Monitoramento das Produções

by Ezequiel Cordova, Analia Mykietiuk, Omar Sued, Lautaro De Vedia, Natalia Pacifico, Matias H. Garcia Hernandez, Natalia M. Baeza, Franco Garibaldi, Maria Fernanda Alzogaray, Rosa Contreras, Lucrecia Soler Puy, Pablo G. Scapellato, Laura Barcelona, Mariana L. Golikow, Maria Florencia Piñeiro, Hugo J. Miño, Maria Fernanda Consalvo, Corina Nemirovsky, Marisa Sanchez, Myrna Cabral, Lucia Lamponi Tappata, Mariano Blasco, Jamile Ballivian, Gustavo Lopardo, Martin E. Stryjewski, on behalf of the ECCOVID study group
Background Clinical features and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infections diverge in different countries. The aim of this study was to describe clinical characteristics and outcomes in a cohort of patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 in Argentina. Methods Multicenter prospective cohort study of ≥18 years-old patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection consecutively admitted to 19 hospitals in Argentina. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify variables associated with 30-day mortality and admission to intensive care unit (ICU). Results A total of 809 patients were analyzed. Median age was 53 years, 56% were males and 71% had at least one comorbidity. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (32%), obesity (23%) and diabetes (17%). Disease severity at admission was classified as mild 25%, moderate 51%, severe 17%, and critical 7%. Almost half of patients (49%) required supplemental oxygen, 18% ICU, and 12% invasive ventilation. Overall, 30-day mortality was 11%. Factors independently associated with ICU admission were male gender (OR 1.81; 95%CI 1.16–2.81), hypertension (OR 3.21; 95%CI 2.08–4.95), obesity (OR 2.38; 95%CI 1.51–3.7), oxygen saturation ≤93% (OR 6.45; 95%CI 4.20–9.92) and lymphopenia (OR 3.21; 95%CI 2.08–4.95). Factors independently associated with 30-day mortality included age ≥60 years-old (OR 2.68; 95% CI 1.63–4.43), oxygen saturation ≤93% (OR 3.19; 95%CI 1.97–5.16) and lymphopenia (OR 2.65; 95%CI 1.64–4.27). Conclusions This cohort validates crucial clinical data on patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 in Argentina.

Title: Biblioteca da Saúde da Mulher e da Criança durante a emergência sanitária provocada pelo novo coranavirus (COVID-19): relatório de atividades: 2020
Authors: Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Nacional de Saúde da Mulher, da Criança e do Adolescente Fernandes Figueira
Abstract: A Emergência Sanitária provocada pelo novo Coronavirus (COVID19) tem redimensionado todos os campos da vida social e de atuação profissional. A Fiocruz em diálogo com sua trajetória no campo da saúde pública vem atuando, com protagonismo, no enfrentamento da pandemia global do Covid19, em diversas frentes. Em consonância com os Planos de Contingência da Fiocruz e as diretrizes da Rede de Bibliotecas da Fiocruz, a Biblioteca da Saúde da Mulher e da Criança (BibSMC) vem reformulando seus serviços e processos de modo a atender as demandas de informação de seus usuários em consonância às normas de Biossegurança. Localizada fisicamente em uma unidade hospitalar, a BibSMC organizou sua atuação a fim de responder à necessidade informacional de docentes, discentes, profissionais da saúde que atuam ou não no Instituto Fernandes Figueira.
Description: Relatório de atividades da BiBSMC para o ano de 2020.

by Stephen Salerno, Yuming Sun, Emily L. Morris, Xinwei He, Yajing Li, Ziyang Pan, Peisong Han, Jian Kang, Michael W. Sjoding, Yi Li
Background Understanding risk factors for short- and long-term COVID-19 outcomes have implications for current guidelines and practice. We study whether early identified risk factors for COVID-19 persist one year later and through varying disease progression trajectories. Methods This was a retrospective study of 6,731 COVID-19 patients presenting to Michigan Medicine between March 10, 2020 and March 10, 2021. We describe disease progression trajectories from diagnosis to potential hospital admission, discharge, readmission, or death. Outcomes pertained to all patients: rate of medical encounters, hospitalization-free survival, and overall survival, and hospitalized patients: discharge versus in-hospital death and readmission. Risk factors included patient age, sex, race, body mass index, and 29 comorbidity conditions. Results Younger, non-Black patients utilized healthcare resources at higher rates, while older, male, and Black patients had higher rates of hospitalization and mortality. Diabetes with complications, coagulopathy, fluid and electrolyte disorders, and blood loss anemia were risk factors for these outcomes. Diabetes with complications, coagulopathy, fluid and electrolyte disorders, and blood loss were associated with lower discharge and higher inpatient mortality rates. Conclusions This study found differences in healthcare utilization and adverse COVID-19 outcomes, as well as differing risk factors for short- and long-term outcomes throughout disease progression. These findings may inform providers in emergency departments or critical care settings of treatment priorities, empower healthcare stakeholders with effective disease management strategies, and aid health policy makers in optimizing allocations of medical resources.

