Search Results for: Identificate le origini evolutive di SARS-CoV-2

Objectives
Long-term sickness absence from employment has negative consequences for the economy and can lead to widened health inequalities. Sick notes (also called ‘fit notes’) are issued by general practitioners when a person cannot work for health reasons for more than 7 days. We quantified the sick note rate in people with evidence of COVID-19 in 2020, 2021 and 2022, as an indication of the burden for people recovering from COVID-19.

Design
Cohort study.

Setting
With National Health Service (NHS) England approval, we used routine clinical data (primary care, hospital and COVID-19 testing records) within the OpenSAFELY-TPP database.

Participants
People 18–64 years with a recorded positive test or diagnosis of COVID-19 in 2020 (n=365 421), 2021 (n=1 206 555) or 2022 (n=1 321 313); general population matched in age, sex and region in 2019 (n=3 140 326), 2020 (n=3 439 534), 2021 (n=4 571 469) and 2022 (n=4 818 870); people hospitalised with pneumonia in 2019 (n=29 673).

Primary outcome measure
Receipt of a sick note in primary care.

Results
Among people with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test or COVID-19 diagnosis, the sick note rate was 4.88 per 100 person-months (95% CI 4.83 to 4.93) in 2020, 2.66 (95% CI 2.64 to 2.67) in 2021 and 1.73 (95% CI 1.72 to 1.73) in 2022. Compared with the age, sex and region-matched general population, the adjusted HR for receipt of a sick note over the entire follow-up period (up to 10 months) was 4.07 (95% CI 4.02 to 4.12) in 2020 decreasing to 1.57 (95% CI 1.56 to 1.58) in 2022. The HR was highest in the first 30 days postdiagnosis in all years. Among people hospitalised with COVID-19, after adjustment, the sick note rate was lower than in people hospitalised with pneumonia.

Conclusions
Given the under-recording of postacute COVID-19-related symptoms, these findings contribute a valuable perspective on the long-term effects of COVID-19. Despite likely underestimation of the sick note rate, sick notes were issued more frequently to people with COVID-19 compared with those without, even in an era when most people are vaccinated. Most sick notes occurred in the first 30 days postdiagnosis, but the increased risk several months postdiagnosis may provide further evidence of the long-term impact.

Purpose
COVID-19 continues to affect millions of individuals worldwide, both in the short and long term. The post-acute complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection, referred to as long COVID, result in diverse symptoms affecting multiple organ systems. Little is known regarding how the symptoms associated with long COVID progress and resolve over time. The Johns Hopkins COVID Long Study aims to prospectively examine the short-term and long-term consequences of COVID-19 in individuals both with and without a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection using self-reported data collected in an online survey.

Participants
16 764 adults with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and 799 adults without a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection who completed an online baseline survey.

Findings to date
This cohort profile describes the baseline characteristics of the Johns Hopkins COVID Long Study. Among 16 764 participants with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and defined long COVID status, 75% reported a very good or excellent health status prior to infection, 99% reported experiencing at least one COVID-19 symptom during the acute phase of infection, 9.9% reported hospitalisation and 63% were defined as having long COVID using the WHO definition.

Future plans
Analysis of longitudinal data will be used to investigate the progression and resolution of long COVID symptoms over time.

Introduction
In 2020, the UK government established a large-scale testing programme to rapidly identify individuals in England who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 and had COVID-19. This comprised part of the UK government’s COVID-19 response strategy, to protect those at risk of severe COVID-19 disease and death and to reduce the burden on the health system. To assess the success of this approach, the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) commissioned an independent evaluation of the activities delivered by the National Health System testing programme in England. The primary purpose of this evaluation will be to capture key learnings from the roll-out of testing to different target populations via various testing services between October 2020 and March 2022 and to use these insights to formulate recommendations for future pandemic preparedness strategy. In this protocol, we detail the rationale, approach and study design.

Methods and analysis
The proposed study involves a stepwise mixed-methods approach, aligned with established methods for the evaluation of complex interventions in health, to retrospectively assess the combined impact of key asymptomatic and symptomatic testing services nationally. The research team will first develop a theory of change, formulated in collaboration with testing service stakeholders, to understand the causal pathways and intended and unintended outcomes of each testing service and explore contextual impacts on each testing service’s intended outcomes. Insights gained will help identify indicators to evaluate how the combined aims of the testing programme were achieved, using a mixed-methods approach.

