RESUMO
BackgroundFluvoxamine is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor that is known to be used as antidepressant. Repurposing of Fluvoxamine for the treatment of COVID-19 is theorized to help in the prevention of the clinical deterioration of SARS CoV-2 patients. In our systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to assess the safety and efficacy of the drug under study in terms of its effect on the mortality and the risk of hospitalization and mechanical ventilation in non-critically ill COVID-19 patients. MethodsWe performed a systematic search of seven electronic databases. The search results were screened based on the previously determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. We determined the data related to our objectives. The mortality rates, rates of hospitalization, risk of mechanical ventilation and serious side effects were extracted from the studies that successfully met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Then, the extracted data from the included studies was included in the meta-analysis. ResultsThree studies, two randomized clinical trials and one observational cohort study, with 1762 patients, were the final outcome of our search and screening processes. Among all participants, 886 patients received Fluvoxamine while 876 were controls. Follow up periods ranged from 7 days to 28 days. There was no significant difference in the intention-to-treat mortality rates between the two groups (RR = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.36 - 1.21, p-value = 0.18; I2 = 0%). However, Fluvoxamine decreased the per-protocol mortality compared to both placebo alone or placebo/standard care (RR = 0.09; 95% CI: 0.01 - 0.64, p-value = 0.02; I2 = 0% and RR = 0.09; 95% CI: 0.01 - 0.72, respectively). As compared to placebo or standard care, the all-cause hospitalization was significantly reduced in the fluvoxamine group (RR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.54 - 0.93, p-value = 0.01; I2 = 61%). This risk reduction was not significant when compared to placebo alone (RR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.57 - 1.00; p-value = 0.051; I2 = 48%). Furthermore, the risk of mechanical ventilation was not improved in the fluvoxamine group as compared to placebo (RR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.43 - 1.16, p-value = 0.17; I2 = 0%). The serious adverse effects were almost the same in the treatment group and the control (13% and 12% respectively). ConclusionFluvoxamine does not significantly reduce the mortality rates or the risk of mechanical ventilation in SARS CoV-2 patients. Nonetheless, it was found to have a good impact on reducing all cause hospitalization among patients with COVID-19 disease. Therefore, further clinical studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of the drug and its mechanisms of action.
RESUMO
BackgroundThe Algerian COVID-19 vaccination campaign, which started by the end of January 2021, is marked by a slowly ascending curve despite the deployed resources. To tackle the issue, we assessed the levels and explored determinants of engagement towards the COVID-19 vaccine among the Algerian population. MethodsA nationwide, online-based cross-sectional study was conducted between March 27 and April 30, 2021. A two-stage stratified snowball sampling method was used to include an equivalent number of participants from the four cardinal regions of the country. A vaccine engagement scale was developed, defining vaccine engagement as a multidimensional parameter (5 items) that combined self-stated acceptance and willingness with perceived safety and efficacy of the vaccine. An Engagement score was calculated and the median was used to define engagement versus nonengagement. Sociodemographic and clinical data, perceptions about COVID-19 and levels of adherence to preventive measures were analyzed as predictors for nonengagement. ResultsWe included 1,019 participants, 54% were female and 64% were aged 18-29 years. Overall, there were low rates of self-declared acceptance (26%) and willingness (21%) to take the vaccine, as well as low levels of agreement regarding vaccine safety (21%) and efficacy (30%). Thus, vaccine engagement rate was estimated at 33.5%, and ranged between 29.6-38.5% depending on the region (p>0.05). Nonengagement was independently associated with female gender (OR=2.31, p<0.001), low adherence level to preventive measures (OR=6.93p<0.001), private sector jobs (OR=0.53, p=0.038), perceived COVID-19 severity (OR=0.66, p=0.014), and fear from contracting the disease (OR=0.56, p=0.018). Concern about vaccine side effects (72.0%) and exigence for more efficacy and safety studies (48.3%) were the most commonly reported barrier and enabler for vaccine acceptance respectively; whereas beliefs in the conspiracy theory were reported by 23.4%. ConclusionsThe very low rates of vaccine engagement among the Algerian population probably explain the slow ascension of the vaccination curve in the country. Vaccine awareness campaigns should be implemented to address the multiple misconceptions and enhance the levels of knowledge and perception both about the disease and the vaccine, by prioritizing target populations and engaging both healthcare workers and the general population.