by Joan C. Timoneda, Sebastián Vallejo Vera

Is Google Trends (GT) useful to survey populations? Extant work has shown that certain search queries reflect the attitudes of hard-to-survey populations, but we do not know if this extends to the general population. In this article, we leverage abundant data from the Covid-19 pandemic to assess whether people’s worries about the pandemic match epidemiological trends as well as political preferences. We use the string ‘will I die from coronavirus’ on GT as the measure for people’s level of distress regarding Covid-19. We also test whether concern for coronavirus is a partisan issue by contrasting GT data and 2016 election results. We find strong evidence that (1) GT search volume close matches epidemiological data and (2) significant differences exist between states that supported Clinton or Trump in 2016.

by Kate E. Lee, Francesca Lim, Elisabeth R. Silver, Adam S. Faye, Chin Hur
Objectives The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted medical student education, particularly in New York City (NYC). We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical students’ residency choices. Methods The authors conducted a cross-sectional survey of medical students in all years of study at four NYC medical schools (Columbia, Cornell, NYU, and SUNY Downstate). The survey was fielded from 19 Aug 2020 to 21 Sep 2020. Survey questions included items assessing COVID-19 impact on residency choices, personal impact of COVID-19, residency/specialty choices, and factors influencing these choices. Results A total of 2310 students received the survey, with 547 (23.7%) providing partial responses and 212 (9.2%) providing valid responses for our primary analysis. 59.0% of participants thought that COVID-19 influenced their choice of residency/specialty, with 0.9% saying the influence was to a great extent, 22.2% to some extent, and 35.8% very little. On multivariable analysis, factors that were independently associated with COVID-19 impacting residency choice included low debt ($1 to $99,999: adjOR 2.23, 95%CI 1.02–5.03) compared with no debt and Other race/ethnicity (adjOR 0.26, 95%CI 0.10–0.63) compared with White race/ethnicity. On secondary analysis of all participants answering survey items for logistic regression regardless of survey completion, direct personal impact of COVID-19 was significantly associated with COVID-19 impacting specialty choice (adjOR 1.90, 95%CI 1.04–3.52). Moreover, 24 students (11.6%) reported a change in their top residency choice from before to during/after COVID-19, citing concerns about frontline work, work-life balance, and risk of harm. Conclusions Our study found that 3 in 5 (59.0%) participants felt that COVID-19 impacted their residency choice, with 11.6% of respondents explicitly changing their top specialty choice. Investigating the impact of the pandemic on medical student residency considerations is crucial to understand how medical career outlooks may change in the future.

Title: COVID-19: o que muda nos Fluxos de Acolhimento e Classificação de Risco em Maternidades?
Authors: Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Instituto Nacional de Saúde da Mulher, da Criança e do Adolescente Fernandes Figueira
Abstract: Deve-se reorganizar a rede de saúde para atender gestantes e puérperas com suspeita ou confirmação de COVID-19, de forma a garantir acesso, acolhimento e assistência adequadas.

by Rob H. Creemers, Ashkan Rezazadeh Ardabili, Daisy M. Jonkers, Mathie P. G. Leers, Mariëlle J. Romberg-Camps, Marie J. Pierik, Ad A. van Bodegraven
Objective Data on the course of severe COVID-19 in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients remains limited. We aimed to determine the incidence rate and clinical course of severe COVID-19 in the heavily affected South-Limburg region in the Netherlands. Methods All COVID-19 patients admitted to the only two hospitals covering the whole South-Limburg region between February 27, 2020 and January 4, 2021 were included. Incidence rates for hospitalization due to COVID-19 were determined for the IBD (n = 4980) and general population (n = 597,184) in South-Limburg. Results During a follow-up of 4254 and 510,120 person-years, 20 IBD patients (0.40%; 11 ulcerative colitis (UC), 9 Crohn’s disease (CD)) and 1425 (0.24%) patients from the general population were hospitalized due to proven COVID-19 corresponding to an incidence rate of 4.7 (95% Confidence interval (CI) 3.0–7.1) and 2.8 (95% CI 2.6–2.9) per 1000 patient years, respectively (Incidence rate ratio: 1.68, 95% CI 1.08–2.62, p = 0.019). Median age (IBD: 63.0 (IQR 58.0–75.8) years vs. general population: 72.0 (IQR 62.0–80.0) years, p = 0.10) and mean BMI (IBD: 24.4 (SD 3.3) kg/m2 vs. general population 24.1 (SD 4.9) kg/m2, p = 0.79) at admission were comparable in both populations. As for course of severe COVID-19, similar rates of ICU admission (IBD: 12.5% vs. general population: 15.7%, p = 1.00), mechanical ventilation (6.3% vs. 11.2%, p = 1.00) and death were observed (6.3% vs. 21.8%, p = 0.22). Conclusion We found a statistically significant higher rate of hospitalization due to COVID-19 in IBD patients in a population-based setting in a heavily impacted Dutch region. This finding reflects previous research that showed IBD patients using systemic medication were at an increased risk of serious infection. However, although at an increased risk of hospitalization, clinical course of severe COVID-19 was comparable to hospitalized patients without IBD.

