Dataset Information

Allergy and coronavirus disease (COVID-19) international survey: Real-life data from the allergy community during the pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The COVID-19 outbreak brought an unprecedented challenge to the world. Knowledge in the field has been increasing exponentially and the main allergy societies have produced guidance documents for better management of allergic patients during this period. However, few publications so far have provided real-life data from the allergy community concerning allergy practice during the COVID-19 outbreak. Therefore, we proposed an international survey on the management of allergic patients during the current pandemic.

Methods

We performed an online survey undertaken to reach out the worldwide allergy community by e-mail and social media. The web-based questionnaire contained 24 questions covering demographic data from the participants, clinical practice during this period, and questions related to the new international classification and coding tools addressed for COVID-19. It was circulated for 8 weeks and had anonymous and volunteer context.

Results

Data are presented for 635 participants from 78 countries of all continents. Allergists with long-term professional experience were the main audience. As expected, we received many responses as "I have no data" or "I don't know" to the questions of the survey. However, most with more experience on managing allergic patients during the pandemic agreed that patients suffering from allergic or hypersensitivity conditions have no increased risk of contracting COVID-19 or developing SARS CoV-2. Also, participants mentioned that none of the allergy treatments (inhaled corticosteroids, allergen immunotherapy, biological agents) increased the risk of contracting COVID-19 infection including severe presentations.

Conclusion

The data presented are a starting point in the process of getting feedback on all the recommendations provided by the allergy societies; it could also be the basis of new strategies to support health professionals while new COVID-19 specific treatments and vaccines are being explored. The information here presented intends to be helpful to the community but represents a course of action in a highly specific situation due to the state of emergency, and it should be helpful to health systems.

SUBMITTER: Tanno LK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7847410 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:A global survey among dentists was used to identify the various impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on this professional group. Special attention was given to perception and assessment of infection risk. From May to August 2020, the questionnaire was delivered in 36 countries by respective research groups and was completed by 52,491 dental professionals. The survey was designed as a cross-sectional survey based on a previously standardized questionnaire. This study focuses on the part of the questionnaire that deals with the perception of the infection risk of COVID-19 by dentists and their patients. A logistic regression model was used, which consisted of four Likert items as response options and the additional self-reported routine or emergency treatment as the dependent variable. Analysis by continent found that European and Asian dentists were particularly likely to be infected at work (OR = 1.45 95%CI = 1.02/1.84 and OR = 2.68, 95%CI = 1.45/3.22, respectively), while it was likely that Australian dentists did not feel particularly at risk due to low infection rates. Three quarters of Americans treated only emergencies during this survey period, while Europeans (64.71%) and Asians (66.67%) provided mostly routine care. This could affect the Europeans' confidence that they would not be able to protect themselves from infections in the long-term. The COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on dental professionals' infection risk perception is determined by the geographical origin of dentists. This study shows that, especially in high-incidence countries, infection risk perception was higher when dentists tried to provide routine dental procedures to their patients. Dental professionals can offer themselves and their patients good protection by maintaining high standards of hygiene. However, their concerns should be taken seriously and the dental professionals' group that is of great importance for oral health care and prevention, should not be neglected in the future, even in the event of emerging pandemics.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has strained the healthcare systems across the world but its impact on acute stroke care is just being elucidated. We hypothesized a major global impact of COVID-19 not only on stroke volumes but also on various aspects of thrombectomy systems.AimsWe conducted a convenience electronic survey with a 21-item questionnaire aimed to identify the changes in stroke admission volumes and thrombectomy treatment practices seen during a specified time period of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThe survey was designed using Qualtrics software and sent to stroke and neuro-interventional physicians around the world who are part of the Global Executive Committee (GEC) of Mission Thrombectomy 2020, a global coalition under the aegis of Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology, between April 5th and May 15th, 2020.ResultsThere were 113 responses to the survey across 25 countries with a response rate of 31% among the GEC members. Globally there was a median 33% decrease in stroke admissions and a 25% decrease in mechanical thrombectomy (MT) procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic period until May 15th, 2020 compared to pre-pandemic months. The intubation policy for MT procedures during the pandemic was highly variable across participating centers: 44% preferred intubating all patients, including 25% of centers that changed their policy to preferred-intubation (PI) from preferred non-intubation (PNI). On the other hand, 56% centers preferred not intubating patients undergoing MT, which included 27% centers that changed their policy from PI to PNI. There was no significant difference in rate of COVID-19 infection between PI versus PNI centers (p=0.60) or if intubation policy was changed in either direction (p=1.00). Low-volume (<10 stroke/month) compared with high-volume stroke centers (>20 strokes/month) were less likely to have neurointerventional suite specific written personal protective equipment protocols (74% vs 88%) and if present, these centers were more likely to report them to be inadequate (58% vs 92%).ConclusionOur data provides a comprehensive snapshot of the impact on acute stroke care observed worldwide during the pandemic. Overall, respondents reported decreased stroke admissions as well as decreased cases of MT with no clear preponderance in intubation policy during MT.Data access statementThe corresponding author will consider requests for sharing survey data. The study was exempt from institutional review board approval as it did not involve patient level data.