Ethics and dissemination
The study protocol was granted ethics approval by the UKHSA Research Ethics and Governance Group (reference NR0347). All relevant ethics guidelines will be followed throughout. Findings arising from this evaluation will be used to inform lessons learnt and recommendations for UKHSA on appropriate pandemic preparedness testing programme designs; findings will also be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, a publicly available report to be published online and at academic conferences. The final report of findings from the evaluation will be used as part of a portfolio of evidence produced for the independent COVID-19 government inquiry in the UK.

Transparency declaration
The lead author (the manuscript’s guarantor) affirms that the manuscript is an honest, accurate and transparent account of the study being reported; no important aspects of the study have been omitted, and any discrepancies from the study as planned have been explained.

A multiyear global collaboration among public health agencies has led to new terminology for pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2 that can spread through the air, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced. The report by the WHO and partners, including the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, moves away from the dichotomy of “aerosols” and “droplets” that sparked debate and confusion during the COVID-19 pandemic.

We read with interest the study by Ampuero et al1 on the vulnerability of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) patients to SARS-CoV-2. Their study, conducted on patients from 13 referral hospitals, highlighted a heightened risk of infection and hospitalisation compared with the general population. However, we propose that their patient selection may inadvertently over-represent severe cases, thus introducing selection bias. Using the CDC WONDER, a database with deidentified death records that included >99% of decedents in the USA, data associated with cirrhosis among adults aged 25 years and above were collected during 1 January 2012–31 December 2021. We estimated the age-standardised mortality rate (per 100 000 persons) using the direct method, referring to the 2000 US Census (standard population). To determine the impact of the pandemic on cirrhosis-related mortality (defined in ), we conducted a Prophet model to predict mortality rates in 1 March 2020–31 December 2021 based on…

Objective
We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and utility of an unsupervised testing mechanism, in which participants pick up a swab kit, self-test (unsupervised) and return the kit to an on-campus drop box, as compared with supervised self-testing at staffed locations.

Design
University SARS-CoV-2 testing cohort.

Setting
Husky Coronavirus Testing provided voluntary SARS-CoV-2 testing at a university in Seattle, USA.

Outcome measures
We computed descriptive statistics to describe the characteristics of the study sample. Adjusted logistic regression implemented via generalised estimating equations was used to estimate the odds of a self-swab being conducted through unsupervised versus supervised testing mechanisms by participant characteristics, including year of study enrolment, pre-Omicron versus post-Omicron time period, age, sex, race, ethnicity, affiliation and symptom status.

Results
From September 2021 to July 2022, we received 92 499 supervised and 26 800 unsupervised self-swabs. Among swabs received by the laboratory, the overall error rate for supervised versus unsupervised swabs was 0.3% vs 4%, although this declined to 2% for unsupervised swabs by the spring of the academic year. Results were returned for 92 407 supervised (5% positive) and 25 836 unsupervised (4%) swabs from 26 359 participants. The majority were students (79%), 61% were female and most identified as white (49%) or Asian (34%). The use of unsupervised testing increased during the Omicron wave when testing demand was high and stayed constant in spring 2022 even when testing demand fell. We estimated the odds of using unsupervised versus supervised testing to be significantly greater among those

A new initiative, known as the Coronavirus Network or CoViNet, will bring together experts in human, animal, and environmental health to monitor known coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV-2 and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, or MERS-CoV, the World Health Organization (WHO) said in a recent statement. CoViNet will also aid in the early detection of novel coronaviruses. The network involves 36 laboratories across 21 countries, including the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Objectives
The study aims to identify the outcome and the related factors of unvaccinated patients with end-stage kidney disease during the Omicron pandemic.

Design
A multicentre retrospective study of patients with end-stage kidney disease undergone maintenance haemodialysis (HD) in China.

Setting
6 HD centres in China.

Participants
A total of 654 HD patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were ultimately included in the study.

Outcome measures
The primary outcomes of interest were adverse outcomes, including hospitalisation due to COVID-19 and all-cause mortality.

