Project description:BackgroundThe outbreak of COVID-19 has resulted in serious concerns in China and abroad. To investigate clinical features of confirmed and suspected patients with COVID-19 in west China, and to examine differences between severe versus non-severe patients.MethodsPatients admitted for COVID-19 between January 21 and February 11 from fifteen hospitals in Sichuan Province, China were included. Experienced clinicians trained with methods abstracted data from medical records using pre-defined, pilot-tested forms. Clinical characteristics between severe and non-severe patients were compared.ResultsOf the 169 patients included, 147 were laboratory-confirmed, 22 were suspected. For confirmed cases, the most common symptoms from onset to admission were cough (70·7%), fever (70·5%) and sputum (33·3%), and the most common chest CT patterns were patchy or stripes shadowing (78·0%); throughout the course of disease, 19·0% had no fever, and 12·4% had no radiologic abnormality; twelve (8·2%) received mechanical ventilation, four (2·7%) were transferred to ICU, and no death occurred. Compared to non-severe cases, severe ones were more likely to have underlying comorbidities (62·5% vs 26·2%, P = 0·001), to present with cough (92·0% vs 66·4%, P = 0·02), sputum (60·0% vs 27·9%, P = 0·004) and shortness of breath (40·0% vs 8·2%, P < 0·0001), and to have more frequent lymphopenia (79·2% vs 43·7%, P = 0·003) and eosinopenia (84·2% vs 57·0%, P = 0·046).ConclusionsThe symptoms of patients in west China were relatively mild, and an appreciable proportion of infected cases had no fever, warranting special attention.
Project description:Since December 2019, a number of patients with novel coronavirus pneumonia (NCP) have been identified in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. NCP has rapidly spread to other provinces and cities in China and other countries in the world. Due to the rapid increase in reported cases in China and around the world, on January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) Emergency Committee announced that NCP is a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). However, there are relatively few suggestions and measures for tumor patients, especially patients with head and neck tumors. This article summarizes the prevention and control of disease in our medical institution to provide a reference for front-line head and neck surgeons.
Project description:BackgroundWe evaluated the epidemiology of candidemia among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs).MethodsWe conducted a retrospective multicenter study in Turkey between April and December 2020.ResultsTwenty-eight of 148 enrolled patients developed candidemia, yielding an incidence of 19% and incidence rate of 14/1000 patient-days. The probability of acquiring candidemia at 10, 20, and 30 days of ICU admission was 6%, 26%, and 50%, respectively. More than 80% of patients received antibiotics, corticosteroid, and mechanical ventilation. Receipt of a carbapenem (odds ratio [OR] = 6.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.6-22.3, P = .008), central venous catheter (OR = 4.3, 95% CI = 1.3-14.2, P = .02), and bacteremia preceding candidemia (OR = 6.6, 95% CI = 2.1-20.1, P = .001) were independent risk factors for candidemia. The mortality rate did not differ between patients with and without candidemia. Age (OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 1.01-1.09, P = .02) and mechanical ventilation (OR = 61, 95% CI = 15.8-234.9, P < .0001) were independent risk factors for death. Candida albicans was the most prevalent species overall. In Izmir, Candida parapsilosis accounted for 50% (2 of 4) of candidemia. Both C parapsilosis isolates were fluconazole nonsusceptible, harbored Erg11-Y132F mutation, and were clonal based on whole-genome sequencing. The 2 infected patients resided in ICUs with ongoing outbreaks due to fluconazole-resistant C parapsilosis.ConclusionsPhysicians should be aware of the elevated risk for candidemia among patients with COVID-19 who require ICU care. Prolonged ICU exposure and ICU practices rendered to COVID-19 patients are important contributing factors to candidemia. Emphasis should be placed on (1) heightened infection control in the ICU and (2) developing antibiotic stewardship strategies to reduce irrational antimicrobial therapy.
Project description:BackgroundThere has been a surge in coronavirus disease 2019 admissions to intensive care units (ICUs) in Asia-Pacific countries. Because ICU healthcare workers are exposed to aerosol-generating procedures, ensuring optimal personal protective equipment (PPE) preparedness is important.ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to evaluate PPE preparedness across ICUs in six Asia-Pacific countries during the initial phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, which is defined by the World Health Organization as guideline adherence, training healthcare workers, procuring stocks, and responding appropriately to suspected cases.MethodsA cross-sectional Web-based survey was circulated to 633 level II/III ICUs of Australia, New Zealand (NZ), Singapore, Hong Kong (HK), India, and the Philippines.FindingsTwo hundred sixty-three intensivists responded, representing 231 individual ICUs eligible for analysis. Response rates were 68-100% in all countries except India, where it was 24%. Ninety-seven percent of ICUs either conformed to or exceeded World Health Organization recommendations for PPE practice. Fifty-nine percent ICUs used airborne precautions irrespective of aerosol generation procedures. There were variations in negative-pressure room use (highest in HK/Singapore), training (best in NZ), and PPE stock awareness (best in HK/Singapore/NZ). High-flow nasal oxygenation and noninvasive ventilation were not options in most HK (66.7% and 83.3%, respectively) and Singapore ICUs (50% and 80%, respectively), but were considered in other countries to a greater extent. Thirty-eight percent ICUs reported not having specialised airway teams. Showering and "buddy systems" were underused. Clinical waste disposal training was suboptimal (38%).ConclusionsMany ICUs in the Asia-Pacific reported suboptimal PPE preparedness in several domains, particularly related to PPE training, practice, and stock awareness, which requires remediation. Adoption of low-cost approaches such as buddy systems should be encouraged. The complete avoidance of high-flow nasal oxygenation reported by several intensivists needs reconsideration. Consideration must be given to standardise PPE guidelines to minimise practice variations. Urgent research to evaluate PPE preparedness and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission is required.
