Risultati per: COVID-19 grave collegato all’invecchiamento cerebrale

Circulation, Volume 150, Issue Suppl_1, Page A4144997-A4144997, November 12, 2024. Introduction:Myocardial injury in patients hospitalized with acute on chronic heart failure concurrent with index SARS-CoV-2 (CoV-2) infection is well described, though studies incorporating pre- and post-acute COVID-19 (PAC) are lacking. We address this gap by estimating intensity of acutely decompensated heart failure (ADHF) using time-series pro-BNP levels across hospitalizations pre- vs. respectively index and initial readmission (PAC1).Hypothesis:Case time series analysis will reveal association (p

Circulation, Volume 150, Issue Suppl_1, Page ASa907-ASa907, November 12, 2024. Background:Different from the negative impact of COVID-19 pandemic on outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) collapsed before emergency medical service (EMS) arrival, there was a report suggested that COVID-19 pandemic did not affect outcomes after OHCA witnessed by EMS personnel. However, no large-scale studies have examined the impact of COVID-19 pandemic after EMS-witnessed OHCA, focusing on favorable neurological outcomes.Research Questions:Does COVID-19 pandemic affect favorable neurological outcomes after EMS-witnessed OHCA?Aims:To assess COVID-19’s impact on favorable neurological outcomes after EMS-witnessed OHCA.Methods:We performed an interrupted time series analysis (ITSA) with a prospective, nationwide, population-based registry in Japan to assess trends of incidence and favorable neurological outcome (Cerebral Performance Category 1 or 2) at 30 days with adult EMS-witnessed OHCA between pre-pandemic (January 2016-March 2020) and pandemic (April 2020-December 2021) periods. Subgroup analyses were performed by stratifying regions by infection spread status defined by whether a state of emergency has been declared. To assess whether there are differences in trends between areas with and without COVID-19 spread, we performed a controlled ITSA between the two areas.Results:We identified 58,315 patients with adult EMS-witnessed OHCA, 41,112 during the pre-pandemic period and 17,203 during the pandemic period. There was no significant increase in the incidence of EMS-witnessed OHCA during the pandemic period (0.03 per 100,000 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], –0.02 to 0.08; p = 0.21). Favorable neurological outcome significantly decreased (relative risk [RR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.91; p < 0.01). In subgroup analysis, favorable neurological outcome significantly decreased in areas with COVID-19 spread (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.81; p < 0.01), while there was no significant difference in areas without COVID-19 spread (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.07; p = 0.24). A controlled ITSA showed that favorable neurological outcome significantly decreased in areas with COVID-19 spread compared to without COVID-19 spread (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.98; p = 0.04).Conclusion:Unlike previous studies, our research with a nationwide, population-based registry showed that COVID-19 pandemic influenced favorable neurological outcome in EMS-witnessed OHCA. This trend appears to be more pronounced in areas with widespread infection.

Circulation, Volume 150, Issue Suppl_1, Page A4127513-A4127513, November 12, 2024. Background:SARS-CoV-2 infection affects the cardiopulmonary system in both the acute and long-term phase. This study aimed to comprehensively assess symptoms and potential long-term impairments 6, 18 and 30 months in patients previously hospitalized for severe Covid-19 infection.Methods:This prospective registry included patients hospitalized for PCR-confirmed Covid-19 infection. Approximately 6 months post-discharge, follow-up examination included patient history, clinical examination, echocardiography, electrocardiogram, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI), chest computed tomography (CT) scan, pulmonary function test (PFT), six-minute walk test (6MWT) and a comprehensive laboratory panel. Patients with pathologic findings during the first visit underwent a second (at 18 months) and third (at 30 months) follow-up examination. Those without pathologic findings or who refused further medical examinations were contacted via phone to inquire about symptoms.Results:Between July 2020 and April 2022, 200 patients (91% general ward, 9% intensive care unit) were recruited. Due to dropouts, the second visit was conducted in 170 patients, and the third visit in 139 (74 in person, 65 via telephone). Long Covid criteria were fulfilled by 73% at 6 months, 52% at 18 months and 49% at 30 months post-discharge, with fatigue being the most common symptom (Figure 1). Echocardiography at 6 months showed impaired left ventricular function in 15 patients, with normalization in 80% at 18 months and further 66% at 30 months (Figure 2). cMRI revealed pericardial effusions in 28 patients at 6 months, which resolved in 47% at 18 months and in further 60% at 30 months. Signs of peri- or myocarditis were present in 7 patients at 6 months and were resolved in all 4 patients who attended control studies at 18 months. Chest CT scans at 6 months identified post-infectious residues in 41 patients, with full recovery in 20% at 18 months without further normalization after 30 months.The length of in-hospital stay was identified as a significant predictor for persisting Long Covid 6 months after discharge (95% CI: 1.005 – 1.12, p=0.03).Conclusion:While the prevalence of Long Covid decreased over time, a significant symptom burden persisted at 6, 18 and even 30 months after severe Covid-19 infection. Structural and functional abnormalities were less frequent compared to reported symptoms, posing a challenge in substantiating the causes of these symptoms.

