Search

Aim: Studies of the effects of COVID‐19, especially post‐acute COVID‐19 syndrome, on psychological health in non‐severe cases are limited. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence and associated risk factors of psychological symptoms, and quality‐of‐life in three groups of outpatients, hospitalized and intensive care patients. Methods: A total 276 patients, previously confirmed with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, attending the COVID‐19 follow‐up outpatient clinic from December 2020 to July 2021 were interviewed face‐to‐face. In this cross‐sectional, retrospective study, all participants were asked our self‐designed demographic and screening questions to assess their psychological symptoms and administered the WHQOOL‐BREF survey to evaluate quality of life. Results: In screening questions, major depressive disorder symptoms were detected at a rate of 20.3%, generalized anxiety disorder symptoms at a rate of 16.7%, panic attack symptoms at a rate of 10.9%, post‐traumatic stress disorder symptoms at a rate of 28.6% and obsessive‐compulsive disorder symptoms at a rate of 18.1%. The outpatient group with COVID‐19 infection had a higher risk of developing psychological symptoms and decreased quality of life. Conclusion: COVID‐19 infection was found to have a considerable psychological impact on those treated as outpatients despite the less severe course of their illness. Summary statement: What is already known about this topic? Post‐intensive care syndrome affects physical, cognitive and psychological health.It is associated with symptoms such as generalized weakness, memory disturbances, cognitive function impairment, depression, anxiety and post‐traumatic stress disorder.Some physical and psychological symptoms persist for over 12 weeks in some patients and have been classified as 'Post‐acute COVID‐19 Condition or Syndrome' (PCS). What this paper adds? At the post‐acute‐COVID‐19 period, a considerable number of outpatients with COVID‐19 infection were at higher risk for psychological distress symptoms than those who had been treated in the hospital or intensive care unit.Depression, anxiety, panic disorder and PTSD symptoms were found to be higher in outpatients and those with these symptoms were also shown to have a lower quality of life.Our findings highlight the significant psychological impact of COVID‐19 on patients, even after their reported recovery from the acute manifestations of this disease. The implications of this paper: Ongoing psychological symptoms in the post‐COVID period are not associated with the severity of the disease in the acute phase.It is important that healthcare professionals are equally concerned not only with physical condition of post‐COVID‐19 patients but also with their psychological state and the patient's psychology‐related quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rapid spread of the SARS-Cov-2 virus, the increase in the number of patients with severe COVID-19, and the high mortality rate created the basis for the production of safe and effective vaccines. Studies have confirmed the increased risk of severe Covid-19 disease and mortality in cancer patients. It is logical that cancer patients should be the first to receive the primary vaccination and the booster vaccine for Covid-19. Since studies related to cancer patients and the effectiveness of existing Covid-19 vaccines have not been widely conducted, there are significant uncertainties about the effectiveness of the vaccine and the level of humoral and cellular immune responses in these patients. As a result, the possible risks and side effects of existing vaccines are not clear for patients with different cancers who are undergoing special treatments. In this study, we will discuss the effectiveness and safety of existing vaccines on cancer patients. In addition, we highlight factors that could affect the effectiveness of vaccines in these patients and finally discuss opportunities and challenges related to vaccination in cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As of early October 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, resulted in approximately 35 million cases and one million fatalities worldwide. Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune disease marked by the generation of pathogenic autoantibodies and a lack of tolerance to nuclear self-antigens. Hypocomple-mentemia, or an abnormal blood complement deficit, is a reliable predictor of infection in SLE patients. Moreover, it has been found that immunoglobulin (Ig), particularly IgG and IgM, is lowered in SLE patients, which may be a factor in their heightened susceptibility to infection. Bloodstream autoantibodies, lymphopenia, aberrant T cells, proinflammatory cytokines, and impaired regulatory systems all lead to an immune response that is aberrant in lupus patients. SLE patients exhibit impaired CD8 T cell responses, including abnormal phagocytosis and chemotaxis. Recent study has shown that COVID-19 infections significantly boost type I inter-feron responses. Patients with SLE and Covid-19 infection typically get immune-suppressing drugs viz corticosteroids, Janus kinase inhibitors (JAK), and tocilizumab, which improve their immune systems and diminution susceptible to Covid-19 infections., (Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.)

