Risultati per: Long COVID: principali risultati, meccanismi e raccomandazioni

Objectives
To determine the occurrence and clinicodemographic associations of hospital-based specialist palliative care (SPC) referral before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, timing of completed SPC consultation and comparative prevalence of ‘no cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR)’ orders, and end-of-life medication use, according to SPC involvement.

Design
Cross-sectional secondary analysis of a retrospective cohort study with a pre-pandemic (November 2019 to February 2020) group (Pre-COVID, n=170) and two intra-pandemic (March to August 2020) groups, one without (COVID–ve, n=170) and one with COVID-19 infection (COVID+ve, n=85). In the cohort study, Pre-COVID and COVID–ve group decedents were matched 2:1 on age, sex and care service (internal medicine/intensive care unit (ICU)) at death with COVID+ve decedents. In our current secondary analysis, clinicodemographic variables associated with SPC referral were examined in multivariable logistic regression, reporting adjusted ORs (aORs) and 95% CIs.

Setting
One quaternary and two tertiary acute care hospitals.

Participants
Decedent cohort with a terminal hospital admission (N=425).

Main outcome measures
SPC referral (yes/no) and timing of completed SPC consultation before death. Additional outcomes included ‘no CPR’ status and end-of-life medication prescription and dosing.

Results
SPC referral occurred in 70 (41.2%), 71 (41.8%) and 26 (30.6%) of the Pre-COVID, COVID–ve and COVID+ve groups, respectively (p=0.18). The aORs for SPC referral were lower for deaths in ICU (0.07; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.16) and admissions from nursing homes/long-term care (0.45; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.9), and higher for active cancer (2.5; 95% CI 1.39 to 4.39). Recipients of SPC consultation, compared with non-recipients, more frequently had a ‘no CPR’ order, had it placed earlier and were more frequently prescribed palliative end-of-life medications.

Conclusions
Hospital SPC consultation rates early in the COVID-19 pandemic were largely maintained at pre-pandemic levels. Having active cancer was positively associated with SPC referral, whereas both ICU death and having a nursing home/long-term care pre-admission source were negatively associated with referral.

Objectives
To examine the effectiveness of exercise interventions to improve long COVID symptoms and the tolerance of exercise interventions among people with long COVID.

Design
Systematic review.

Data sources
Medline via EBSCOhost, Embase via OVID and CENTRAL via the Cochrane Library up to 28 February 2023.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies
Inclusion criteria were: (1) participants with long COVID, as defined by study authors; (2) random assignment to either an exercise intervention or a comparison group and (3) a quantitative measure of at least 1 of the 12 core long COVID outcomes. Exclusion criteria were: (1) signs or symptoms not reasonably attributable to prior SARS-CoV-2 infection; (2) pre-exposure or postexposure prophylaxis for COVID-19 or the prevention of long COVID symptoms and (3) interventions where the primary exercise component is breathing or respiratory muscle training.

Data extraction and synthesis
Two reviewers independently extracted data, and studies were narratively synthesised.

Results
Eight studies were included. Follow-up periods ranged from 2 to 28 weeks (mean=8.5 weeks). Sample sizes ranged from 39 to 119 (mean=56). All studies were in adults (mean age=49.9 years) and both sexes (mean female proportion=53.9%). Four studies were at low risk of bias, two were unclear and two were high. The evidence suggests that exercise interventions lead to short-term improvements in dyspnoea, fatigue, physical function and the physical domain of quality of life among people with long COVID. Of the five studies that reported adverse events, rates were low and, when reported, mild. Of the seven studies that reported sufficient relevant information, 1 of 252 participants who received exercise discontinued the intervention due to tolerance-related issues.

Conclusion
Available evidence suggests that exercise interventions may be beneficial and tolerable among some people with long COVID. However, the evidence base consists of a limited number of studies with small sample sizes and short follow-up periods.

Possibile lun egame con l’aumento del tempo che si trascorre al chiuso

Objectives
Patient information sheets (PISs) and informed consent forms (ICFs) are essential tools to communicate and document informed consent for clinical trial participation. These documents need to be easily understandable, especially when used to take informed consent from acutely unwell patients. Health literacy guidance recommends written information should be at a level between reading ages 9–11. We aimed to assess the readability and complexity of PISs/ICFs used for clinical trials of acute therapies during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design
Retrospective document analysis.