Circulation, Volume 150, Issue Suppl_1, Page A4138301-A4138301, November 12, 2024. Background:Hyperlipidemia (HLD) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Little is known regarding temporal variation in CVD mortality related to HLD. The COVID-19 pandemic added complexity to factors influencing CVD mortality.Question:What are the yearly trends and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on HLD-related CVD mortality in the United States?Methods:Mortality and demographic data for adults were obtained from CDC repository from 1999-2020, using ICD-10 codes HLD (E78.0-E78.5) and CVD (I00-I99). Age adjusted mortality rates (AAMR) per 1,000,000 population was standardized to the 2000 US population. Log-linear regression models evaluated mortality shifts. Average annual percentage change (AAPC) from 1999-2019 was used to calculate projected AAMR in 2020, subsequently compared to actual 2020 death rates to estimate pandemic-attributed excess deaths.Results:A total of 483,155 HLD-related CVD deaths were recorded between 1999-2020. Despite the CVD mortality decline in general population, HLD-related CVD AAMR rose from 36.33 [95% CI, 35.52-37.13] in 1999 to 99.77 [98.67-100.87] in 2019. Ischemic heart diseases (AAMR 49.39) were the most common causes of death while hypertension had the highest annual mortality increase (AAPC +10.23%) in populations with HLD. Higher HLD-related CVD mortality was observed in males (AAMR 104.87) than females (AAMR 61.93), in those ≥75 years (AAMR 646.45) than 35-75 years (AAMR 54.11), in non-Hispanic (NH) (AAMR 82.49) than Hispanic (AAMR 58.98) populations, and in rural (AAMR 89.98) than urban (AAMR 78.94) regions. NH Black populations (AAMR 84.35) and Western US regions (AAMR 96.88) had the highest HLD-related CVD. The first year of COVID-19 pandemic resulted in 10.55% excess HLD-related CVD death, with the most prominent increase in the 35-75 years age group (14.23%), Hispanic (17.96%), Black (14.82%), and urban (11.68%) populations.Conclusions:Our study revealed an increase in HLD-related CVD mortality which was exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Higher CVD mortality disproportionately affected males, Black, elderly (≥75 years), and rural populations with HLD. Further research is needed to validate our findings and identify contributing factors.

Background
Increasing evidence has emerged for traditional, complementary and integrative medicine (TCIM) to treat COVID-19 which requires systematic summaries of the net benefits of interventions against standard care and one another. The study aims to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) regarding TCIM therapies for treating mild/moderate acute COVID-19, potentially informing the WHO guideline development and clinical decision-making.

Methods and analysis
We will search Embase, MEDLINE, Virtual Health Library on Traditional Complementary and Integrative Medicine, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, WHO’s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform with additional searches of Chinese and Korean literature sources for randomised controlled trials comparing TCIM with placebo, standard care, no treatment or with an alternate type of TCIM to treat COVID-19. We will limit the search dates from 2020 to 28 March 2024. Reviewers will, in duplicate, screen eligible articles, extract data and evaluate the risk of bias. We will conduct frequentist network meta-analyses for network comparisons and each outcome. We will assess the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach and classify interventions from most to least effective or harmful.