The rapid spread of the SARS-Cov-2 virus, the increase in the number of patients with severe COVID-19, and the high mortality rate created the basis for the production of safe and effective vaccines. Studies have confirmed the increased risk of severe Covid-19 disease and mortality in cancer patients. It is logical that cancer patients should be the first to receive the primary vaccination and the booster vaccine for Covid-19. Since studies related to cancer patients and the effectiveness of existing Covid-19 vaccines have not been widely conducted, there are significant uncertainties about the effectiveness of the vaccine and the level of humoral and cellular immune responses in these patients. As a result, the possible risks and side effects of existing vaccines are not clear for patients with different cancers who are undergoing special treatments. In this study, we will discuss the effectiveness and safety of existing vaccines on cancer patients. In addition, we highlight factors that could affect the effectiveness of vaccines in these patients and finally discuss opportunities and challenges related to vaccination in cancer patients.

Early in the pandemic, New Jersey (NJ) long-term care facilities (LTCFs) witnessed severe COVID-19 illness. With limited surveillance to characterize the scope of infection, we estimated the prevalence of antibody to the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein among residents and staff, to describe the epidemiology, and to measure antibody distribution by prior PCR/antigen status and symptomatology. 10 NJ LTCFs of 20 solicited with diverse geography and bed-capacities were visited between October 2020 and March 2021. A single serum was tested for total N-antibody (ELISA) by the state laboratory. Residents' demographics and clinical history were transcribed from the patient record. For staff, this information was solicited directly from employees, supplemented by prior PCR/antigen results from facilities. 62% of 332 residents and 46% of 661 staff tested N-antibody positive. In a multivariable logistic regression in residents, odds ratios for older age and admission prior before March 1, 2020 were significant. Among the staff, odds ratios for older age, ethnic-racial group, nursing-related job, and COVID-19 symptoms were significantly associated with N-antibody positivity. In a sub-analysis in five better record-keeping LTCFs, 90% of residents and 85% of staff with positive PCR/antigen results were seropositive for N-antibody, yet 25% of residents and 22% of staff were N-antibody positive but PCR/antigen and symptoms negative. The high rate of clinically unsuspected infections likely contributed to the spread. These findings argue for robust surveillance, regular screening of asymptomatic individuals, and vaccinating both residents and staff to abate the pandemic. The data also provide guidance to prevent future outbreaks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been proposed as a treatment for mild to moderate COVID-19, with favorable outcomes reported in clinical trials and an emergency use authorization granted by the Food and Drug Administration. Real-world data remain limited, however, and thus this analysis presents findings from over 6,500 outpatient administrations of mAb at facilities affiliated with a large healthcare organization in the United States. Within 48 hours of mAb infusion, 15.6% (1,043) of patients received a drug that was indicative of a possible reaction to the infusion; the majority of these were mild (e.g., acetaminophen). Approximately 5.2% of patients who received mAb (n=347) had a post-infusion emergency department visit or admission for COVID-19 disease progression. The results of this analysis indicate that patients who receive mAb have a low likelihood of both an immediate negative reaction to the treatment as well as future inpatient admission related to COVID-19 disease progression.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and various types of ophthalmic manifestation of patients with COVID-19. Methods: This is a prospective observational study conducted on patients with SARS-Co-V-2 infection, at a dedicated tertiary COVID-19 hospital in South India from April 1 to July 31, 2020. At the time of their admission to the COVID hospital, demographic data such as name, age, sex was recorded. A thorough history regarding the onset, duration, progression, nature of symptoms and its associated factors, medication history, treatment history were elicited and documented. Ocular examination was performed under torchlight by an ophthalmologist posted for COVID duty. Further investigations including imaging were sought for, depending on clinical indications. Serial follow-up examinations of all patients were carried out every 72 hours or when patients complained of any ocular symptoms whichever earlier, until discharge. All