Project description:BackgroundPersonal-protective equipment (PPE)-preparedness, defined as adherence to guidelines, healthcare worker (HCW) training, procuring PPE stocks and responding appropriately to suspected cases, is crucial to prevent HCW-infections.ObjectivesTo perform a follow-up survey to assess changes in PPE-preparedness across six Asia-Pacific countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA prospective follow-up cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted between 10/08/2020 to 01/09/ 2020, five months after the initial Phase 1 survey. The survey was sent to the same 231 intensivists across the six Asia-Pacific countries (Australia, Hong Kong, India, New Zealand, Philippines, and Singapore) that participated in Phase 1. The main outcome measure was to identify any changes in PPE-preparedness between Phases 1 and 2.FindingsPhase 2 had responses from 132 ICUs (57%). Compared to Phase 1 respondents reported increased use of PPE-based practices such as powered air-purifying respirator (40.2% vs. 6.1%), N95-masks at all times (86.4% vs. 53.7%) and double-gloving (87.9% vs. 42.9%). The reported awareness of PPE stocks (85.6% vs. 51.9%), mandatory showering policies following PPE-breach (31.1% vs. 6.9%) and safety perception amongst HCWs (60.6% vs. 28.4%) improved significantly during Phase 2. Despite reported statistically similar adoption rate of the buddy system in both phases (42.4% vs. 37.2%), there was a reported reduction in donning/doffing training in Phase 2 (44.3% vs. 60.2%). There were no reported differences HCW training in other areas, such as tracheal intubation, intra-hospital transport and safe waste disposal, between the 2 phases.ConclusionsOverall reported PPE-preparedness improved between the two survey periods, particularly in PPE use, PPE inventory and HCW perceptions of safety. However, the uptake of HCW training and implementation of low-cost safety measures continued to be low and the awareness of PPE breach management policies were suboptimal. Therefore, the key areas for improvement should focus on regular HCW training, implementing low-cost buddy-system and increasing awareness of PPE-breach management protocols.
Project description:The temporal growth in the number of deaths in the COVID-19 epidemic is subexponential. Here we show that a piecewise quadratic law provides an excellent fit during the thirty days after the first three fatalities on January 20 and later since the end of March 2020. There is also a brief intermediate period of exponential growth. During the second quadratic growth phase, the characteristic time of the growth is about eight times shorter than in the beginning, which can be understood as the occurrence of separate hotspots. Quadratic behavior can be motivated by peripheral growth when further spreading occurs only on the outskirts of an infected region. We also study numerical solutions of a simple epidemic model, where the spatial extend of the system is taken into account. To model the delayed onset outside China together with the early one in China within a single model with minimal assumptions, we adopt an initial condition of several hotspots, of which one reaches saturation much earlier than the others. At each site, quadratic growth commences when the local number of infections has reached a certain saturation level. The total number of deaths does then indeed follow a piecewise quadratic behavior.
Project description:There is a worldwide concern about the new coronavirus 2019-nCoV as a global public health threat. In this article, we provide a preliminary evolutionary and molecular epidemiological analysis of this new virus. A phylogenetic tree has been built using the 15 available whole genome sequences of 2019-nCoV, 12 whole genome sequences of 2019-nCoV, and 12 highly similar whole genome sequences available in gene bank (five from the severe acute respiratory syndrome, two from Middle East respiratory syndrome, and five from bat SARS-like coronavirus). Fast unconstrained Bayesian approximation analysis shows that the nucleocapsid and the spike glycoprotein have some sites under positive pressure, whereas homology modeling revealed some molecular and structural differences between the viruses. The phylogenetic tree showed that 2019-nCoV significantly clustered with bat SARS-like coronavirus sequence isolated in 2015, whereas structural analysis revealed mutation in Spike Glycoprotein and nucleocapsid protein. From these results, the new 2019-nCoV is distinct from SARS virus, probably trasmitted from bats after mutation conferring ability to infect humans.