Setting
PISs/ICFs used in trials involving pharmaceutical interventions recruiting hospitalised patients with COVID-19 during the first year of the pandemic were sourced from hospitals across the UK.

Primary and secondary outcome measures
PISs/ICFs were assessed for length, approximate reading time and subsection content. Readability and language complexity were assessed using Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) (range 1–18; higher is more complex), Gunning-Fog (GFOG) (range 1–20; higher is more complex) and Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) (range 0–100; below 60 is ‘difficult’ for comprehension).

Results
13 documents were analysed with a median length of 5139 words (range 1559–7026), equating to a median reading time of 21.4 min (range 6.5–29.3 min) at 240 words per minute. Median FKGL was 9.8 (9.1–10.8), GFOG 11.8 (10.4–13) and FRES was 54.6 (47.0–58.3). All documents were classified as ‘difficult’ for comprehension and had a reading age of 14 years old or higher.

Conclusions
All PISs/ICFs analysed contained literary complexity beyond both recommendations and the reading level of many in the UK population. Researchers should seek to improve communications to improve trial volunteer comprehension and recruitment.

Objectives
This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of individuals experiencing financial hardship and to examine the relationship between their experiences of financial hardship and psychological distress during and after the COVID-19 lockdowns.

Design
This is a secondary analysis of data from four repeated state-wide surveys conducted in 2020 and 2022.

Setting
Victoria, Australia.

Participants and outcome measures
All Victorian residents aged 18 years and above were eligible. Psychological distress was assessed using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale-6 Item version (K6), while financial hardship was assessed using a nine-item scale. Relationships between experiencing any form of financial hardship and experiencing high psychological distress (K6≥19) were evaluated using an autoregressive and cross-lagged model that used data from all four surveys.

Results
A total of 2000, 2000, 2349 and 2444 individuals responded to surveys 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. The proportion of people experiencing at least one form of financial hardship increased from 23.5% in 2020 (the first year of the pandemic) to 38.5% in 2022 (the third year of the pandemic). The most vulnerable groups facing financial hardship included young people, Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islanders, individuals with disabilities and those with low income. The proportions of individuals experiencing high psychological distress followed a quadratic trajectory, with the peak occurring between the first and third years of the pandemic. Experiencing financial hardship was consistently associated with high psychological distress at each time point in this study. However, there was no evidence of a longitudinal relationship between financial hardship and high psychological distress.

Conclusions
The data from this study confirmed a significant increase in the proportion of individuals facing financial hardship among the adult population in Victoria from the first to the third year of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study does not ascertain a longitudinal effect of financial hardship on psychological distress during the pandemic. Further research is warranted to confirm this finding.

Preliminary data show that both vaccines protected against infection and hospitalization.

Objectives
After taking a heavy toll on the world population, the COVID-19 pandemic is now an endemic disease of global public health significance that requires long-term application of control measures, which will likely be influenced by people’s sources of information, knowledge and attitude about COVID-19 and their previous use of control measures. This study aimed to further the understanding of COVID-19 information sources, knowledge, attitude and control practices and their predictors among community members in Ebonyi state, Nigeria during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design
Analytical cross-sectional survey.

Setting and participants
We conducted a survey among all consenting/assenting community members aged 15 years and above in 28 randomly selected geographical clusters between 12 March and 9 May 2022. Data were collected through a structured, interviewer-administered questionnaire using KoBoCollect installed in Android devices.

Analysis
Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were done, including multivariate generalised estimating equations.

Results
10 825 participants were surveyed. The radio was the most common individual source of information about COVID-19 (used by 71.9% of the participants), and also the main and most trusted source of information for majority of the participants (46.1% and 44.7%, respectively). This was followed by family members/relatives/friends (61.8%) as the next most common source of information about COVID-19. Next to radio, family members/relatives/friends (13.2%) were the second main source of information, followed by health workers (13.0%). Meanwhile, health workers (15.2%) were the second most trusted source of COVID-19 information, next to radio. Traditional media was the main and also the most trusted source of information (55.6% and 54.3%, respectively), followed by interpersonal sources (36.9% and 39.7%, respectively) and internet/social media/text messages (7.5% and 6.0%, respectively). 10.1%, 51.4% and 23.7% of the participants had good knowledge, good attitude and good control practice, respectively. The strongest and most important predictor of the main and most trusted sources of information was gender. Other predictors included marital status, educational level, age and occupation. Good attitude, being married and educational level were strong predictors of good control practices.