Results
The average age of the patients was 57 years, with 33.6% of them being over 65 years. Among the patients, 57.5% were male. During the follow-up period, 158 patients (24.2%) experienced adverse outcomes, and 93 patients (14.2%) died. The majority of patients (88/158) developed adverse outcomes within 30 days, and most deaths (77/93) occurred within 1 month. An advanced multivariable Cox regression analysis identified that adverse outcomes were associated with various factors while all-cause mortality was related to advanced age, male gender, high levels of C reactive protein (CRP) and low levels of prealbumin. The Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated significantly higher all-cause mortality rates in the older, male, high CRP and low prealbumin subgroups.

Conclusions
Among unvaccinated HD patients with confirmed Omicron infections, various factors were found to be linked to adverse outcomes. Notably, age, sex, CRP and prealbumin had a substantial impact on the risk of all-cause mortality.

Introduction
A significant proportion of individuals suffering from post COVID-19 condition (PCC, also known as long COVID) can present with persistent, disabling fatigue similar to myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) and post-viral fatigue syndromes. There remains no clear pharmacological therapy for patients with this subtype of PCC, which can be referred to as post-COVID fatigue syndrome (PCFS). A low dose of the opioid antagonist naltrexone (ie, low-dose naltrexone (LDN)) has emerged as an off-label treatment for treating fatigue and other symptoms in PCC. However, only small, non-controlled studies have assessed LDN in PCC, so randomised trials are urgently required.

Methods and analysis
A prospective, randomised, double-blind, parallel arm, placebo-controlled phase II trial will be performed to assess the efficacy of LDN for improving fatigue in PCFS. The trial will be decentralised and open to eligible individuals throughout the Canadian province of British Columbia (BC). Participants will be recruited through the province-wide Post-COVID-19 Interdisciplinary Clinical Care Network (PC-ICCN) and research volunteer platform (REACH BC). Eligible participants will be 19–69 years old, have had a confirmed or physician-suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection at least 3 months prior and meet clinical criteria for PCFS adapted from the Institute of Medicine ME/CFS criteria. Individuals who are taking opioid medications, have a history of ME/CFS prior to COVID-19 or history of significant liver disease will be excluded. Participants will be randomised to an LDN intervention arm (n=80) or placebo arm (n=80). Participants in each arm will be prescribed identical capsules starting at 1 mg daily and follow a prespecified schedule for up-titration to 4.5 mg daily or the maximum tolerated dose. The trial will be conducted over 16 weeks, with assessments at baseline, 6, 12 and 16 weeks. The primary outcome will be fatigue severity at 16 weeks evaluated by the Fatigue Severity Scale. Secondary outcomes will include pain Visual Analogue Scale score, overall symptom severity as measured by the Patient Phenotyping Questionnaire Short Form, 7-day step count and health-related quality of life measured by the EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire.

Ethics and dissemination
The trial has been authorised by Health Canada and approved by The University of British Columbia/Children’s and Women’s Health Centre of British Columbia Research Ethics Board. On completion, findings will be disseminated to patients, caregivers and clinicians through engagement activities within existing PCC and ME/CFS networks. Results will be published in academic journals and presented at conferences.

Trial registration number
NCT05430152.

Objectives
To assess whether increasing levels of hospital stress—measured by intensive care unit (ICU) bed occupancy (primary), ventilators in use and emergency department (ED) overflow—were associated with decreasing COVID-19 ICU patient survival in Colorado ICUs during the pre-Delta, Delta and Omicron variant eras.

Design
A retrospective cohort study using discrete-time survival models, fit with generalised estimating equations.

Setting
34 hospital systems in Colorado, USA, with the highest patient volume ICUs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Participants
9196 non-paediatric SARS-CoV-2 patients in Colorado hospitals admitted once to an ICU between 1 August 2020 and 1 March 2022 and followed for 28 days.

Outcome measures
Death or discharge to hospice.

Results
For Delta-era COVID-19 ICU patients in Colorado, the odds of death were estimated to be 26% greater for patients exposed every day of their ICU admission to a facility experiencing its all-era 75th percentile ICU fullness or above, versus patients exposed for none of their days (OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.54; p=0.0102), adjusting for age, sex, length of ICU stay, vaccination status and hospital quality rating. For both Delta-era and Omicron-era patients, we also detected significantly increased mortality hazard associated with high ventilator utilisation rates and (in a subset of facilities) states of ED overflow. For pre-Delta-era patients, we estimated relatively null or even protective effects for the same fullness exposures, something which provides a meaningful contrast to previous studies that found increased hazards but were limited to pre-Delta study windows.

