures to contain the COVID-19 pandemic are based on preventing the pathogen spread, and the use of oral antiseptics has been proposed as a strategy to reduce transmission risk. The aim of this manuscript is to test the efficacy of mouthwashes to reduce salivary viral load in vivo. This is a multi-centre, blinded, parallel-group, placebo-controlled randomised clinical trial that tests the effect of four mouthwashes (cetylpyridinium chloride, chlorhexidine, povidone-iodine and hydrogen peroxide) in SARS-CoV-2 salivary load measured by qPCR at baseline and 30, 60 and 120 min after the mouthrinse. A fifth group of patients used distilled water mouthrinse as a control. Eighty-four participants were recruited and divided into 12-15 per group. There were no statistically significant changes in salivary viral load after the use of the different mouthwashes. Although oral antiseptics have shown virucidal effects in vitro, our data show that salivary viral load in COVID-19 patients was not affected by the tested treatments. This could reflect that those mouthwashes are not effective in vivo, or that viral particles are not infective but viral RNA is still detected by PCR. Viral infectivity studies after the use of mouthwashes are therefore required. ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04707742 ; Identifier: NCT04707742).
Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents, Local/pharmacology , Mouthwashes/pharmacology , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Saliva/virology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/chemistry , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , Child , Child, Preschool , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Middle Aged , Mouthwashes/chemistry , Placebo Effect , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Viral Load/drug effects , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Global Influenza Hospital Surveillance Network was established in 2012 to obtain valid epidemiologic data on hospital admissions with influenza-like illness. Here we describe the epidemiology of admissions with influenza within the Northern Hemisphere sites during the 2013/2014 influenza season, identify risk factors for severe outcomes and complications, and assess the impact of different influenza viruses on clinically relevant outcomes in at-risk populations. METHODS: Eligible consecutive admissions were screened for inclusion at 19 hospitals in Russia, Turkey, China, and Spain using a prospective, active surveillance approach. Patients that fulfilled a common case definition were enrolled and epidemiological data were collected. Risk factors for hospitalization with laboratory-confirmed influenza were identified by multivariable logistic regression. FINDINGS: 5303 of 9507 consecutive admissions were included in the analysis. Of these, 1086 were influenza positive (534 A(H3N2), 362 A(H1N1), 130 B/Yamagata lineage, 3 B/Victoria lineage, 40 untyped A, and 18 untyped B). The risk of hospitalization with influenza (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval]) was elevated for patients with cardiovascular disease (1.63 [1.33-2.02]), asthma (2.25 [1.67-3.03]), immunosuppression (2.25 [1.23-4.11]), renal disease (2.11 [1.48-3.01]), liver disease (1.94 [1.18-3.19], autoimmune disease (2.97 [1.58-5.59]), and pregnancy (3.84 [2.48-5.94]). Patients without comorbidities accounted for 60% of admissions with influenza. The need for intensive care or in-hospital death was not significantly different between patients with or without influenza. Influenza vaccination was associated with a lower risk of confirmed influenza (adjusted odds ratio = 0.61 [0.48-0.77]). CONCLUSIONS: Influenza infection was detected among hospital admissions with and without known risk factors. Pregnancy and underlying comorbidity increased the risk of detecting influenza virus in patients hospitalized with influenza-like illness. Our results support influenza vaccination as a measure for reducing the risk of influenza-associated hospital admission.