Conclusion
The evidence from this study should be used to guide subsequent policy actions on COVID-19 or other similar health emergencies in order to enhance effective emergency health information dissemination and optimal use of control measures by community members in Ebonyi state, Nigeria and in other similar settings.

Introduction
Under-vaccination among underserved groups remains low due to existing disparities. This is particularly the case with postpandemic COVID-19 vaccinations and other vaccine-preventable diseases, including measles, mumps, rubella or influenza. Therefore, we aim to (1) determine the feasibility and practicality of implementing a patient engagement tool (PET) and gain vital insights to plan a subsequent definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effectiveness of this tool for increasing uptake of COVID-19 and influenza vaccinations and (2) define the appropriate level of support needed for healthcare providers at site-level to ensure successful implementation of the PET and to identify supporting activities needed to implement interventions for COVID-19 and influenza vaccinations.

Methods and analysis
This is a randomised controlled feasibility study evaluating a co-designed PET, involving randomisation at individual and cluster levels. For individual randomisation, patients will be individually randomised 1:1 to receive the intervention (PET) or routine care; whereas for cluster randomisation, six GP (General Practitioner) practices will be randomised 1:1 and divided into two tranches at two separate time points. Both groups will receive training and software activation. Data will be analysed using statistical software R (V.4.0 or greater) or STATA (V.17 or greater). Baseline characteristics will be summarised and presented in groups based on an intention-to-treat basis with categorical data, including demographics, socioeconomic variables, comorbidities and vaccination status.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethical approval was granted by the Westminster Ethics Committee (ref: 316860). Our dissemination strategy targets three audiences: (1) policy makers, public and health service managers, and clinicians responsible for delivering vaccines and infection prevention services; (2) patients and public from underserved population groups and (3) academics.

Trial registration number
ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05866237).

Introduction
The elderly are particularly vulnerable to morbidity and mortality from COVID-19, the disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2. Approximately 20% of the elderly showed no antibodies 3–5 months post-second dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. As probiotics have been shown to increase influenza-specific antibody levels post-influenza vaccination, we aim to reduce the percentage of participants without antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor-binding domain (anti-S1-RBD) at 6 months post-vaccination.

Methods and analysis
Our study design is a double-blind randomised controlled trial, using intention-to-treat analysis. Eligible participants are a purposive sample of 688 adults aged 65–89 years, in Quebec, Canada, not diagnosed with COVID-19 in the 3 months prior to recruitment and who wish to receive a government-recommended mRNA booster (Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna) vaccine. The intervention consists of one capsule/day of a probiotic dietary supplement of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus and Lacticaseibacillus casei 6×109 CFU/capsule or a placebo, for 15 days pre-booster and post-booster vaccine. All participants provide dried blood spot samples at three timepoints (inclusion, 3 and 6 months post-vaccination) and a stool sample for microbiome analysis. A subgroup of 100 participants living near Sherbrooke, Quebec, is expected to volunteer for two onsite blood-test visits (at inclusion and 6 months post-vaccination). The primary outcome is the percentage of participants without anti-S1-RBD antibodies at 6 months post-vaccination. Secondary outcomes include longitudinal analysis of anti-S1-RBD and anti-N antibodies at three timepoints. In the subgroup, serum levels of neutralising antibodies will be determined at inclusion and 6 months post-vaccination. Probiotic and vaccine side effects are monitored. At the end of the study, we expect to identify the adjuvant effect of probiotic on vaccine-induced immune response.

Ethics and dissemination
The study was approved by Research Ethics Board of the Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et des Services Sociaux de l’Estrie- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke (CIUSSS de l’Estrie-CHUS) and the CHU de Québec-Université Laval # MP-31-2022-4598 as well as Health Canada. All participants will provide informed consent. Results will be disseminated to the scientific community and to all networks related in this research.

Trial registration number
NCT05195151.