Conclusions
Overall, and especially during the Delta era (when most Colorado facilities were at their fullest), increasing exposure to a fuller hospital was associated with an increasing mortality hazard for COVID-19 ICU patients.

Introduction
SARS-CoV-2 mainly infects respiratory endothelial cells, which is facilitated through its spike protein binding to heparan sulphate. Calcium dobesilate (CaD) is a well-established, widely available vasoactive and angioprotective drug interacting with heparan sulphate, with the potential to interfere with the uptake of SARS-CoV-2 by epithelial cells. The CADOVID trial aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CaD in reducing the SARS-CoV-2 viral load in non-hospitalised adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19, confirmed by a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR, including its efficacy to reduce the impact of persistent COVID-19 symptoms.

Methods and analysis
This is a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, monocentric phase II trial. Enrolment began in July 2022. A total of 74 adult patients will be randomly allocated to the CaD arm or the placebo group with a 1:1 ratio, respectively. Participants in the intervention arm will receive two capsules of CaD 500 mg two times per day and the placebo arm will receive two matching capsules of mannitol 312.5 mg two times per day, with a treatment period of 7 days for both arms, followed by a 77-day observational period without treatment administration. Participants will be asked to complete secured online questionnaires using their personal smartphone or other electronic device. These include a COVID-19 questionnaire (assessing symptoms, temperature measurement, reporting of concomitant medication and adverse events), a COVID-19 persistent symptoms’ questionnaire and the Short Form 12-Item (SF-12) survey. SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing will be performed on nasopharyngeal swabs collected on days 1, 4, 8 and 21. The primary endpoint is the reduction from baseline of SARS-CoV-2 viral load determined by RT-PCR at day 4.

Ethics and dissemination
This trial has received approval by the Geneva Regional Research Ethics Committee (2022-00613) and Swissmedic (701339). Dissemination of results will be through presentations at scientific conferences and publication in scientific journals.

Trial registration number
NCT05305508; Clinicaltrials.gov; Swiss National Clinical Portal Registry (SNCTP 000004938).

Objectives
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the long-term consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection, termed long COVID. However, in the absence of comparative groups, the differentiation of disease progression remains difficult, as COVID-19 symptoms become indistinguishable from symptoms originating from alternative etiologies. This study aimed to longitudinally investigate the association between COVID-19 exposure and the somatic symptoms in the Japanese general population.

Design
This was a longitudinal cohort study with 1-year follow-up.

Setting and participants
Longitudinal data from 19 545 individuals who participated in the Japan Society and New Tobacco Internet Survey (JASTIS) 2022 and 2023 were included. In this study, we used data from the 2022 JASTIS as baseline data and the 2023 JASTIS as follow-up data. Based on questionnaire responses, respondents were classified into three categories of exposure to COVID-19.

Outcome measures
The somatic symptoms were assessed by the Somatic Symptom Scale-8 (SSS-8). Using generalised linear models adjusted for baseline covariates, we calculated the ORs of having very high somatic symptoms assessed by SSS-8, attributable to COVID-19 exposure (no COVID-19 cases as the reference group).

Results
Follow-up completers were divided into three groups according to COVID-19 exposure (no COVID-19, n=16 012; COVID-19 without O2 therapy, n=3201; COVID-19 with O2 therapy, n=332). After adjusting for all covariates, COVID-19 cases with O2 therapy had a significant positive association (OR 7.60, 95% CI 5.47 to 10.58) with a very high somatic symptoms burden while other COVID-19 exposure groups did not. Pre-existing physical and psychological conditions were also associated with increased risk of somatic symptoms.

Conclusion
The findings of our study suggest that the severity of COVID-19 symptoms requiring O2 therapy in the acute phase led to high somatic symptoms. Pre-existing conditions were also associated with a subsequent risk of somatic symptoms.

The Original Investigation titled “Development of a Definition of Postacute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection,” published in the June 13, 2023, issue of JAMA, has been corrected to include additional consortium authors and nonauthor collaborator names in a supplement.

People who received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccination had a lower risk of heart failure and blood clots in their veins and arteries after COVID-19 infection than those who had not been vaccinated, a recent study involving more than 20 million participants in Estonia, Spain, and the UK found.