Search

Objective: Chest CT is the reference test for assessing pulmonary injury in suspected or diagnosed COVID-19 with signs of clinical severity. This study aimed to evaluate the association of a lung ultrasonography score and unfavorable clinical evolution at 28 days., Methods: The eChoVid is a multicentric study based on routinely collected data that was conducted in 8 emergency units in France; patients were included between March 19, 2020 and April 28, 2020 and underwent lung ultrasonography, a short clinical assessment by 2 emergency physicians blinded to each other's assessment, and chest CT. Lung ultrasonography consisted of scoring lesions from 0 to 3 in 8 chest zones, thus defining a global score (GS) of severity from 0 to 24. The primary outcome was the association of lung damage severity as assessed by the GS at day 0 and patient status at 28 days. Secondary outcomes were comparing the performance between GS and CT scan and the performance between a new trainee physician and an ultrasonography expert in scores., Results: For the 328 patients analyzed, the GS showed good performance in predicting clinical worsening at 28 days (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] 0.83, sensitivity 84.2%, specificity 76.4%). The GS showed good performance in predicting the CT severity assessment (AUC 0.84, sensitivity 77.2%, specificity 83.7%)., Conclusion: A lung ultrasonography GS is a simple tool that can be used in the emergency department to predict unfavorable assessment at 28 days in patients with COVID-19., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.)

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic affected provision and use of maternal health services. This study describes changes in obstetric complications, referrals, stillbirths and maternal deaths during the first year of the pandemic and elucidates pathways to these changes., Design: Prospective observational mixed-methods study, combining monthly routine data (March 2019-February 2021) and qualitative data from prospective semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed separately, triangulated during synthesis and presented along three country-specific pandemic periods: first wave, slow period and second wave., Setting: Six referral maternities in four sub-Saharan African countries: Guinea, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda., Participants: 22 skilled health personnel (SHP) working in the maternity wards of various cadres and seniority levels., Results: Percentages of obstetric complications were constant in four of the six hospitals. The percentage of obstetric referrals received was stable in Guinea and increased at various times in other hospitals. SHP reported unpredictability in the number of referrals due to changing referral networks. All six hospitals registered a slight increase in stillbirths during the study period, the highest increase (by 30%-40%) was observed in Uganda. Four hospitals registered increases in facility maternal mortality ratio; the highest increase was in Guinea (by 158%), which had a relatively mild COVID-19 epidemic. These increases were not due to mortality among women with COVID-19. The main pathways leading to these trends were delayed care utilisation and disruptions in accessing care, including sub-optimal referral linkages and health service closures., Conclusions: Maternal and perinatal survival was negatively affected in referral hospitals in sub-Saharan Africa during COVID-19. Routine data systems in referral hospitals must be fully used as they hold potential in informing adaptations of maternal care services. If combined with information on women's and care providers' needs, this can contribute to ensuring continuation of essential care provision during emergency., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Referral hospitals in sub-Saharan Africa are located in crowded urban areas, which were often epicentres of the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper prospectively assesses how maternal healthcare was provided in six referral hospitals in Guinea, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: Mixed-methods design using three data sources: (1) qualitative data from repeated rounds of semi-structured interviews conducted between July 2020 and February 2021 with 22 maternity skilled heath personnel (SHP) on perceptions of care provision; (2) quantitative monthly routine data on caesarean section and labour induction from March 2019 to February 2021; and (3) timeline data of COVID-19 epidemiology, national and hospital-level events. Qualitative and quantitative data were analysed separately, framed based on timeline analysis, and triangulated during reporting., Results: We identified three periods: first wave, slow period and second wave. The first wave was challenging for SHP given little knowledge about COVID-19, lack of infection prevention and control training, and difficulties reaching workplace. Challenges that persisted beyond the first wave were shortage of personal protective equipment and no rapid testing for women suspected with COVID-19. We noted no change in the proportion of caesarean sections during the pandemic, and a small increase in the proportion of labour inductions. All hospitals arranged isolation areas for women suspected/confirmed with COVID-19 and three hospitals provided care to women with suspected/confirmed COVID-19. Breastfeeding was not discouraged and newborns were not separated from mothers confirmed with COVID-19. Care provision was maintained through dedication of SHP, support from hospital management and remote communication between SHP., Conclusion: Routine maternal care provision was maintained in referral hospitals, despite first wave challenges. Referral hospitals and SHP contributed to guideline development for pregnant women suspected/confirmed with COVID-19. Maternity SHP, women and pregnancy must always be included in priority setting when responding to health system shocks, including outbreaks., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: In sub-Saharan Africa, referral hospitals are important sources of key maternal health services, especially during a crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic. This study prospectively assessed the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal health service utilisation in six large referral hospitals in Guinea, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda during the first year of the pandemic., Methods: Mixed-methods design combining three data sources: (1) quantitative data based on routine antenatal, childbirth and postnatal care data collected March 2019-February 2021, (2) qualitative data from recurring rounds of semi-structured interviews conducted July 2020-February 2021 with 22 maternity skilled heath personnel exploring their perceptions of service utilisation and (3) timeline data of COVID-19 epidemiology, global, national and hospital-level events. Qualitative and quantitative data were analysed separately, framed based on the timeline analysis and triangulated when reporting., Results: Three periods including a first wave, slow period and second wave were identified. Maternal health service utilisation was lower during the pandemic compared with the prepandemic year in all but one selected referral hospital. During the pandemic, service utilisation was particularly lower during the waves and higher or stable during the slow period. Fear of being infected in hospitals, lack of transportation, and even when available, high cost of transportation and service closures were key reasons affecting utilisation during the waves. However, community perception that the pandemic was over or insinuation by Government of the same appeared to stabilise use of referral hospitals for childbirth., Conclusion: Utilisation of maternal health services across the continuum of care varied through the different periods and across countries. In crisis situations such as COVID-19, restrictions and service closures need to be implemented with consideration given to alternative options for women to access and use services. Information on measures put in place for safe hospital use should be communicated to women., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Abstract: To assess tocilizumab (TCZ) efficacy associated to standard of care (SOC) compared to SOC alone in severe coronavirus associated disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. In a matched case-control study from 3 French Hospital COVID-19 Departments, 27 patients with severe COVID-19 treated with TCZ and SOC were matched for baseline epidemiological and clinical features and compared to 27 severe COVID-19 patients treated with SOC alone. Baseline characteristics of the study population were comparable between groups. Eleven patients (20%) died. TCZ was not associated with clinical improvement as compared to SOC regarding oxygen-free status (44% vs 63%) and death (18.5% vs 22%), despite a higher decrease of the C-reactive protein at Day 7 (10.7 vs 52 mg/L; P < 10-3). Compared to the 43 patients alive at the end-of follow-up, patients who died were older (78 vs 64 years; P < 10-3), with 82% of them older than 72 years vs only 23% of live patients (P < 10-3). Age (OR = 1.15; 95%CI = 1.04-1.3; P = .008) and age over 72 years (OR) = 14.85; 95%CI = 2.7-80; P = .002) were independently associated with mortality. TCZ in addition to SOC for severe COVID-19 patients did not reduce mortality, subsequent need for invasive mechanical ventilation nor did it shorten the time of oxygen support, despite better control of the inflammatory response. More powerful and randomized controlled trials are warranted to determine if TCZ is effective in the management of COVID-19., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)