Search

Objectives To assess the reporting quality of abstracts for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including the use of spin strategies and the level of spin for RCTs with statistically nonsignificant primary outcomes, and to explore potential predictors for reporting quality and the severity of spin. Study Design and Setting PubMed was searched to find RCTs that tested interventions for COVID-19, and the reporting quality and spin in the abstracts were assessed. Linear regression analyses were used to identify potential predictors. Results Forty RCT abstracts were included in our assessment of reporting quality, and a higher word count in the abstract was significantly correlated with higher reporting scores (95% CI 0.044–0.658, P = 0.026). Multiple spin strategies were identified. Our multivariate analyses showed that geographical origin was associated with severity of spin, with research from non-Asian regions containing fewer spin strategies (95% CI -0.756 to -0.096, P = 0.014). Conclusions The reporting quality of abstracts of RCTs of interventions for COVID-19 is far from satisfactory. A relatively high proportion of the abstracts contained spin, and the findings reported in the results and conclusion sections of these abstracts need to be interpreted with caution.

The new corona virus disease has started in Wuhan - China at the end of 2019 and quickly spread with a pandemic trend across the rest of the world. The scientific community is making an extraordinary effort to study and control the situation, but the results are just partial. Based on the most recent scientific literature and strong statements by the most prestigious international health institutions, the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy has drawn up some recommendations about the use of personal protective equipment, the correct way of dressing and undressing of endoscopists and nurses, before and after digestive endoscopy procedures. In addition, some other important indications are given to reduce the risk of contamination of healthcare providers during endoscopic activities, in the setting of a pandemic. Nevertheless, because of the very quick evolution of our knowledge on this issue, these recommendations must be considered as evolving, because they could change in a short time. © 2020 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l.

Background Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has been used for severe illness caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but its treatment effects and safety are unclear. Purpose This study reviews the effect and safety of CHM granules in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19. Methods We conducteda single-center, retrospective study on patients with severe COVID-19 in a designated hospital in Wuhan from January 15, 2020 to March 30, 2020. The propensity score matching (PSM) was used to assess the effect and safety of the treatment using CHM granules. The ratio of patients who received treatment with CHM granules combined with usual care and those who received usual care alone was 1:1. The primary outcome was the time to clinical improvement within 28 days, defined as the time taken for the patients’ health to show improvement by decline of two categories (from the baseline) on a modified six-category ordinal scale, or to be dischargedfrom the hospital before Day 28. Results Using PSM, 43 patients (45% male) aged 65.6 (57–70) yearsfrom each group were exactly matched. No significant difference was observed in clinical improvement of patients treated with CHM granules compared with those who received usual (p = 0.851). However, the use of CHM granules reduced the 28-day mortality (p = 0.049) and shortened the duration of fever (4 days vs. 7 days, p = 0.002). The differences in the duration of cough and dyspnea and the difference in lung lesion ratio on computerized tomography scans were not significant.Commonly,patients in the CHM group had an increased D -dimer level (p = 0.036). Conclusion Forpatients with severe COVID-19, CHM granules, combined with usual care, showed no improvement beyond usual care alone. However, the use of CHM granules reduced the 28-day mortality rate and the time to fever alleviation. Nevertheless, CHM granules may be associated with high risk of fibrinolysis.