by Seong Hee Kang, Dong-Hyuk Cho, Jimi Choi, Soon Koo Baik, Jun Gyo Gwon, Moon Young Kim
Background/Aims We measured the association between underlying chronic hepatitis B (CHB) and antiviral use with infection rates among patients who underwent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing. Methods In total, 204,418 patients who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 between January and June 2020 were included. For each case patient (n = 7,723) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, random controls (n = 46,231) were selected from the target population who had been exposed to someone with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but had a negative SARS-CoV-2 test result. We merged claim-based data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database collected. Primary endpoints were SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19. Results The proportion of underlying CHB was lower in COVID-19 positive patients (n = 267, 3.5%) than in COVID-19 negative controls (n = 2482, 5.4%). Underlying CHB was associated with a lower SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate, after adjusting for comorbidities (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57–0.74). Among patients with confirmed COVID-19, underlying CHB tended to confer a 66% greater risk of severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19, although this value was statistically insignificant. Antiviral treatment including tenofovir and entecavir was associated with a reduced SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate (aOR 0.49; 95% CI, 0.37–0.66), while treatment was not associated with severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19. Conclusions Underlying CHB and antiviral agents including tenofovir decreased susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection. HBV coinfection did not increase the risk of disease severity or lead to a worse prognosis in COVID-19.

by Claudio Violato, Emilio Mauro Violato, Efrem Mauro Violato
Background How effective have lockdowns been at reducing the covid-19 infection and mortality rates? Lockdowns influence contact among persons within or between populations including restricting travel, closing schools, prohibiting public gatherings, requiring workplace closures, all designed to slow the contagion of the virus. The purpose of the present study was to assess the impact of lockdown measures on the spread of covid-19 and test a theoretical model of the covid-19 pandemic employing structural equation modelling. Methods Lockdown variables, population demographics, mortality rates, infection rates, and health were obtained for eight countries: Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. The dataset, owid-covid-data.csv, was downloaded on 06/01/2020 from: https://github.com/owid/covid-19-data/tree/master/public/data. Infection spread and mortality data were depicted as logistic growth and analyzed with stepwise multiple regression. The overall structure of the covid-19 data was explored through factor analyses leading to a theoretical model that was tested using latent variable path analysis. Results Multiple regression indicated that the time from lockdown had a small but significant effect (β = 0.112, p 0.01) on reducing the number of cases per million. The stringency index produced the most important effect for mortality and infection rates (β = 0.588,β = 0.702, β = 0.518, β = 0.681; p 0.01). Exploratory and confirmatory analyses resulted in meaningful and cohesive latent variables: 1) Mortality, 2) Infection Spread, 3) Pop Health Risk, and 4) Health Vulnerability (Comparative Fit Index = 0.91; Standardized Root Mean Square Residual = 0.08). Discussion The stringency index had a large impact on the growth of covid-19 infection and mortality rates as did percentage of population aged over 65, median age, per capita GDP, diabetes prevalence, cardiovascular death rates, and ICU hospital beds per 100K. The overall Latent Variable Path Analysis is theoretically meaningful and coherent with acceptable fit indices as a model of the covid-19 pandemic.

by Erjia Ge, Yanhong Li, Shishi Wu, Elisa Candido, Xiaolin Wei
Background The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has infected 1.9% of the world population by May 2, 2021. Since most previous studies that examined risk factors for mortality and severity were based on hospitalized individuals, population-based cohort studies are called for to provide evidence that can be extrapolated to the general population. Therefore, we aimed to examine the associations of comorbidities with mortality and disease severity in individuals with COVID-19 diagnosed in 2020 in Ontario, Canada. Methods and findings We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all individuals with COVID-19 in Ontario, Canada diagnosed between January 15 and December 31, 2020. Cases were linked to health administrative databases maintained in the ICES which covers all residents in Ontario. The primary outcome is all-cause 30-day mortality after the first COVID-19 diagnosis, and the secondary outcome is a composite severity index containing death and hospitalization. To examine the risk factors for the outcomes, we employed Cox proportional hazards regression models and logistic regression models to adjust for demographic, socio-economic variables and comorbidities. Results were also stratified by age groups. A total of 167,500 individuals were diagnosed of COVID-19 in 2020 and included in the study. About half (43.8%, n = 73,378) had at least one comorbidity. The median follow-up period were 30 days. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (24%, n = 40,154), asthma (16%, n = 26,814), and diabetes (14.7%, n = 24,662). Individuals with comorbidity had higher risk of mortality compared to those without (HR = 2.80, 95%CI 2.35–3.34; p