relevant data were compiled and statistically analyzed. Results: A total of 2742 patients were examined. Of them, 1461 (53.28%) were males and 1281 (46.72%) were females. The mean age (±SD) was 39.46 ± 17.63 years. None of the patients in our study had any ocular symptoms or signs as the presenting complaint at the time of their admission. On subsequent follow-up, only 20 (0.72%) developed ocular manifestations, of which 19 (95%) had features suggestive of Bilateral viral conjunctivitis. However, 1 (5%) patient had orbital cellulitis secondary to pansinusitis. Conclusion: Ophthalmic manifestations in the clinical spectrum of COVID-19 infection are uncommon and unlikely to be the presenting clinical impression. However, it has broadened our view to a wider spectrum of COVID-19 presentations enhancing our clinical acumen for staunch detection of COVID-19 suspects in our daily practice, augmenting early diagnosis and management and also break the chain of transmission for the greater good of humanity.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CO-V-2), was first reported in Wuhan, Hubei province, China has now rapidly spread over 50 countries. For the prevention and control of infection, Taiwan Centers for Disease Control initiated testing of SARS-CoV-2 on January 24th 2020 for persons suspected with this disease. Until February 28th, 43 flu-like symptomatic patients were screened in China Medical University Hospital. Methods: Two patients were confirmed positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection by rRT-PCR as COVID-19 patients A and B. Causative pathogens for included patients were detected using FilmArray™ Respiratory Panel. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical presentations, laboratory data, radiologic findings, and travel and exposure contact histories, of the COVID-19 patients in comparison to those with other respiratory infections. Results: Through contact with Taiwan No. 19 case patient on 27th January, COVID-19 patients A and B were infected. Both patients had no identified comorbidities and developed mild illness with temporal fever, persistent cough, and lung interstitial infiltrates. Owing to the persistence of positive SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory specimen, the two COVID-19 patients are still in the isolation rooms despite recovery until 10th of March. The results of FilmArrayTM Respiratory Panel revealed 22 of the 41 non-COVID-19 patients were infected by particular pathogens. In general, seasonal respiratory pathogens are more prevalent than SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic patients in non- COVID-19 endemic area during the flu season. Since all patients shared similar clinical and laboratory findings, expanded surveillance of detailed exposure history for suspected patients and application of rapid detection tools are highly recommended.

Purpose: The national lockdown established by the Italian government began on the 11th of March 2020 as a means to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infections. The purpose of this brief report is to evaluate the effect of the national lockdown on the occurrence and characteristics of trauma in children during lockdown. Methods: All children admitted to our paediatric orthopaedic unit with a diagnosis of fracture or trauma, including sprains and contusions, between 11 March 2020 and 11 April 2020, were retrospectively reviewed. Their demographic data, type of injury, anatomical location and need for hospitalisation were compared with the equivalent data of children admitted for trauma in the same period of 2018 and 2019. Results: Sixty-nine patients with trauma were admitted in 2020, with a significant decrease in comparison with 2019 (n = 261) and 2018 (n = 289) (p < 0.01). The patients were significantly younger, and the rate of fractures significantly increased in 2020 (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Home confinement decreased admissions to the emergency department for trauma by shutting down outdoor activities, schools and sports activities. However, the rate of fractures increased in comparison with minor trauma, involved younger children and had a worse prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A 75-year-old female with no history of lung disease developed severe pulmonary fibrosis within 1 month of acute severe COVID-19 pneumonia. She developed dry basal crackles, hypoxia needing home oxygen, and computed tomography changes which dramatically evolved from acute ground-glass opacities to honeycombing and traction bronchiectasis. Interestingly, these changes occurred despite her being on steroids through most of her hospital stay. She is being commenced on pirfenidone and her responses are carefully monitored, but the role of antifibrotic drugs are unclear and will only be established from large clinical trials.

