Search

COVID-19 is a severe infectious disease that has claimed >150,000 lives and infected millions in the United States thus far, especially the elderly population. Emerging evidence has shown the virus to cause hemorrhagic and immunologic responses, which impact all organs, including lungs, kidneys, and the brain, as well as extremities. SARS-CoV-2 also affects patients', families', and society's mental health at large. There is growing evidence of re-infection in some patients. The goal of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review of SARS-CoV-2-induced disease, its mechanism of infection, diagnostics, therapeutics, and treatment strategies, while also focusing on less attended aspects by previous studies, including nutritional support, psychological, and rehabilitation of the pandemic and its management. We performed a systematic review of >1,000 articles and included 425 references from online databases, including, PubMed, Google Scholar, and California Baptist University's library. COVID-19 patients go through acute respiratory distress syndrome, cytokine storm, acute hypercoagulable state, and autonomic dysfunction, which must be managed by a multidisciplinary team including nursing, nutrition, and rehabilitation. The elderly population and those who are suffering from Alzheimer's disease and dementia related illnesses seem to be at the higher risk. There are 28 vaccines under development, and new treatment strategies/protocols are being investigated. The future management for COVID-19 should include B-cell and T-cell immunotherapy in combination with emerging prophylaxis. The mental health and illness aspect of COVID-19 are among the most important side effects of this pandemic which requires a national plan for prevention, diagnosis and treatment.

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE Estimate the future number of hospitalizations from Covid-19 based on the number of diagnosed positive cases. METHOD Using the covid-19 Panel data recorded in Spain at the Red Nacional de Vigilancia Epidemiológica, Renave (Epidemiological Surveillance Network), a regression model with multiplicative structure is adjusted to explain and predict the number of hospitalizations from the lagged series of positive cases diagnosed from May 11, 2020 to September 20, 2021. The effect of the time elapsed since the vaccination program starting on the number of hospitalizations is reviewed. RESULTS Nine days is the number of lags in the positive cases series with greatest explanatory power on the number of hospitalizations. The variability of the number of hospitalizations explained by the model is high (adjusted R2: 96.6%). Before the vaccination program starting, the expected number of hospitalizations on day t was 20.2% of the positive cases on day t-9 raised to 0.906. After the vaccination program started, this percentage was reduced by 0.3% a day. Using the same model, we find that in the first pandemic wave the number of positive cases was more than six times that reported on official records. CONCLUSIONS Starting from the covid-19 cases detected up to a given date, the proposed model allows estimating the number of hospitalizations nine days in advance. Thus, it is a useful tool for forecasting the hospital pressure that health systems shall bear as a consequence of the disease.

Individuals with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) are characterized by an increased vulnerability to complications stemming from infectious diseases. While these patients do not inherently face a heightened risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to the general population, their vulnerability to severe COVID-19 complications and subsequent hospitalization is notably increased. The objective of our study is to quantitatively assess the global coverage of COVID-19 vaccination among individuals with IBD, achieved through a comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review. Thirteen studies were systematically selected from scientific articles available in the MEDLINE/PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Scopus databases, spanning from 1 January 2021 to 25 July 2023. The pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine uptake was estimated at 72% (95%CI = 59–83%) for at least one dose, 81% (95%CI = 68–91%) for the complete vaccination regimen, and 71% (95%CI = 46–91%) for the third dose. Analysis of the determinants influencing vaccination uptake revealed several significant associations. These encompassed Caucasian ethnicity, female sex, absence of immunosuppressive therapy, advanced age, prior receipt of the anti-influenza vaccine, absence of a history of COVID-19 infection, and the provision of advice from gastroenterologists, all linked to improved compliance. Our study underscores a noteworthy yet not entirely optimal COVID-19 vaccination coverage among individuals with IBD. A multifaceted approach is warranted to enhance vaccination rates. Within this context, the role of gastroenterologists extends beyond direct patient care, encompassing a pivotal