by Abdallah S. Attia, Mohammad Hussein, Mohamed A. Aboueisha, Mahmoud Omar, Mohanad R. Youssef, Nicholas Mankowski, Michael Miller, Ruhul Munshi, Aubrey Swinford, Adam Kline, Therese Nguyen, Eman Toraih, Juan Duchesne, Emad Kandil
Introduction Several studies have described typical clinical manifestations, including fever, cough, diarrhea, and fatigue with COVID-19 infection. However, there are limited data on the association between the presence of neurological manifestations on hospital admission, disease severity, and outcomes. We sought to investigate this correlation to help understand the disease burden. Methods We delivered a multi-center retrospective study of positive laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients. Clinical presentation, laboratory values, complications, and outcomes data were reported. Our findings of interest were Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission, intubation, mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality. Results A total of 502 patients with a mean age of 60.83 ± 15.5 years, of them 71 patients (14.14%) presented with altered mental status, these patients showed higher odds of ICU admission (OR = 2.06, 95%CI = 1.18 to 3.59, p = 0.01), mechanical ventilation (OR = 3.28, 95%CI = 1.86 to 5.78, p 0.001), prolonged (>4 days) mechanical ventilation (OR = 4.35, 95%CI = 1.89 to 10, p = 0.001), acute kidney injury (OR = 2.18, 95%CI = 1.28 to 3.74, p = 0.004), and mortality (HR = 2.82, 95%CI = 1.49 to 5.29, p = 0.01). Conclusion This cohort study found that neurological presentations are associated with higher odds of adverse events. When examining patients with neurological manifestations, clinicians should suspect COVID-19 to avoid delayed diagnosis or misdiagnosis and lose the chance to treat and prevent further transmission.

by Morgan Maner, Katherine LeMasters, Jennifer Lao, Mariah Cowell, Kathryn Nowotny, David Cloud, Lauren Brinkley-Rubinstein

Carceral settings in the United States have been the source of many single site COVID-19 outbreaks. Quarantine is a strategy used to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 in correctional settings, and specific quarantine practices differ state to state. To better understand how states are using quarantine in prisons, we reviewed each state’s definition of quarantine and compared each state’s definition to the Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) definition and recommendations for quarantine in jails and prisons. Most prison systems, 45 of 53, define quarantine, but definitions vary widely. No state published definitions of quarantine that align with all CDC recommendations, and only 9 states provide quarantine data. In these states, the highest recorded quarantine rate occurred in Ohio in May 2020 at 843 per 1,000. It is necessary for prison systems to standardize their definitions of quarantine and to utilize quarantine practices in accordance with CDC recommendations. In addition, data transparency is needed to better understand the use of quarantine and its effectiveness at mitigating COVID-19 outbreaks in carceral settings.

by Mubarek Yesse, Mohammed Muze, Shemsu Kedir, Bedru Argaw, Mohammed Dengo, Tajudin Nesre, Faris Hamdalla, Awol Saliha, Tofik Mussa, India Kasim, Abdulfeta Kedir, Tofik Delebo, Awol Sunkemo, Yesuf Badeg, Dureti Ensarmu, Dereje Abebe, Amara Dessalegn, Henok Ayelign
Introduction COVID-19 is a pandemic respiratory disease caused by the highly contagious novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV 2). The disease is now quickly spreading around the world, resulting in ongoing coronavirus pandemic. Healthcare workers are more susceptible to COVID-19 infection than the general population due to frequent contact with infected individuals. Objective This study was aimed to assess knowledge, attitude and practice towards COVID-19 and associated factors among health care workers. Methods Facility-based cross-sectional study design was conducted among health care workers in Silte Zone. A total of 379 health professionals were selected using multistage stratified sampling technique. Self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data. Binary logistic regression model was used to see association between outcome and independent variables. Results This study found 74.9%, 84.2% and 68.9% prevalence of adequate knowledge, positive attitude and good practice respectively. Working in comprehensive specialized hospital (AOR = 4.46, 95% CI = 1.46–13.62).having MSC degree (AOR = 10.26, 95% CI = 2.27–46.44), and training on COVID-19 (AOR = 6.59, 95% CI = 2.97–14.65) were strongly associated with knowledge of health care workers. On the other hand, older age (AOR = 3.35, 95% CI = 1.07–10.50), training on COVID-19 (AOR = 3.73, 95% CI = 1.82–7.63), Work experience (AOR = 3.78, 95% CI = 1.46–9.80) and Knowledge (AOR = 5.45, 95% CI = 2.60–11.43) were significantly associated with attitude, whereas source of information from friends or colleagues (AOR = 3.13, 95% CI = 1.28–7.66), working in primary hospital (AOR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.21–0.620) and having good knowledge (AOR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.03–3.14) were strongly associated with good practice of health care workers. Conclusion This study found majority of health care workers had good level of knowledge and positive attitude toward COVID-19, but lower proportion of health care workers practices sufficiently in the study area. Type of health facilities, level of education, training on COVID-19, work experience, type of source of information were significantly associated with knowledge, attitude and practice of health care workers. Stakeholders need to focus on interventions that increase preventive practices of health care workers.