The onset of exanthema was delayed in the course of COVID-19 (during the recovery phase) and not in the initial acute stage when we can expect an RNAaemia with cutaneous vascular involvement. COVID-19, Skin, SARS-CO-V-2, Exanthema, Eosinophilia, DRESS Keywords: COVID-19; Skin; SARS-CO-V-2; Exanthema; Eosinophilia; DRESS EN COVID-19 Skin SARS-CO-V-2 Exanthema Eosinophilia DRESS 607 610 4 07/24/21 20210901 NES 210901 This comment refers to the article available online at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00403-020-02091-0. [Extracted from the article]

This report presents first case of severe multi-organ trauma, complicated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The child suffered from trauma resulting from falling out of the window. Imaging revealed head trauma, areas of lung contusion and abdominal organ trauma. Co-existence of multi-organ trauma, affecting chest and lungs, obscured the characteristic for COVID-19 pneumonia appe arance.

Declared as a pandemic by WHO on March 11, 2020, COVID-19 has brought about a dramatic change in the working of different laboratories across the country. Diagnostic laboratories testing different types of samples play a vital role in the treatment management. Irrespective of their size, each laboratory has to follow strict biosafety guidelines. Different sections of the laboratory receive samples that are variably infectious. Each sample needs to undergo a proper and well-designed processing system so that the personnel involved are not infected and also their close contacts. It takes a huge effort so as to limit the risk of exposure of the working staff during the collection, processing, reporting or dispatching of biohazard samples. Guidelines help in preventing the laboratory staff and healthcare workers from contracting the disease which has a known human to human route of transmission and high rate of mortality. A well-knit approach is the need of the hour to combat this fast spreading disease. We anticipate that the guidelines described in this article will be useful for continuing safe work practices by all the laboratories in the country.

OBJECTIVE: Approximately 30% of patients with confirmed COVID-19 report persistent smell or taste disorders as long-term sequalae of infection. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is associated with inflammatory changes to the olfactory bulb, and treatments with anti-inflammatory properties are hypothesized to attenuate viral injury and promote recovery of olfaction after infection. Our study investigated the efficacy of a supplement with Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) and Luteolin to support recovery of olfaction in COVID-19 patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a randomized-controlled pilot study in outpatients with history of confirmed COVID-19 with post-infection olfactory impairment that persisted ≥ 90 days after SARS-CoV-2 negative testing. Patients were randomized to two times a day olfactory rehabilitation alone or weekly olfactory rehabilitation plus daily oral supplement with PEA and Luteolin. Subjects with preexisting olfactory disorders were excluded. Sniffin' Sticks assessments were performed at baseline and 30 days after treatment. Data on gender, age, and time since infection were collected. Kruskal-Wallis (KW) test was used to compare variances of Sniff scores between groups over time, and Spearman's correlation coefficients were calculated to assess for correlations between Sniff Score and gender or duration of infection. RESULTS: Among 12 patients enrolled (n=7, supplement; n=5, controls), patients receiving supplement had greater improvement in olfactory threshold, discrimination, and identification score versus controls (p=0.01). Time since infection was negatively correlated with Sniff Score, and there was no correlation between gender. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment combining olfactory rehabilitation with oral supplementation with PEA and Luteolin was associated with improved recovery of olfactory function, most marked in those patients with longstanding olfactory dysfunction. Further studies are necessary to replicate these findings and to determine whether early intervention including olfactory rehabilitation and PEA+Luteolin oral supplement might prevent SARS-CoV-2 associated olfactory impairment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Steam inhalation is widely practiced home remedies in upper respiratory tract infections or upper airway allergy for soothing the airway and opening of the nasal passages. Clinical presentations of the upper airway such as nasal block and nasal discharge are often relieved which improve the quality of life. Mild to moderate symptoms of the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections are usually benefited from the steam inhalation. Severe symptomatic patients are often associated with dyspnea and need ventilator or oxygen, so unable to do steam inhalation. The COVID-19 infection is highly contagious disease caused by the novel coronavirus called Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2(SARS-CoV-2). This virus is enveloped virus which is sensitive to the heat and destroyed by the temperature