Ethics and dissemination
This NMA is based on the existing trials and data which is not subject to ethical approval. We will publish the NMA in a peer-reviewed journal. This may provide methodological reference and clinical evidence for TCIM on future epidemic-prone diseases.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42024517321.

Introduction
Post-COVID-19 condition, or syndrome, also known as long COVID, is an infection-associated chronic condition that can develop after a SARS-CoV-2 infection and last at least 3 months to years. Despite representing a high burden for the Unified Health System (SUS), which has affected millions of Brazilians, it has received limited attention in Brazil. Prevalence studies to date have failed to include a broad representation of the population, and there has been insufficient exploration of the impact on people’s lives and the burden of and barriers to accessing health services. This article presents the research protocol for the quantitative component of a mixed methods project to produce evidence to inform SUS’s provision of care for long COVID. The protocol was designed to study long COVID in SUS patients hospitalised for COVID-19 in a large city in Southeast Brazil to capture symptoms and factors associated with the syndrome, effects on quality of life and employment, health needs, use of health services and barriers to accessing necessary healthcare.

Methods and analysis
An ambidirectional cohort study to capture data retrospectively and prospectively from adults previously discharged from SUS hospitals for COVID-19. The study involves up to two telephone surveys with the patients or proxies selected from a sampling plan for population estimates. Survey questions include baseline and follow-up data on demographic, socioeconomic, comorbidities, work status, health-related quality of life, vaccination status, long COVID symptoms, healthcare needs, use and barriers to access. Descriptive and appropriate multivariable analyses will be employed.

Ethics and dissemination
The project was approved by the Research Ethics Committees of participant institutions and by the Brazilian National Research Ethics Commission. All participants provided verbal consent. We plan to publish articles in scientific journals and multimedia resources for SUS professionals and the general population.

Objectives
This study aims to identify the factors influencing vaccine hesitancy, willingness and its variation over time in order to inform more responsive strategies for increasing vaccination uptake. The specific objectives are: (1) to describe and compare levels of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among the general population in rural and urban settings in West Africa over time and (2) to identify factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination willingness and hesitancy among the general population across five West African countries over time.

Design
Following a baseline survey (Wave I), three serial cross-sectional surveys (Waves II-IV) were implemented.

Setting
The study was conducted in Burkina Faso, Guinea, Mali, Senegal and Sierra Leone from November 2021 to July 2022.

Participants
A total of 13 571 study participants were included in the study (n=4373, n=4593 and n=4605 for survey Waves II, III and IV, respectively). Inclusion criteria were being 18 years or older, living in the study area and willing to provide informed consent. A two-stage sampling strategy was used to select the sample from among the general population.

Primary and secondary outcomes
Primary outcomes were the variability of vaccine hesitancy over time and across the five West African countries. Secondary outcomes were factors associated with vaccine willingness.

Results
A small but steady increase in hesitancy to COVID-19-vaccination can be observed across countries, with an upward trend of vaccine hesitancy reported by 952 participants (33.9 %) in Wave II, 1055 (37.3%) in Wave III and 1089 (38.1%) in Wave IV. Among the countries included, Senegal shows the highest level of vaccine hesitancy (‘Definitely no’ and ‘Probably no’ ranging from 50.2% to 56.0% and 26.2 to 28.3%, respectively). At the same time, Senegal has the lowest vaccination coverage overall. Across all five countries and survey waves, the primary factor associated with vaccination willingness is fear of experiencing severe COVID-19 disease (Wave II: OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.51, Wave III: OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.59 and Wave IV: OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.66). Perceived improved financial status seems to influence willingness to get vaccinated negatively (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.81) and unlike in Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich and Democratic countries, men seem more reluctant to get vaccinated than women (OR 0.77, 95%, CI 0.65 to 0.93).

Conclusions
Our findings suggest that vaccine hesitancy should be monitored over time to inform communication strategies, which are responsive to changes in vaccination-related public sentiments. Additionally, a focus on social solidarity and the importance of women in vaccination advocacy can help improve COVID-19 vaccination coverage in West Africa.