Title: Boletim Observatório COVID-19: boletim extraordinário: 8 de setembro de 2021
Abstract: Esta edição do Boletim ratifica, em mais uma semana consecutiva, a queda nas taxas de ocupação de leitos de UTI Covid-19 para adultos no SUS em praticamente todo o país. Estão fora da zona de alerta (taxas 60%) mais de 90% das unidades da Federação e 85% das capitais. Este indicador reflete a tendência geral de diminuição da incidência de casos graves, internações e mortalidade por Covid-19.

by Fredrick Dermawan Purba, Asteria Devy Kumalasari, Langgersari Elsari Novianti, Lenny Kendhawati, Afra Hafny Noer, Retno Hanggarani Ninin

COVID-19 pandemic has impacted people around the globe. Countries, including Indonesia, implemented large-scale social restrictions. Since marriage is found to be beneficial to people’s quality of life (QoL), the study aimed to examine the QoL of married people in Indonesia during a large-scale social restriction of the COVID-19 pandemic. An online cross-sectional survey using Qualtrics was conducted in June 2020. Respondents’ sociodemographic data, spouse data (as reported by the respondents), and pandemic-related data were collected, followed by QoL data, measured by WHQOOL-BREF. WHOQL-BREF consists of 26 questions grouped into four domains: physical, psychological, social relationships, and environmental. Mann-Whitney U, Kruskal-Wallis H and Spearman correlation analyses were employed to compare QoL between groups of sociodemographic characteristics. In total, 603 respondents were recruited. The respondents’ mean age is 35.3 years (SD = 7.61), most are females (82%), bachelor degree graduate (95%), Islam (78%), employed (69%), and assigned to work from home during the pandemic (76%). Married men reported better QoL in almost all domains than women; employed respondents reported higher QoL scores than unemployed; higher educated respondents reported higher QoL than those with lower education; respondents with higher income reported higher QoL than those with lower income. We found significant positive correlations between the QoL scores and age, spouse’s age, and marriage length, although they were considered small. Compared to Indonesian population normative scores pre-pandemic, our sample reported no difference in physical and social domains, lower in the psychological domain, but higher in the environmental domain. Indonesian married people, especially women, those with low level of education, currently out of work, and below-average financial condition are the ones who reported worse quality of life during the lockdown. These results can help direct the Indonesian government efforts in dealing with psychosocial problems during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially for married couples.

by Kangli Li, Natasha Zhang Foutz, Yuxin Cai, Yunlei Liang, Song Gao

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly impacted the economy and human lives worldwide, particularly the vulnerable low-income population. We employ a large panel data of 5.6 million daily transactions from 2.6 million debit cards owned by the low-income population in the U.S. to quantify the joint impacts of the state lockdowns and stimulus payments on this population’s spending along the inter-temporal, geo-spatial, and cross-categorical dimensions. Leveraging the difference-in-differences analyses at the per card and zip code levels, we uncover three key findings. (1) Inter-temporally, the state lockdowns diminished the daily average spending relative to the same period in 2019 by $3.9 per card and $2,214 per zip code, whereas the stimulus payments elevated the daily average spending by $15.7 per card and $3,307 per zip code. (2) Spatial heterogeneity prevailed: Democratic zip codes displayed much more volatile dynamics, with an initial decline three times that of Republican zip codes, followed by a higher rebound and a net gain after the stimulus payments; also, Southwest exhibited the highest initial decline whereas Southeast had the largest net gain after the stimulus payments. (3) Across 26 categories, the stimulus payments promoted spending in those categories that enhanced public health and charitable donations, reduced food insecurity and digital divide, while having also stimulated non-essential and even undesirable categories, such as liquor and cigar. In addition, spatial association analysis was employed to identify spatial dependency and local hot spots of spending changes at the county level. Overall, these analyses reveal the imperative need for more geo- and category-targeted stimulus programs, as well as more effective and strategic policy communications, to protect and promote the well-being of the low-income population during public health and economic crises.

by Francisco Perez-Arce, Marco Angrisani, Daniel Bennett, Jill Darling, Arie Kapteyn, Kyla Thomas
Background The COVID-19 pandemic brought about large increases in mental distress. The uptake of COVID-19 vaccines is expected to significantly reduce health risks, improve economic and social outcomes, with potential benefits to mental health. Purpose To examine short-term changes in mental distress following the receipt of the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Methods Participants included 8,003 adults from the address-based sampled, nationally representative Understanding America Study (UAS), surveyed at regular intervals between March 10, 2020, and March 31, 2021 who completed at least two waves of the survey. Respondents answered questions about COVID-19 vaccine status and self-reported mental distress as measured with the four-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4). Fixed-effects regression models were used to identify the change in PHQ-4 scores and categorical indicators of mental distress resulting from the application of the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Results People who were vaccinated between December 2020 and March 2021 reported decreased mental distress levels in the surveys conducted after receiving the first dose. The fixed-effects estimates show an average effect of receiving the vaccine equivalent to 4% of the standard deviation of PHQ-4 scores (p-value