tolerable to the human being. The viability of the virus is usually lost at higher temperature like in steam inhalation and so useful for treatment of the COVID-19 infections. Steam inhalation is a cheap and easily available therapeutic modality for COVID-19 infection. Steam inhalation can be used as adjuvant treatment by COVID-19 patients along with use of the face mask, social distancing and hand wash. There is little work on the steam inhalation for treatment of the COVID-19 infections. This review article discusses on the benefit of the steam inhalation and used as an adjuvant treatment during COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and various types of ophthalmic manifestation of patients with COVID-19. Methods: This is a prospective observational study conducted on patients with SARS-Co-V-2 infection, at a dedicated tertiary COVID-19 hospital in South India from April 1 to July 31, 2020. At the time of their admission to the COVID hospital, demographic data such as name, age, sex was recorded. A thorough history regarding the onset, duration, progression, nature of symptoms and its associated factors, medication history, treatment history were elicited and documented. Ocular examination was performed under torchlight by an ophthalmologist posted for COVID duty. Further investigations including imaging were sought for, depending on clinical indications. Serial follow-up examinations of all patients were carried out every 72 hours or when patients complained of any ocular symptoms whichever earlier, until discharge. All relevant data were compiled and statistically analyzed. Results: A total of 2742 patients were examined. Of them, 1461 (53.28%) were males and 1281 (46.72%) were females. The mean age (±SD) was 39.46 ± 17.63 years. None of the patients in our study had any ocular symptoms or signs as the presenting complaint at the time of their admission. On subsequent follow-up, only 20 (0.72%) developed ocular manifestations, of which 19 (95%) had features suggestive of Bilateral viral conjunctivitis. However, 1 (5%) patient had orbital cellulitis secondary to pansinusitis. Conclusion: Ophthalmic manifestations in the clinical spectrum of COVID-19 infection are uncommon and unlikely to be the presenting clinical impression. However, it has broadened our view to a wider spectrum of COVID-19 presentations enhancing our clinical acumen for staunch detection of COVID-19 suspects in our daily practice, augmenting early diagnosis and management and also break the chain of transmission for the greater good of humanity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This report presents first case of severe multi-organ trauma, complicated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The child suffered from trauma resulting from falling out of the window. Imaging revealed head trauma, areas of lung contusion and abdominal organ trauma. Co-existence of multi-organ trauma, affecting chest and lungs, obscured the characteristic for COVID-19 pneumonia appe arance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Remdesivir is a broad spectrum anti-viral drug that has shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2, in vitro and in vivo. In absence of any effective treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19), remdesivir has been tried for a compassionate use in severe COVID-19. Newer randomized controlled studies that have recently become available, showed a mixed result. We aimed to systematically search the literature to understand the pharmacology and clinical effects of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19. We systematically searched the PubMed, ClinicalTrial.Org and MedRxiv database up till May 5, 2020 using specific key words such as "Remdesivir" or 'GS-5734″ AND "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2" and retrieved all the article published in English language, that have reported the pharmacology and the clinical outcomes of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19. Initial compassionate use of remdesivir has shown a fairly good result, but difficult to quantify, in the absence of control arm. While the very first double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial conducted in Wuhan, did not find any significant benefit compared to the control, the preliminary result of another similar multi-country trial has shown a significant faster time to recovery but without any difference in mortality. Remdesivir has shown a mixed result in patients with COVID-19 with an acceptable side effect. However, jury is still out while awaiting the results from the forthcoming trials. • Remdesivir has been recently given an Emergency Use Authorization for in-patients use in severe COVID-19 in both adults and children. • While the first double-blind, randomized-controlled trial (DBRCT) found no significant benefit with remdesivir compared to placebo, preliminary reports from another DBRCT showed a significant faster recovery, without any difference in mortality. • Interestingly, a short 5-days course of remdesivir was found to have a similar efficacy to a long 10-days course with a lesser side effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The last two decades have experienced the