Search

Background: Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) had generated considerable interest for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prophylaxis. We conducted a prospective observational study at a tertiary care hospital in India, with dedicated COVID-19 care facilities. Objectives: Primary objective was incidence of adverse effects, secondary objective being efficacy in preventing COVID-19. Methods: Healthcare workers were recruited and grouped based on voluntary HCQ prophylaxis as per national guidelines. Side effects in HCQ group were graded in accordance with national cancer institute-common terminology criteria for adverse events (NCI-CTCAE) version 5.0. At 3–7-week follow-up, groups were compared for COVID-19 exposure, symptoms development and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RT-PCR results. Results: Among 358 participants recruited, 216 (60.3%) were males and mean age was 31.2 ± 6.6 years. Chemoprophylaxis was initiated by 258 (72%) participants. After loading dose, 7 (2.7%) reported grade 2 and 1 (0.4%) grade 3 adverse effects. Discontinuation of HCQ due to side effects was reported in 11 (4.3%) participants. Electrocardiogram was done by 50 (19.4%) participants on HCQ; no abnormalities were noted. A total of 106 (41%) among those taking and 63 (63%) among those not taking HCQ were tested for SARS-CoV-2 due to influenza-like illness or significant exposure. Among all participants, 25 (6.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.3–9.6) developed COVID-19 during the study period. In the group taking HCQ, 10 (3.9%) tested positive compared to 15 (15%) in the group not taking HCQ (P < 0.001). Odds ratio with HCQ intake was 0.34 (95% CI 0.13–0.83, P = 0.01) and the number needed to treat was 12. Conclusion: HCQ is safe at the recommended dose for pre-exposure prophylaxis of COVID-19.

Background: An efficient sampling is one of the key methods to identify all those affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objectives: To analyze how efficient setting up of a central sampling team would be to prevent any outbreak within the institution by minimizing the movement of suspected COVID-19 patients admitted in the inpatient wards. The secondary objective was to train maximum resident doctors to collect samples of admitted patients. Methodology: A central sampling team comprising of resident doctors from various departments was made who did sampling of the suspected COVID-19 inpatients admitted under various specialties. Results: There were a total of 341 patients [209 males (61.29%), 132 females (38.7%)] and 335 patients underwent sampling. There was a positive correlation between: (1) number of calls from a department vs percentage of positive samples in that department [Pearson correlation coefficient (R) = 0.47; P = 0.026], (2) number of samples taken by resident of a particular department from central sampling team vs number of positive samples taken by resident of that department [R = 0.8739, P = 0.01] and (3) number of visits to a department vs number of residents trained in that department [R = 0.93; P = 0.00001]. Conclusion: Formulation of a central sampling team led to changes like a separate donning and doffing area in each ward and training of many resident doctors posted in different wards. This made each ward self-sufficient in collection of samples. This venture also ensured minimal movement of suspected COVID-19 patients in the hospital and thus least exposure to the hospital staff.