by Pauline Jones, Anil Menon, Allen Hicken, Laura S. Rozek

What influences the adoption of SARS-CoV-2 mitigation behaviors–both personal, such as mask wearing and frequent handwashing, and social, such as avoiding large gatherings and physical contact–across countries? Understanding why some individuals are more willing to change their behavior to mitigate the spread of a pandemic will not only help us to address the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic but also to respond to future ones. Researchers have pointed to a variety of factors that may influence individual adoption of personal and social mitigation behaviors, including social inequality, risk perception, personality traits, and government policies. While not denying the importance of these factors, we argue that the role of trust and confidence has received insufficient attention to date. Our study explores whether there is a difference in the way trust and confidence in particular leaders and organizations affect individual compliance and whether this effect is consistent across different types of mitigation behaviors. Specifically, we utilize an original cross-national survey conducted during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (May-June 2020) to investigate how trust in scientists, medical professionals, politicians, and religious leaders and confidence in global, national, and local health organizations affects individual compliance in 16 countries/territories across five world regions. Our analyses, which control for the aforementioned factors as well as several others, suggest that trust in politicians and confidence in national health ministries have the most consistent influence on whether individuals adopt both personal and social mitigation behaviors. Across our sample, we find that greater trust in politicians is associated with lower levels of individual compliance with public health directives, whereas greater confidence in the national health ministry is associated with higher levels of individual compliance. Our findings suggest the need to understand trust and confidence as among the most important individual level characteristics driving compliance when developing and delivering messaging about the adoption of mitigation behaviors. The content of the message, it seems, will be most effective when citizens across countries trust its source. Trusted sources, such as politicians and the national health ministry, should thus consider working closely together when determining and communicating recommended health behaviors to avoid contradicting one another.

by Guido Iaccarino, Guido Grassi, Claudio Borghi, Stefano Carugo, Francesco Fallo, Claudio Ferri, Cristina Giannattasio, Davide Grassi, Claudio Letizia, Costantino Mancusi, Pietro Minuz, Stefano Perlini, Giacomo Pucci, Damiano Rizzoni, Massimo Salvetti, Riccardo Sarzani, Leonardo Sechi, Franco Veglio, Massimo Volpe, Maria Lorenza Muiesan, on Behalf of the SARS-RAS Investigators

by Satoshi Sunohara, Toshiaki Asakura, Takashi Kimura, Shun Ozawa, Satoshi Oshima, Daigo Yamauchi, Akiko Tamakoshi

Due to COVID-19, many countries including Japan have implemented a suspension of economic activities for infection control. It has contributed to reduce the transmission of COVID-19 but caused severe economic losses. Today, several promising vaccines have been developed and are already being distributed in some countries. Therefore, we evaluated various vaccine and intensive countermeasure strategies with constraint of economic loss using SEIR model to obtain knowledge of how to balance economy with infection control in Japan. Our main results were that the vaccination strategy that prioritized younger generation was better in terms of deaths when a linear relationship between lockdown intensity and acceptable economic loss was assumed. On the other hand, when a non-linearity relationship was introduced, implying that the strong lockdown with small economic loss was possible, the old first strategies were best in the settings of small basic reproduction number. These results indicated a high potential of remote work when prioritizing vaccination for the old generation. When focusing on only the old first strategies as the Japanese government has decided to do, the strategy vaccinating the young next to the old was superior to the others when a non-linear relationship was assumed due to sufficient reduction of contact with small economic loss.

by Dararat Eksombatchai, Thananya Wongsinin, Thanyakamol Phongnarudech, Kanin Thammavaranucupt, Naparat Amornputtisathaporn, Somnuek Sungkanuparph
Objectives To study abnormality of spirometry, six-minute walk distance, and chest radiograph among patients recovered from Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods and study design A prospective cohort study was conducted in 87 COVID-19 confirmed cases who recovered and discharged from a medical school hospital in Thailand. At the follow-up visit on day 60 after onset of symptoms, patients underwent an evaluation by spirometry (FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC, FEF25-75, and PEF), a six-minute-walk test (6MWT), and a chest radiograph. Results There were 35 men and 52 women, with a mean age of 39.6±11.8 years and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 23.8±4.3 kg/m2. Of all, 45 cases had mild symptoms; 35 had non-severe pneumonia, and 7 had severe pneumonia. Abnormality in spirometry was observed in 15 cases (17.2%), with 8% of restrictive defect and 9.2% of obstructive defect. Among the patients with an abnormal spirometry, the majority of the cases were in the severe pneumonia group (71.4%), compared with 15.6% in the non-severe pneumonia group, and 10.2% in the mild symptom group (p = 0.001). The mean six-minute-walk distance (6MWD) in the mild symptom and non-severe pneumonia groups was 538±56.8 and 527.5±53.5 meters, respectively. Although the severe pneumonia group tended to have a shorter mean 6-min walking distance, but this was not statistically significant (p = 0.118). Twelve patients (13.8%) had abnormal chest radiographs that showed residual fibrosis. This abnormality was more common in the severe pneumonia group (85.7%) and in others (7.5%) (p