Trial registration number
The general protocol is registered on clinicaltrial.gov (protocol number: NCT04912284).

Objectives
To explore experiences of physiotherapists working with adults living with Long COVID in Canada.

Design
Cross-sectional descriptive qualitative study involving online semi-structured interviews.

Participants
We recruited physiotherapists in Canada who self-identified as having clinically treated one or more adults living with Long COVID in the past year.

Data collection
Using an interview guide, we inquired about physiotherapists’ knowledge of Long COVID, assessment and treatment experiences, perspectives on physiotherapists’ roles, contextual and implementation factors influencing rehabilitative outcomes, and their recommendations for Long COVID rehabilitation. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a group-based thematic analytical approach. We administered a demographic questionnaire to describe sample characteristics.

Results
13 physiotherapists from five provinces participated; most were women (n=8; 62%) and practised in urban settings (n=11; 85%). Participants reported variable amounts of knowledge of existing guidelines and experiences working with adults living with Long COVID in the past year. Physiotherapists characterised their experiences working with adults living with Long COVID as a dynamic process involving: (1) a disruption to the profession (encountering a new patient population and pivoting to new models of care delivery), followed by (2) a cyclical process of learning curves and evolving roles of physiotherapists working with persons living with Long COVID (navigating uncertainty, keeping up with rapidly emerging evidence, trial and error, adapting mindset and rehabilitative approaches and growing prominence of roles as advocate and collaborator). Participants recommended the need for education and training, active and open-minded listening with patients, interdisciplinary models of care, and organisational- and system-level improvements to foster access to care.

Conclusions
Physiotherapists’ experiences involved a disruption to the profession followed by a dynamic process of learning curves and evolving roles in Long COVID rehabilitation. Not all participants demonstrated an in-depth understanding of existing Long COVID rehabilitation guidelines. Results may help inform physiotherapy education in Long COVID rehabilitation.

Misurando la presenza di certi anticorpi

Annals of Internal Medicine, Ahead of Print.

“Fondi insufficienti per salvare servizio sanitario nazionale”

Background
Persons with COVID-19 may experience limitations in daily functioning and can be referred to occupational therapy.

Objectives
To evaluate changes in daily functioning, cognitive complaints, fatigue and self-management of persons with COVID-19 who received occupational therapy in primary care.

To get insights in the volume and duration of occupational therapy.

Design
A pre-post observational cohort study from October 2020 until April 2021.

Setting
Fifty-eight occupational therapy practices in primary care throughout the Netherlands participated with 68 occupational therapists.

Participants
228 adults (≥18 years) with COVID-19, referred to occupational therapy, gave informed consent and participated in the pre-post evaluation. The mean age was 49 years (SD 13) and 79% of the patients was female. The most frequently reported complaints included fatigue and cognitive complaints.

Interventions
Occupational therapy using Dutch guidelines for occupational therapy in clients with COVID-19.

Outcome measures
Performance and satisfaction with performance using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM); the impact of Cognitive Complaints on Participation (CoCo-P); and daily activities, self-management and perceived contribution of occupational therapy using the Patient Reported Outcome Measure for Occupational Therapy (PROM-OT).

Results
COPM-performance score improved with a mean difference of 2.9 points (95% CI 2.7 to 3.2), and COPM-satisfaction score improved with 3.2 points (95% CI 2.9 to 3.5). CoCo-P score improved with a mean difference of 20.9 points (95% CI from 14.4 to 27.4), and PROM-OT improved with 42.8 points (95% CI from 40.2 to 45.4). Participants received a median of seven sessions of occupational therapy (IQR 5–10) with a median duration of 18 weeks (IQR 12–25). They valued the contribution of occupational therapy to their improved functioning with a mean score of 8 (SD 1.4) and recommended this to others with a mean score of 9 (SD 1.2).

Conclusions
Persons with COVID-19 who received occupational therapy in primary care improved significantly in daily functioning and highly valued occupational therapy.