outbreaks of three different coronaviruses in the different parts of the world namely; Severe acute respiratory syndrome cornonavirus-1 (SARS-CoV-1), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS-CoV) and Severe acute respiratory syndrome cornonavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). We aimed to delineate the differences in viral dynamics and clinical features between them and tried to focus on every basic details of SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) that every health care provider must know. We systematically searched the PubMed database up till April 2, 2020 and retrieved all the articles published on SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-1, MERS-CoV that dealt with viral dynamics. Ample data is available to suggest the differences in etiology, transmission cycle, diagnosis, genetics, hosts, reproductive rates, clinical features, laboratory diagnosis and radiological features between SARS-CoV-1, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. Although SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) is more infectious than SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV, most infections are generally mild and self-limiting. However, case-fatality rates are very high in patients with COVID-19 with comorbidities, compared to SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV. • Multiple corona virus outbreaks have been witnessed in past two decades. • SARS-CoV-2 is more infectious, has a long incubation period and a short serial interval but low case-fatality rate than SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV. However, case-fatality rate is much higher in comorbidities. • Isolation and containment is only way of prevention from contracting COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Romanian Journal of Family Medicine / Revista Română de Medicina Familiei is the property of Media DOM Express and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Purpose: The national lockdown established by the Italian government began on the 11th of March 2020 as a means to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infections. The purpose of this brief report is to evaluate the effect of the national lockdown on the occurrence and characteristics of trauma in children during lockdown. Methods: All children admitted to our paediatric orthopaedic unit with a diagnosis of fracture or trauma, including sprains and contusions, between 11 March 2020 and 11 April 2020, were retrospectively reviewed. Their demographic data, type of injury, anatomical location and need for hospitalisation were compared with the equivalent data of children admitted for trauma in the same period of 2018 and 2019. Results: Sixty-nine patients with trauma were admitted in 2020, with a significant decrease in comparison with 2019 (n = 261) and 2018 (n = 289) (p < 0.01). The patients were significantly younger, and the rate of fractures significantly increased in 2020 (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Home confinement decreased admissions to the emergency department for trauma by shutting down outdoor activities, schools and sports activities. However, the rate of fractures increased in comparison with minor trauma, involved younger children and had a worse prognosis.

• SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies for COVID-19 cause few immediate adverse reactions. • Reactions to monoclonal antibody treatment are primarily mild in severity. • Most patients who receive this treatment do not have further COVID-19 progression. SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been proposed as a treatment for mild to moderate COVID-19, with favorable outcomes reported in clinical trials and an emergency use authorization granted by the Food and Drug Administration. Real-world data remain limited, however, and thus this analysis presents findings from over 6,500 outpatient administrations of mAb at facilities affiliated with a large healthcare organization in the United States. Within 48 hours of mAb infusion, 15.6% (1,043) of patients received a drug that was indicative of a possible reaction to the infusion; the majority of these were mild (e.g., acetaminophen). Approximately 5.2% of patients who received mAb (n=347) had a post-infusion emergency department visit or admission for COVID-19 disease progression. The results of this analysis indicate that patients who receive mAb have a low likelihood of both an immediate negative reaction to the treatment as well as future inpatient admission related to COVID-19 disease progression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Canadian Sentinel Practitioner Surveillance Network reports mid-season 2023/24 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) of 63% (95% CI: 51-72) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, lower for clade 5a.2a.1 (56%; 95% CI: 33-71) than clade 5a.2a (67%; 95% CI: 48-80), and lowest against influenza A(H3N2) (40%; 95% CI: 5-61). The Omicron XBB.1.5 vaccine protected comparably well, with VE of 47% (95% CI: 21-65) against medically attended COVID-19, higher among people reporting a prior confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection at 67% (95% CI: 28-85).