by Johan Mälberg, Nermin Hadziosmanovic, David Smekal
Background The COVID-19 pandemic has presented emergency medical services (EMS) worldwide with the difficult task of identifying patients with COVID-19 and predicting the severity of their illness. The aim of this study was to investigate whether physiological respiratory parameters in pre-hospital patients with COVID-19 differed from those without COVID-19 and if they could be used to aid EMS personnel in the prediction of illness severity. Methods Patients with suspected COVID-19 were included by EMS personnel in Uppsala, Sweden. A portable respiratory monitor based on pneumotachography was used to sample the included patient’s physiological respiratory parameters. A questionnaire with information about present symptoms and background data was completed. COVID-19 diagnoses and hospital admissions were gathered from the electronic medical record system. The physiological respiratory parameters of patients with and without COVID-19 were then analyzed using descriptive statistical analysis and logistic regression. Results Between May 2020 and January 2021, 95 patients were included, and their physiological respiratory parameters analyzed. Of these patients, 53 had COVID-19. Using adjusted logistic regression, the odds of having COVID-19 increased with respiratory rate (95% CI 1.000–1.118), tidal volume (95% CI 0.996–0.999) and negative inspiratory pressure (95% CI 1.017–1.152). Patients admitted to hospital had higher respiratory rates (p

by Yu Shionoya, Toshibumi Taniguchi, Hajime Kasai, Noriko Sakuma, Shun Imai, Kohei Shikano, Shin Takayanagi, Misuzu Yahaba, Taka-aki Nakada, Hidetoshi Igari, Seiichiro Sakao, Takuji Suzuki
Introduction Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Although most patients with COVID-19 develop asymptomatic or mild disease, some patients develop severe disease. The effectiveness of various therapeutic agents, including antiviral drugs, steroids, and anti-inflammatories for COVID-19, have been being confirmed. The effect of administering steroids in early disease is unclear. This study therefore aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and risk of exacerbation of steroids administered preceding antiviral drugs in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods This retrospective, single-center, observational study included consecutive patients with COVID-19 between March 2020 and March 2021. Patients were divided into a steroids-first group and antiviral-drugs-first group. Mortality, duration of hospitalization, incidence rate and duration of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, intubation, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) induction of the two groups were compared. Results A total of 258 patients were admitted during the study period. After excluding patients who received symptomatic treatment only, who were taking immunosuppressive drugs, or who were administered antiviral drugs only, 68 patients were included in the analysis, 16 in the steroids-first group and 52 in the antiviral-drugs-first group. The rate of intubation, ICU admission and ECMO induction were significantly higher in the steroids-first group than in the antiviral-drugs-first group (81.3% vs. 33.3, p

Title: Physical Exercise and Immune System: Perspectives on the COVID-19 pandemic
Authors: Caria, Alex Cleber Improta; Soci, Úrsula Paula Renó; Pinho, Cristiano Silva; Aras Júnior, Roque; Sousa, Ricardo Augusto Leoni de; Bessa, Theolis Costa Barbosa

Title: A control framework to optimize public health policies in the course of the COVID‑19 pandemic
Authors: Pataro, Igor M. L.; Oliveira, Juliane F.; Morato, Marcelo M.; Amad, Alan A. S; Ramos, Pablo I. P.; Pereira, Felipe A. C.; Silva, Mateus S.; Jorge, Daniel C. P.; Andrade, Roberto F. S.; Barreto, Mauricio Lima; Costa, Marcus Americano da

by Misganu Endriyas, Aknaw Kawza, Abraham Alano, Mamush Hussen, Emebet Mekonnen, Teka Samuel, Mekonnen Shiferaw, Sinafikish Ayele, Temesgen Kelaye, Tebeje Misganaw, Endashaw Shibru
Background COVID-19 is highly infectious viral disease that can lead to main clinical symptoms like fever, dry cough, fatigue, myalgia, and dyspnea. Since there is no drug to cure the disease, focusing on improving community awareness related to prevention methods is crucial. But there was no regional level study addressing the reach of information, community knowledge and attitude related to COVID-19 and its prevention, and this study was done to inform and assist communication related to the disease responses during early introduction of the disease to the setting. Methods Community based cross sectional study was conducted in selected ten towns of SNNPR, Ethiopia. Multi-stage sampling was used to select 1239 participants. Semi-structured questionnaire was designed, pre-tested and uploaded to SurveyCTO data collection system with security patterns. Knowledge was assessed considering awareness about signs and symptoms, confirmatory test (laboratory test), what to do if there is a suspect, availability of drug to cure the disease, mechanisms of transmission, prevention methods and most at risk groups. Attitude was assessed using 11 statements including seriousness of disease, being at risk, possibility of prevention, and benefits of staying at health facilities. Descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression were performed to manage data using SPSS version 25. Results Almost all respondents (99.8%) heard about the disease. The mean score of knowledge was 52.3% (SD = 18.9) while the mean score attitude was 80.8% (SD = 6.48). Educational status, housing condition and marital status were associated with having good knowledge while occupation, housing condition, age and overall knowledge were associated with having positive attitude. Conclusion Even though almost all respondents had heard about the COVID-19, knowledge and attitude related to COVID-19 and its prevention were low. Awareness creation should be intensified using different local languages to improve community awareness, overcome misconceptions and minimize consequences of the disease.