Project description:BackgroundIn light of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, how resources are managed and the critically ill are allocated must be reviewed. Although ethical recommendations have been published, strategies for dealing with overcapacity of critical care resources have so far not been addressed.ObjectivesAssess expert opinion for allocation preferences regarding the growing imbalance between supply and demand for medical resources.DesignA 10-item questionnaire was developed and sent to the most prominent members of the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC).SettingSurvey via a web-based platform.PatientsRespondents were members of the National Anaesthesiologists Societies Committee and Council Members of the ESAIC; 74 of 80 (92.5%), responded to the survey.Measurements and main resultsResponses were analysed thematically. The majority of respondents (83.8%), indicated that resources for COVID-19 were available at the time of the survey. Of the representatives of the ESAIC governing bodies, 58.9% favoured an allocation of excess critical care capacity: 69% wished to make them available to supraregional patients, whereas 30.9% preferred to keep the resources available for the local population. Regarding the type of distribution of resources, 35.3% preferred to make critical care available, 32.4% favoured the allocation of medical equipment and 32.4% wished to support both options. The majority (59.5%) supported the implementation of a central European institution to manage such resource allocation.ConclusionExperts in critical care support the allocation of resources from centres with overcapacity. The results indicate the need for centrally administered allocation mechanisms that are not based on ethically disputable triage systems. It seems, therefore, that there is wide acceptance and solidarity among the European anaesthesiological community that local medical and human pressure should be relieved during a pandemic by implementing national and international re-allocation strategies among healthcare providers and healthcare systems.

Project description:ObjectivesA multicentre survey was designed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 outbreak on dental practice worldwide, estimate the COVID-19 related symptoms/signs, work attitudes and behaviour and the routine use of protective measures and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).MethodsA global survey using a standardized questionnaire with research groups from 36 countries was designed. The questionnaire was developed and pretested during April 2020 and contained three domains: 1) Personal data; 2) COVID-19 positive rate and symptoms/signs presumably related to the coronavirus; 3) Working conditions and PPE adopted after the outbreak. Countries' data were grouped by the Country Positive Rate (CPR) during the survey period and by Gross-National-Income per capita. An ordinal multinomial logistic regression model was carried out with COVID-19 self-reported rate referred by dental professionals as dependent variable to assess the association with questionnaire items.ResultsA total of 52,491 questionnaires were returned with a male/female ratio of 0.63. Out of the total respondents, 7,859 dental professionals (15%) reported symptoms/signs compatible with COVID-19. More than half of the sample (n = 27,818; 53%) stated to use FFP2/N95 masks, while 21,558 (41.07%) used eye protection. In the bivariate analysis, CPR and N95/FFP2 were significantly associated (OR = 1.80 95%CI = 1.60/2.82 and OR = 5.20 95%CI = 1.44/18.80, respectively), while Gross-National-Income was not statistically associated with CPR (OR = 1.09 95%CI = 0.97/1.60). The same significant associations were observed in the multivariate analysis.ConclusionsOral health service provision has not been significantly affected by COVID-19, although access to routine dental care was reduced due to country-specific temporary lockdown periods. While the dental profession has been identified at high-risk, the reported rates of COVID-19 for dental professionals were not significantly different to those reported for the general population in each country. These findings may help to better plan oral health care for future pandemic events.