Stroke, Ahead of Print. BACKGROUND:Whether the long-term benefit of stroke prevention when stenting is added to medical therapy (MT) over MT alone for symptomatic severe intracranial artery stenosis offsets the perioperative risks of the stenting has not been directly evaluated in a randomized trial. We aimed to compare the long-term ( >3 years) effect of stenting versus MT alone in patients with symptomatic severe intracranial artery stenosis in a randomized trial.METHODS:We extended the follow-up of 358 subjects enrolled in a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial conducted at 8 centers in China. Patients with transient ischemic attack or stroke attributed to severe intracranial stenosis (70% to 99%) were recruited between March 5, 2014, and November 10, 2016. The primary outcome was a composite of stroke or death within 30 days or stroke in the territory of the qualifying artery beyond 30 days. Other secondary outcomes included stroke in the territory of the qualifying artery, as well as disabling stroke or death after enrollment.RESULTS:A total of 358 patients (stenting 176 versus MT 182) were recruited from March 5, 2014, and followed up till January 22, 2024. The median duration of follow-up was 7.4 years (interquartile range, 6.0–8.0). The primary outcome was not significantly different (stenting 14.8% versus MT 14.3%; hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.58–1.77];P=0.97). No significant difference was found between groups for the secondary outcomes: stroke in the territory of qualifying artery (14.8% versus 14.3%; hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.58–1.77];P=0.97), disabling stroke or death (16.5% versus 14.3%; hazard ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.66–1.91];P=0.70), and death (9.1% versus 7.1%; hazard ratio, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.58–2.58];P=0.60).CONCLUSIONS:This study provides compelling evidence that, even over prolonged observed periods, the addition of stenting to MT does not confer additional benefits to MT alone in patients with symptomatic severe intracranial artery stenosis. These results underscore the importance of MT as the cornerstone of long-term stroke prevention in this patient population.REGISTRATION:URL:https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01763320.

Annals of Internal Medicine, Ahead of Print.

Objectives
To evaluate hospital outcomes and their predictors during the pandemic for patients with and without COVID-19, stratified by the presence of acute kidney injury (AKI).

Design
Retrospective observation study using the Hospital Episodes Statistics database for England.

Participants
2 385 337 unique hospital admissions of adult patients from March 2020 to March 2021 in England.

Main outcome measures
COVID-19 cases were identified by the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) code of U07.1. Patients with suspected COVID-19 (U07.2 code) and patients with end-stage kidney disease on chronic dialysis (N18.6 and Z99.2) were excluded. AKI cases were identified by the ICD10 code. Patients were categorised into four groups based on COVID-19 and AKI diagnoses: Group 1—neither; Group 2—COVID-19 only; Group 3—AKI only; Group 4—both. A multivariable logistic regression model was created with in-hospital mortality as the outcome, including diagnostic groups, demographics, admission methods, comorbidity severity, deprivation index and intensive therapy unit (ITU) admission.

Results
Among 2 385 337 admissions involving 663 628 patients, 856 544 had AKI (N17 codes) and 1 528 793 did not. Among patients without AKI, there were 1,008,774 admissions among 133,988 individuals without COVID-19 (Group 1) and 520,019 admissions among 256,037 individuals with COVID-19 (Group 2). Among patients with AKI, there were 630,342 admissions among 218,270 individuals without COVID-19 (Group 3) and 226,202 admissions among 55,333 individuals with COVID-19 (Group 4). Patients in group 4 were older (75.4 ± 13.8 years) and had greater length of stay (17.1 ± 17 days) than all other groups. They also had and had a greater proportion of males, ethnic minorities and comorbidities than other groups. Mortality was highest in Group 4 (28.7%) and lowest in Group 1 (1.1%). The increased risk of death persisted after controlling for multiple baseline factors (OR for death vs Group 1: Group 4—22.28, Group 2—9.67, Group 3—6.44). ITU admission was least required in Group 1 (1.2%) and most in Group 4 (10.9%), with mortality at 4.8% versus 47.8%, respectively.

Conclusions
Patients with COVID-19 and AKI have a high risk of mortality and should be recognised early and provided with optimal support. Planning for future pandemics should ensure adequate critical care and acute dialysis capacity.

Trial registration number
NCT04579562.

