Search

Background Global pandemic resulted from the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) demands mental health concerns on the affected population. We examine the time-course shift of psychological burden among suspected and confirmed COVID-19 patients. Methods Participants with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were included in the cohort. Consecutive surveys were conducted upon hospital admission, discharge, and during outpatient follow-up by adapting the 5-item brief symptom rating scale (BSRS-5) assessing psychological symptoms including anxiety, depression, hostility, interpersonal sensitivity, and insomnia. The sixth measure to observe suicidal ideation was also included. Results A total of 109 eligible patients participated in the study, in which 83.49% reported no distress upon hospital admission, while 2.75%, 3.66%, and 10.1% patients were assessed as being with severe, moderate and mild psychological distress, respectively. Overall, age, sex, and history of contact did not significantly differ between patients with and without psychological distress. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that patients admitted during April–May (OR: 7.66, 95% CI: 1.46–40.28) and presented with symptoms including sore throat (OR: 4.24, 95% CI: 1.17–15.29) and malaise (OR: 5.24, 95% CI: 1.21–22.77) showed significantly higher risk of psychological distress. Cough symptom interestingly showed lower risk of emotional distress (OR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.08–0.81). Subsequent surveys upon hospital discharge and during outpatient follow-up revealed steadily declining distress among all cohort. Conclusion At least 16.5% of our cohort reported psychological distress upon hospital admission, with distinct time-dependent decline. Access to mental health support, alongside with promoting positive activities for good mental health are pivotal for those directly affected.

Hemoptysis, a common symptom of different lung diseases, engenders shortness of breath and increased mortality. Tranexamic acid (TXA), a commonly used antifibrinolytic agent, can control bleeding. However, the effects of its use on pulmonary hemorrhage have rarely been discussed. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of TXA for hemoptysis to investigate its effectiveness in reducing hemoptysis volume and duration. We searched the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed (including MEDLINE), and Scopus databases for relevant RCTs. Two of the authors individually assessed study quality by using the Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB) 2.0 tool, and the pooled results were evaluated using RevMan 5.3. We obtained 617 articles, of which four RCTs met eligibility criteria. The pooled results demonstrated no significant differences in bleeding duration or hemoptysis resolution between the TXA and control groups. Nevertheless, TXA use reduced bleeding volume (mean difference [MD] = − 56.21 mL; 95% CI − 94.70 to − 17.72 mL), further intervention risk (Peto odds ratio = 0.24; 95% CI 0.08–0.67; I2 = 0%), and length of hospital stay (MD = − 1.62 days; 95% CI − 2.93 to − 0.31; I2 = 0%). TXA use was observed to reduce bleeding volume, further intervention risk, and length of hospital stay in patients with hemoptysis; however, our results may have low statistical power because of limited sample size. Additional large-scale RCTs are thus warranted to confirm the effectiveness and safety of TXA use.