by David Yechiam Aharon, Arie Jacobi, Eli Cohen, Joseph Tzur, Mahmoud Qadan

This study explores the interplay between public measures adopted by the U.S. government to combat COVID-19 and the performance of the American hospitality industry. The recent global pandemic is a natural experiment for exploring the role of government interventions and their direct impact on hospitality stock returns in the U.S. financial market. Overall, our findings show that most of the government interventions were associated with a negative response in the returns of the hospitality industry, a response that became more negative as the COVID-19 pandemic evolved. Similar patterns were also detected for other industries such as entertainment and transportation that are closely related to hospitality. The findings we document are fundamental to understanding the trends and fluctuations in hospitality stocks in the current crisis and any similar crisis in the future.

by Juan Ospina, Tao Jiang, Kennedy Hoying, Jennifer Crocker, Taylor Ballinger

We predicted that people with compassionate goals to support others and not harm them practiced more COVID-19 health behaviors during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic to protect both themselves and others from infection. Three studies (N = 1,143 American adults) supported these predictions and ruled out several alternative explanations. Compassionate goals unrelated to the health context predicted COVID-19 health behaviors better than the general motivation to be healthy (Studies 2 and 3). In contrast, general health motivation predicted general health behaviors better than did compassionate goals. Compassionate goals and political ideology each explained unique variance in COVID-19 health behaviors (Studies 1–3). Compassionate goals predict unique variance in COVID-19 health behaviors beyond empathic concern, communal orientation, and relational self-construal (Study 3), supporting the unique contribution of compassionate goals to understanding health behaviors. Our results suggest that ecosystem motivation is an important predictor of health behaviors, particularly in the context of a highly contagious disease.

by Bernd Kowall, Fabian Standl, Florian Oesterling, Bastian Brune, Marcus Brinkmann, Marcel Dudda, Peter Pflaumer, Karl-Heinz Jöckel, Andreas Stang
Introduction Excess mortality is a suitable indicator of health consequences of COVID-19 because death from any cause is clearly defined contrary to death from Covid-19. We compared the overall mortality in 2020 with the overall mortality in 2016 to 2019 in Germany, Sweden and Spain. Contrary to other studies, we also took the demographic development between 2016 and 2020 and increasing life expectancy into account. Methods Using death and population figures from the EUROSTAT database, we estimated weekly and cumulative Standardized Mortality Ratios (SMR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the year 2020. We applied two approaches to calculate weekly numbers of death expected in 2020: first, we used mean weekly mortality rates from 2016 to 2019 as expected mortality rates for 2020, and, second, to consider increasing life expectancy, we calculated expected mortality rates for 2020 by extrapolation from mortality rates from 2016 to 2019. Results In the first approach, the cumulative SMRs show that in Germany and Sweden there was no or little excess mortality in 2020 (SMR = 0.976 (95% CI: 0.974–0.978), and 1.030 (1.023–1.036), respectively), while in Spain the excess mortality was 14.8% (1.148 (1.144–1.151)). In the second approach, the corresponding SMRs for Germany and Sweden increased to 1.009 (1.007–1.011) and 1.083 (1.076–1.090), respectively, whereas results for Spain were virtually unchanged. Conclusion In 2020, there was barely any excess mortality in Germany for both approaches. In Sweden, excess mortality was 3% without, and 8% with consideration of increasing life expectancy.

by Inés Suárez-García, Isabel Perales-Fraile, Andrés González-García, Arturo Muñoz-Blanco, Luis Manzano, Martín Fabregate, Jesús Díez-Manglano, Eva Fonseca Aizpuru, Francisco Arnalich Fernández, Alejandra García García, Ricardo Gómez-Huelgas, José-Manuel Ramos-Rincón, on behalf of SEMI-COVID-19 Network
Background Whether immunosuppressed (IS) patients have a worse prognosis of COVID-19 compared to non-IS patients is not known. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcome of IS patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared to non-IS patients. Methods We designed a retrospective cohort study. We included all patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, a large multicentre national cohort in Spain, from March 27th until June 19th, 2020. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of in-hospital death among IS compared to non-IS patients. Results Among 13 206 included patients, 2 111 (16.0%) were IS. A total of 166 (1.3%) patients had solid organ (SO) transplant, 1081 (8.2%) had SO neoplasia, 332 (2.5%) had hematologic neoplasia, and 570 (4.3%), 183 (1.4%) and 394 (3.0%) were receiving systemic steroids, biological treatments, and immunosuppressors, respectively. Compared to non-IS patients, the aOR (95% CI) for in-hospital death was 1.60 (1.43–1.79) for all IS patients, 1.39 (1.18–1.63) for patients with SO cancer, 2.31 (1.76–3.03) for patients with haematological cancer and 3.12 (2.23–4.36) for patients with SO transplant. The aOR (95% CI) for death for patients who were receiving systemic steroids, biological treatments and immunosuppressors compared to non-IS patients were 2.16 (1.80–2.61), 1.97 (1.33–2.91) and 2.06 (1.64–2.60), respectively. IS patients had a higher odds than non-IS patients of in-hospital acute respiratory distress syndrome, heart failure, myocarditis, thromboembolic disease and multiorgan failure. Conclusions IS patients hospitalized with COVID-19 have a higher odds of in-hospital complications and death compared to non-IS patients.