Comunicato del 13/03/2025 n°10

Objectives
Racially minoritised communities (RMCs) were disproportionately affected by COVID-19, experiencing among the highest mortality rates of the UK’s pandemic. We sought to understand the priorities for action to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health and well-being of RMCs in the ethnically diverse and socioeconomically unequal area of East London, located in the northeastern part of London, England.

Design
Prospective surveys and a consensus meeting following the established James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership (PSP) methodology, adapted for a specific geographic location and ethnic groups.

Setting
Conducted in East London between 2021 and 2023.

Participants
Participants were individuals aged ≥18 years living and/or working in East London. Communities represented included Black African, Black Caribbean, Somali, South Asian and Bangladeshi.

Outcome measure
People were asked to submit suggestions for the priorities for action to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Return responses were reviewed and prioritised in a final workshop.

Results
816 suggestions were gathered from 187 responses to the initial survey. These were summarised into a longlist of 40 for the second survey, from which 243 respondents identified a shortlist of 26 priorities for discussion in a consensus meeting. The final top 10 priorities cover community-based support and spaces spanning education, social support, mental health and housing.

Conclusion
A systematic methodology was used to identify the priorities of RMCs in East London in the context of recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. The breadth of the top 10 reflects how profound the effects of the pandemic have been among these communities. It also demonstrates the capacity of a PSP to articulate diverse community-driven priorities for a topic that was wider than healthcare. The findings could have applications in other disease areas that disproportionately affect RMCs.

Objectives
This study aims to explore the perceptions of patients affected by COVID-19 and their families regarding the challenges faced, coping strategies used and lessons learnt in Pakistan.

Design
A qualitative exploratory descriptive approach was used to explore the real-time experiences of the participants.

Setting
The study was carried out in a tertiary care hospital in Karachi, Pakistan.

Participants
Purposive and snowball sampling methods were used to enrol 22 dyads of adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and their respective family members (FMs) (spouse, children, siblings or any other FM sharing a residence in Karachi, Pakistan, with the patient before quarantine). The 44 participants, with 23 females and 21 males, had an average age of 43.2 years.

Results
We identified five key themes: practising a healthy diet and physical activity to boost immunity; developing workplace policies for job security, safety and mental well-being; encouraging digitalisation of health through teleconsultation and virtual learning; using technology and artificial intelligence to transform healthcare delivery systems; and empowering resilience and community unity to promote mental well-being.

Conclusion
The study summarises the opinions of people directly affected by COVID-19 and the stakeholders of systemic challenges. The findings of the study can guide further strengthening of the healthcare system and improvements of organisational policies to facilitate better preparation of marginalised communities for future pandemics.

Objectives
To quantify access to health services during the COVID-19 pandemic and measure the change in use between the prepandemic and the pandemic periods in a population with assessment of psychological distress or diagnosis of mental disorders.

Data sources
We developed and piloted a search syntax and adapted it to enter the following databases from 1 January 2020 to 31 March 2023: PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Epistemonikos and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We reran the searches from the end of the original search to 3 December 2024.

Design
We systematically screened titles, abstracts and full texts of retrieved records.

Eligibility criteria
We included observational studies on any populations and regions, covering health services such as doctor visits, hospital admissions, diagnostic examinations, pharmaceutical therapies and mental health (MH) services. Only studies using validated scales to assess psychological distress or mental disorders as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders were included.

Data extraction and synthesis
We extracted data using a purposefully designed form and evaluated the studies’ quality with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We measured the incidence rate (IR) of access to health services and the IR ratio (IRR) between the prepandemic and the pandemic periods. We calculated contacts days and catchment areas in the different periods. We used the random effects DerSimonian-Laird inverse-variance model and calculated heterogeneity with statistics I² and ². We computed pooled IR and pooled IRR and tested the hypothesis of no variation (IRR=1).

Results
We retrieved 10 014 records and examined the full text of 580 articles. We included 136 primary studies of which 44 were meta-analysed. The IR of access to services during the pandemic was 2.59 contact months per 10 000 inhabitants (IR=2.592; 95% CI: 1.301 to 5.164). We observed a reduction of 28.5% in the use of services with negligible differences by age group and type of services (IRR=0.715; 95% CI: 0.651 to 0.785). We observed significant differences in effect sizes across studies (2=5.44; p