Background
Gauteng was one of the provinces in South Africa most hit by COVID-19. However, there has been no assessment of the pandemic’s impact on essential maternal, neonatal and child health (MNCH) services in Gauteng, for planning against future emergencies. This study sought to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on essential MNCH service utilisation, delivery and health outcomes in Gauteng province.

Methods
We employed a quasi-experimental interrupted time series (ITS) study design, using the District Health Information System (DHIS) data set to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on eight key MNCH indicators between March 2019 to February 2021. Using Stata V.17.0 and 5% alpha, a segmented linear regression (ITS) model quantified the trends of the indicators before COVID-19 (March 2019 to February 2020) (β1), the immediate change in level due to the March 2020 lockdown (β2), the post-lockdown (March 2020 to February 2021) trend (β4) and the change in gradient from before to after the lockdown (β3).

Results
COVID-19 lockdown exerted a significant decline in primary healthcare headcount

Introduction
Evidence summaries on the benefits and harms of treatment options support informed decisions under controlled conditions. However, few studies have investigated how such formats support decision-making across different social groups. There is a risk that only disadvantaged people will be able to make informed health decisions—possibly increasing the health equity gap. It is also unclear whether they support decision-making in the field at all. The aim of our study is to assess whether evidence summaries based on the fact box format can help people from different social groups make informed decisions about COVID-19 and influenza vaccinations, and thus reduce inequity in health communication.

Methods and analysis
In a multi-centre, cluster-randomised, controlled trial, health educators from usual care and outreach work in Germany will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to provide either usual health communication plus an evidence summary (‘fact box’) or usual health communication. Health educators provide a flyer about COVID-19 or influenza vaccination which contains a link to an online study either with (intervention) or without (control) fact box on the reverse side. Flyer and online study will be available in Arabic, German, Turkish and Russian language. The primary outcome is informed vaccination intention, based on vaccination knowledge, attitudes, intentions and behaviour. Secondary outcomes include risk perception, decisional conflict and shared decision-making. We will use linear mixed models to analyse the influence of both individual (eg, education status) and cluster level factors and account for the expected cluster variability in realising usual health communication or the intervention. The statistical analysis plan includes the selection of appropriate measures of effect size and power calculation, assuming a sample size of 800 patients.

Ethics and dissemination
The trial has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Potsdam, Germany (application numbers: 34/2021 and 57/2022).
Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conferences and to relevant stakeholders.

Protocol version
Version 6 (4 October 2024); Preprint available on Research Square: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3401234/v3

Trial registration number
NCT06076421.

Objective
The study aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on the cascade of HIV care for people living with HIV (PLHIV) in Ethiopia.

Design
A retrospective longitudinal study.

Setting
The study was conducted in North Showa Zone, Ethiopia, from pre-COVID-19 (January 2018–December 2019) and during COVID-19 (January 2020–December 2021).

Participants
We identified 61901 records from 3925 PLHIV, of which 23 848 were recorded during the pandemic.

Main outcome measure
We investigated indicators from four stages of the HIV care cascade, including HIV screening and diagnosis, HIV care, HIV treatment and HIV disease progression, according to a WHO framework. The indicator changes were assessed with incidence rate ratios (IRRs).

Results
For HIV screening and diagnosis, the monthly number of HIV tests experienced a 46% decline from 2520 to 1361 since the pandemic (IRR 0.553; 95% CI 0.546 to 0.561). For HIV care, the monthly number of consultations was reduced by 49.6% (from 1582 to 798) since the pandemic (IRR 0.591; 95% CI 0.581 to 0.601). Similarly, the monthly number of viral load tests was reduced by 42.8% (IRR 0.614; 95% CI 0.581 to 0.650). For HIV treatment, the number of antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiations was reduced by 27.8% and the number of ART adherence by 52.5% since the pandemic. For HIV disease progression, the monthly number of PLHIV achieving viral suppression was reduced by 61.6%, while HIV-related deaths doubled during the pandemic.

Conclusion
The study highlights pandemic-induced disruptions in the cascade of care for PLHIV. Targeted interventions are necessary to protect PLHIV in public health emergencies.

This cohort study evaluates associations between mental illness and COVID-19 by vaccination status.