responsibility in preventing complications stemming from post-infectious diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Vaccination for COVID-19 is an effective method of preventing complications; however, studies suggest that public attitudes toward the vaccine are heterogeneous. The objective of our study was to identify predictors for low likelihood of COVID-19 vaccination among women in the United States and determine whether reasons for low intention were modified by race, ethnicity, or other characteristics to better understand the factors that shape attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine and help inform multilevel interventions. Methods: In January 2021, we used social media to recruit a cross-section of reproductive-aged women in the United States (N = 5269). Our primary outcome was self-reported low vaccination likelihood (responses of unlikely or very unlikely on a 5-item scale). Our secondary outcome was concerns influencing vaccination decision that participants selected from a list of 19 items. We estimated multivariable logistic regression models and controlled for respondents' sociodemographic characteristics. Results: Overall, race and ethnicity, educational attainment, health insurance type, annual household income, partnership status, and US region were associated with low vaccine likelihood. The adjusted odds of reporting low likelihood were 1.83 (95% CI, 1.45-2.32) times greater among non-Hispanic Black than among non-Hispanic White participants. Among pregnant or postpartum participants, breastfeeding status was the strongest predictor (adjusted odds ratio = 2.77; 95% CI, 2.02-3.79). Conclusions: Vaccine hesitancy and concerns may exacerbate existing COVID-19 health disparities in racial and ethnic groups and highlight the need to target messaging to specific populations, including pregnant and breastfeeding women, because these populations are at high risk for COVID-19 complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine the pattern of COVID-19 infection and vaccination, and to explore pregnant women's willingness and reluctance to accept a booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: This was a cross-sectional, descriptive study with a convenient sample size using a structured questionnaire among pregnant women attending the gynecology and obstetrics department at Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar Hospital, Istanbul, Türkiye. The Health Belief Model scale was used to assess the intention and reluctance to accept a booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Results: A total of 145 participants, with a mean age of (33.5±4.8) years, and a gestational age of (30.9±7.3) weeks, were enrolled in this study. 88.8% Received full doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination. 47.8% Participants suffered from vaccine adverse effects. Health Belief Model demonstrated a significant finding of perceived susceptibility (P<0.001), perceived severity of COVID-19 complications (P<0.001), and perceived benefits regarding a booster COVID-19 vaccination (P<0.001). Conclusions: Most pregnant women who received the COVID-19 immunization express a significant intention to receive a booster dose, regardless of the adverse effects experienced from the previous doses. However, a small percentage of the study sample express hesitancy about receiving the booster dose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People experiencing homelessness (PEH) are at high risk for COVID-19 complications and fatality, and have been prioritized for vaccination in many areas. Yet little is known about vaccine acceptance in this population. The objective of this study was to determine the level of vaccine hesitancy among PEH in Los Angeles, CA and to understand the covariates of hesitancy in relation to COVID-19 risk, threat perception, self-protection and information sources. A novel mobile survey platform was deployed to recruit PEH from a federally qualified health center (FQHC) in Los Angeles to participate in a monthly rapid response study of COVID-19 attitudes, behaviors, and risks. Of 90 PEH surveyed, 43 (48%) expressed some level of vaccine hesitancy based either on actual vaccine offers (17/90 = 19%) or a hypothetical offer (73/90 = 81%). In bivariate analysis, those with high COVID-19 threat perception were less likely to be vaccine hesitant (OR = 0.34, P = 0.03), while those who frequently practiced COVID-19 protective behaviors were more likely to be vaccine hesitant (OR = 2.21, P = 0.08). In a multivariate model, those with high threat perception (AOR = 0.25, P = 0.02) were less likely to be hesitant, while those engaging in COVID-19 protective behaviors were more hesitant (AOR = 3.63, P = 0.02). Those who trusted official sources were less hesitant (AOR = 0.37, P = 0.08) while those who trusted friends and family for COVID-19 information (AOR = 2.70, P = 0.07) were more likely to be hesitant. Findings suggest that targeted educational and social influence interventions are needed to address high levels of vaccine hesitancy among PEH.