A 75-year-old female with no history of lung disease developed severe pulmonary fibrosis within 1 month of acute severe COVID-19 pneumonia. She developed dry basal crackles, hypoxia needing home oxygen, and computed tomography changes which dramatically evolved from acute ground-glass opacities to honeycombing and traction bronchiectasis. Interestingly, these changes occurred despite her being on steroids through most of her hospital stay. She is being commenced on pirfenidone and her responses are carefully monitored, but the role of antifibrotic drugs are unclear and will only be established from large clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People living with HIV (PLHIV) are at increased risk of COVID-19 acquisition, severe disease, and poor outcomes. Yet, little is known about COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among PLHIV in high HIV burden countries, such as Nigeria., Objective: This study aims to assess the acceptability of the COVID-19 vaccine and identify predictors and reasons for vaccine hesitancy among patients living with HIV and attending a tertiary hospital in Kano, northern Nigeria., Methods: Using a mixed-methods design, structured questionnaires were administered to a clinic- based sample of patients living with HIV (n = 344), followed by 20 in-depth interviews with a sub-sample. Logistic regression and the framework approach were used to analyze the data., Results: Less than half (46.2 %, n = 159) of the respondents were willing to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccine acceptance was higher among non-Muslim PLHIV (Adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) = 1.26, 95 % Confidence Interval (95 % CI): 1.10-4.00), persons with high-risk perception (aOR = 2.43, 95 % CI:1.18-5.00), those who were not worried about infertility-related rumors (aOR = 13.54, 95 % CI:7.07-25.94) and persons who perceived antiretroviral drugs are protective against COVID-19 (aOR = 2.76, 95 % CI: 1.48-5.14). In contrast, vaccine acceptance was lower among persons who were not concerned about the potential effects of COVID-19-HIV co-infection (aOR = 0.20, 95 % CI:0.10-0.39). The most common reasons for vaccine hesitancy included doubts about the existence of COVID-19, low-risk perception, anxiety about antiretroviral treatmentvaccine interactions, safety concerns, and infertility-related rumors., Conclusion: Covid-19 vaccine acceptance was low among PLHIV. COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was associated with respondents' faith, risk perception, perception of the protective effects of antiretroviral treatment, concerns about COVID-19-HIV co-infection, and infertility-related rumors. Vaccination counseling should be integrated into HIV treatment services to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake among PLHIV in Kano, Nigeria and similar settings., (Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.)

The COVID-19 pandemic caused the United States to hit record numbers of COVID-19 cases: peak unemployment of 14.7%, an increase in $4 trillion in national debt, and an estimated 3.4% GDP decline. The current socio-economic environment the pandemic created is just an earthquake that can create a tsunami that is bound to hit the healthcare system and can be felt around the globe. This tsunami is composed of a post-pandemic increase in healthcare facilities admission of indigent patients, decrease in medical reimbursement, and high operating costs to maintain healthcare workers, which can cause a synergistic effect that can lead to healthcare facilities experiencing significant negative total revenue. Time is of the essence, and it is imperative to make a collective effort from all healthcare professionals and legislatures to shift the nation's attention to the issue at hand that can threaten the closure of many healthcare facilities post-pandemic.

Introduction: In COVID-19 pandemic epicenters cancer care was severely impacted. All elective and semi-elective procedures, as well as select urgent cases, were postponed in order to preserve resources and protect patients and staff from SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Structured decision making for breast cancer treatment resulted in deferment of surgery with initiation of endocrine therapy. Moreover, the waitlist for elective breast cancer procedures after mitigation is a challenge for prioritization., Objective and Significance: We aim to summarize the current body of evidence, comparatively evaluate oncological outcomes of surgery versus primary endocrine therapy (PET), and determine whether PET is a viable long - term alternative to surgery in the context of crisis management strategy for early, operable hormone receptor positive (HRP) breast cancer. PET could potentially be an acceptable bridging or maintenance therapy in select patients during pandemic crisis or for those choosing to forgo surgery in the treatment of breast cancer., Methods and Analysis: The database search includes PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE (via Ovid). This systematic review includes women 18 years or older undergoing one of two interventions for HRP breast cancer: surgery (with or without endocrine therapy post-surgery) or solely PET. Studies comparing one of the two interventions of interest to a non-relevant intervention and studies reporting only descriptive data will not be included in the quantitative synthesis of data. After selection of eligible studies based on title and abstract, these studies will be further screened through full text articles by two independent reviewers, with a third as an arbitrator. Eligible studies will be critically appraised at the study level for methodological quality. Cochrane methodology will be utilized for meta-analysis., Ethics and Dissemination: This study does not require an institutional review board approval given its summary design nature. Findings of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2020 The Authors.)