Objective: The aim of this research is to investigate the perspective of citizens of Nepal on the management COVID‐19, the roll‐out of the vaccine, and to gain an understanding of attitudes towards the governments' handling of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Method: A qualitative methodology was used. In‐depth interviews were conducted with 18 males and 23 females aged between 20 and 86 years old from one remote and one urban district of Nepal. Interviews were conducted in November and December 2021. A thematic approach was used to analyse the data, utilising NVivo 12 data management software. Result: Three major themes were identified: (1) Peoples' perspective on the management of COVID‐19, (2) people's perception of the management of COVID‐19 vaccination and (3) management and dissemination of information. It was found that most participants had heard of COVID‐19 and its mitigation measures, however, the majority had limited understanding and knowledge about the disease. Most participants expressed their disappointment concerning poor testing, quarantine, vaccination campaigns and poor accountability from the government towards the management of COVID‐19. Misinformation and stigma were reported as the major factors contributing to the spread of COVID‐19. People's knowledge and understanding were mainly shaped by the quality of the information they received from various sources of communication and social media. This heavily influenced their response to the pandemic, the preventive measures they followed and their attitude towards vaccination. Conclusion: Our study concludes that the study participants' perception was that testing, quarantine centres and vaccination campaigns were poorly managed in both urban and rural settings in Nepal. Since people's knowledge and understanding of COVID‐19 are heavily influenced by the quality of information they receive, we suggest providing contextualised correct information through a trusted channel regarding the pandemic, its preventive measures and vaccination. This study recommends that the government proactively involve grassroots‐level volunteers like Female Community Health Volunteers to effectively prepare for future pandemics. Patient and Public Contribution: This study was based on in‐depth interviews with 41 people from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. This study would not have been possible without their participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Objectives There have been concerns that clozapine treatment may undermine the capacity of the body to fight infection and increase the vulnerability to contracting COVID-19. This review of recent cohort studies investigated (1) whether people with a severe psychiatric disorder are at increased risk of COVID-19 and complications, (2) the immunological response of clozapine-users who contract COVID-19, and (3) patients' perspectives on COVID-19 and the pandemic response. Methods A systematic search of EMBASE, Medline, Pubmed, and PsycINFO databases using PRISMA guidelines using "COVID-19", "clozapine", and "vaccination" terms. Results 18 studies (out of 330 identified) met all criteria (N = 119 054 including 8045 on clozapine). There was no strong evidence that clozapine users may be at increased risk of contracting COVID-19 or developing complications after adjusting for medical comorbidities. Hematological studies showed temporary reductions in neutrophils in COVID-19-positive patients and vaccination suggesting a clozapine effect in defence against infection. Vaccination studies did not report major adverse effects. Increased plasma levels of clozapine and neutropenia however point to COVID-19-related interference of clozapine metabolism. Patient surveys reported limited impact on mental health and positive attitudes regarding pandemic response. Conclusion This review did not find compelling evidence that the immune system of clozapine users put them at risk of COVID-19 and further complications. Evidence of drug–infection interactions however points to the importance of adhering to consensus guidelines about clozapine therapy during the pandemic. More evidence using longitudinal designs is required to examine the longer-term effects of COVID-19 and vaccination in this vulnerable population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Serum antibody levels to SARS-CoV-2 in infants born to mothers who had received 2 doses of the BNT2b2 vaccine during pregnancy correlated positively with increasing gestational age at vaccination (P <.01) and negatively with increasing time from vaccination (P <.01), with a significant drop in infants aged >60 days (P =.045). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Because health care personnel (HCP) are potentially at increased risk of contracting COVID-19, high vaccination rates in this population are essential. The objective of this study was to assess vaccination status, barriers to vaccination, reasons for vaccine acceptance, and concerns about COVID-19 vaccination among HCP. Methods: We conducted an anonymous online survey at a large US health care system from April 9 through May 4, 2021, to assess COVID-19 vaccination status and endorsement of reasons for acceptance and concerns related to vaccination (based on selections from a provided list). Results: A total of 4603 HCP (12.2% response rate) completed the survey, 3947 (85.7%) had received at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine at the time of the survey, and 550 (11.9%) reported no plans to receive the vaccine. Unvaccinated HCP were 30 times more likely than vaccinated HCP to endorse religious or personal beliefs as a vaccine concern (odds ratio = 30.95; 95% CI, 21.06-45.48) and 15 times more likely to believe that personal vaccination is not needed if enough others are vaccinated (odds ratio = 14.99; 95% CI, 10.84-20.72). The more reasons endorsed for vaccination (ß = 0.60; P <.001), the higher the likelihood of having received the vaccine. However, the number of concerns about COVID-19 vaccine was not related to vaccination status (ß = 1.01; P =.64). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that reasons for vaccination acceptance and concerns about vaccination need to be considered to better understand behavioral choices related to COVID-19 vaccination among HCP, because these beliefs may affect vaccination advocacy, responses to vaccine mandates, and promotion of COVID-19 vaccine boosters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Recent COVID-19 surges are attributed to emergence of more transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs). The relative severity of VOCs in children is unknown. Methods We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study of children ≤18 years old diagnosed with COVID-19 from October 2020–February 2022 and whose SARS-CoV-2 isolate underwent Illumina sequencing. We measured the frequency of five markers of COVID-19 severity. Logistic regression models were fitted to estimate the odds of each severity marker with each VOC. Results Among 714 children, 471 (66.0%) were infected with a VOC: 96 (13.4%) alpha, 38 (5.3%) gamma, 119 (16.7%) delta, and 215 (30.1%) omicron. High-risk medical conditions and increasing age were independently associated with COVID-19 severity. After adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, high-risk medical conditions, and COVID-19 community incidence, neither alpha, delta, nor omicron was associated with severe COVID-19. Gamma was independently associated with hospitalization (OR 6.7, 95% CI 2.0–22.1); pharmacologic treatment (OR 5.7, 95% CI 1.2–26.8); respiratory support (OR 11.9, 95% CI 2.7–62.4); and severe disease per the WHO Clinical Progression Scale (OR 11.7, 95% CI 2.1–90.5). Upon subgroup analyses, omicron was independently associated with ICU admission and severe disease per the WHO Clinical Progression Scale in children without SARS-CoV-2 immunization or prior COVID-19 infection. Conclusions Compared to non-VOC COVID-19, the gamma VOC was independently associated with increased COVID-19 severity, as was omicron in children without SARS-CoV-2 immunization or prior COVID-19 infection. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and prior COVID-19 prevented severe outcomes during the omicron surge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To explore the impact of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on caregivers' willingness to vaccinate their children against influenza in 2021 in Saudi Arabia and the factors influencing this decision. Patients and Methods: An online survey of 2501 caregivers in Saudi Arabia with children aged 6 months– 18 years was conducted between July 15, 2021, and August 2, 2021. A convenience sample of participants that met the inclusion criteria was used as the study sample. Social Science Package Statistical (SPSS) was used for the statistical analysis. Categorical variables were reported as frequencies and percentages. The Chi-square test was used for categorical variables to assess the difference between the variables and the parents' willingness to vaccinate their children against seasonal influenza after the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Of the 2501 respondents to the survey, 1185 (47.3%) parents plan to give their children the influenza vaccine next year, which is an increase from 745 (29.8%) in the previous year. The following were the main reasons for not giving children the vaccine: children were less likely to get seasonal flu (617, 24.7%), fear of side effects (491, 19.6%), and fear of needles and syringes (484, 19.4%). Among the parents, 1222 (48.9%) were more likely to receive the seasonal flu vaccine themselves the following year, and 1361 (54.4%), which is more than half, were concerned about their children contracting seasonal influenza. Conclusion: Parents' decision-making to vaccinate their children against seasonal influenza has been influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic. Numerous factors including a caregiver who had received the seasonal influenza vaccine themselves, who had vaccinated or planned to vaccinate their children during the previous or current seasonal influenza season, and/or who had a higher education level were associated with increased willingness to receive the flu vaccine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The aim of this study was to determine the mortality risk factors of hospitalized moderate-to-severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in Tehran. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the baseline characteristics and clinical and paraclinical parameters of 223 deceased and discharged patients who were hospitalized in Firoozabadi General Hospital between March 1 and April 1, 2020. Results: According to our multiple logistic regression model, advanced age (odds ratio [OR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02–1.09; P < 0.01), reduced oxygen saturation (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.87–0.96; P < 0.01), and hypertension (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.04–6.46; P = 0.04) can be perceived as independent risk factors for mortality. Conclusion: Our results suggest that patients with older age, lower oxygen saturation, and hypertension are predisposed to an increased risk of mortality. Thus, to lower the COVID-19 mortality rates, patients with these characteristics should be the primary targets for early treatment, vaccination, or monitoring strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: In the midst of a pandemic resulting from the new virus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, we carried out a review of the impact of the virus on patients suffering with upper gastrointestinal cancers. This previously unknown, but highly infectious virus, has rapidly spread throughout the world, causing devastation to people's health on a global scale. The scientific and medical community have had to adapt and learn how to manage the virus, which has had knock on effects to patients suffering other diseases. Health services have been severely disrupted, so we reviewed the impact of this, specifically relating to the diagnosis and treatment of patients with upper gastrointestinal cancers. The situation is rapidly changing; therefore, we share the findings of our critical analysis of the available literature. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, has left dramatic footprints on human health and economy. Cancer, whilst not an infective disease, is prevalent in epidemic proportions and cannot be pretermitted due to the impact of COVID-19. As we emanate from the second national lockdown in the UK with mixed feelings of hope and despair—due to vaccination and new COVID-19 variant, respectively—we reflect on the impact of the first wave on the provision on diagnosis and management of with upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancers. This review provides a critical analysis of available literature on COVID-19 and its impact on cancer management in general and that of UGI cancers in particular. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]