Declared as a pandemic by WHO on March 11, 2020, COVID-19 has brought about a dramatic change in the working of different laboratories across the country. Diagnostic laboratories testing different types of samples play a vital role in the treatment management. Irrespective of their size, each laboratory has to follow strict biosafety guidelines. Different sections of the laboratory receive samples that are variably infectious. Each sample needs to undergo a proper and well-designed processing system so that the personnel involved are not infected and also their close contacts. It takes a huge effort so as to limit the risk of exposure of the working staff during the collection, processing, reporting or dispatching of biohazard samples. Guidelines help in preventing the laboratory staff and healthcare workers from contracting the disease which has a known human to human route of transmission and high rate of mortality. A well-knit approach is the need of the hour to combat this fast spreading disease. We anticipate that the guidelines described in this article will be useful for continuing safe work practices by all the laboratories in the country.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CO-V-2), was first reported in Wuhan, Hubei province, China has now rapidly spread over 50 countries. For the prevention and control of infection, Taiwan Centers for Disease Control initiated testing of SARS-CoV-2 on January 24th 2020 for persons suspected with this disease. Until February 28th, 43 flu-like symptomatic patients were screened in China Medical University Hospital., Methods: Two patients were confirmed positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection by rRT-PCR as COVID-19 patients A and B. Causative pathogens for included patients were detected using FilmArray™ Respiratory Panel. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical presentations, laboratory data, radiologic findings, and travel and exposure contact histories, of the COVID-19 patients in comparison to those with other respiratory infections., Results: Through contact with Taiwan No. 19 case patient on 27th January, COVID-19 patients A and B were infected. Both patients had no identified comorbidities and developed mild illness with temporal fever, persistent cough, and lung interstitial infiltrates. Owing to the persistence of positive SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory specimen, the two COVID-19 patients are still in the isolation rooms despite recovery until 10th of March. The results of FilmArrayTM Respiratory Panel revealed 22 of the 41 non-COVID-19 patients were infected by particular pathogens. In general, seasonal respiratory pathogens are more prevalent than SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic patients in non- COVID-19 endemic area during the flu season. Since all patients shared similar clinical and laboratory findings, expanded surveillance of detailed exposure history for suspected patients and application of rapid detection tools are highly recommended., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Introduction: The biggest concerns in the current pandemic are enormous workload pressure, psychological distress, caregiver burnout, and, even worse, transmission of the virus among healthcare workers. One of the potentially beneficial tools in reducing the above-mentioned risks for overwhelming the healthcare system is telemedicine. Although the role of telemedicine and related interventions as a crisis management tool has increased, the current state of the implementation of telemedicine in surgery and surgical subspecialties has not been adequately evaluated., Objective and Significance: The objective of this review is to screen the literature, extract expert opinions, qualitative, and quantitative data on the current use and future directions in the implementation of telemedicine in surgery and surgical subspecialties during the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings would potentially help in understanding the challenges and future directions of telemedicine use in surgery., Methods and Analysis: The databases to be searched include PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE (via Ovid). In addition, ClinicalTrials.gov and medRxiv.org will be searched for any ongoing and/or unpublished studies. The reference lists of articles included in the review will be screened to assess the sensitivity of the search. Literature search, quality assessment, followed by data extraction will be performed by two independent researchers. The findings of the data synthesis will be reported in diagrams, tables, and text. This review will consider reports that include expert opinions, qualitative and quantitative data on the implementation of telemedicine in surgery and surgical subspecialties (including patients with surgical disease of any age) during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, future perspectives reported based either on the evidence provided by the data or on expert opinions will be considered., Ethics and Dissemination: This study does not require an institutional review board approval given its summary design nature. Findings of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal., Systematic Review Registration Number: PROSPERO does not currently accept registrations for scoping reviews, literature reviews or mapping reviews., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2020 The Author(s).)