Dataset Information

COVID-19 Sequelae in adults aged less than 50 years: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is emerging evidence of long-term sequelae in a considerable proportion of COVID-19 patients after recovery and the spectrum and severity of such sequelae should be systematically reviewed. This review aims to evaluate the available evidence of all intermediate and long-term COVID-19 sequelae affecting formerly healthy adults.

Methods

A systematic literature search of Embase, WHO, Scopus, Pubmed, Litcovid, bioRxiv and medRxiv was conducted with a cutoff date of the 17th September 2020 according to PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020208725). Search terms included "COVID-19", "coronavirus disease 2019", "SARS-CoV-2", "sequelae" and "consequence*". Publications on adult participants, with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Elderly (>50 years old) and children (<18 years old) were excluded. Bias assessment was performed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Results

A total of 31 papers were included. Study types included prospective and retrospective cohort studies, cross-sectional studies and case reports. Sequelae persistence since infection spanned 14 days to three months. Sequelae included persistent fatigue (39-73% of assessed persons), breathlessness (39-74%), decrease in quality of life (44-69%), impaired pulmonary function, abnormal CT findings including pulmonary fibrosis (39-83%), evidence of peri-/perimyo-/myocarditis (3-26%), changes in microstructural and functional brain integrity with persistent neurological symptoms (55%), increased incidence of psychiatric diagnoses (5.8% versus 2.5-3.4% in controls), incomplete recovery of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction (33-36% of evaluated persons).

Conclusions

A variety of organ systems are affected by COVID-19 in the intermediate and longer-term after recovery. Main sequelae include post-infectious fatigue, persistent reduced lung function and carditis. Careful follow-up post COVID 19 is indicated to assess and mitigate possible organ damage and preserve life quality.

SUBMITTER: Willi S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7898978 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

COVID-19 sequelae in adults aged less than 50 years: A systematic review.

Willi Sandra S Lüthold Renata R Hunt Adam A Hänggi Nadescha Viviane NV Sejdiu Donikë D Scaff Camila C Bender Nicole N Staub Kaspar K Schlagenhauf Patricia P

Travel medicine and infectious disease 20210222

<h4>Background</h4>There is emerging evidence of long-term sequelae in a considerable proportion of COVID-19 patients after recovery and the spectrum and severity of such sequelae should be systematically reviewed. This review aims to evaluate the available evidence of all intermediate and long-term COVID-19 sequelae affecting formerly healthy adults.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic literature search of Embase, WHO, Scopus, Pubmed, Litcovid, bioRxiv and medRxiv was conducted with a cutoff date of th ...[more]

PMID: 33631340

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCannabinoid-based medicines (CBMs) are being used widely in the elderly. However, their safety and tolerability in older adults remains unclear. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and tolerability of CBMs in adults of age ≥50 years.Methods and findingsA systematic search was performed using MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL PsychInfo, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 January 1990 to 3 October 2020). Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of CBMs in those with mean age of ≥50 years for all indications, evaluating the safety/tolerability of CBMs where adverse events have been quantified, were included. Study quality was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) criteria and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Two reviewers conducted all review stages independently. Where possible, data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Effect sizes were calculated as incident rate ratio (IRR) for outcome data such as adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and death and risk ratio (RR) for withdrawal from study and reported separately for studies using tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), THC:cannabidiol (CBD) combination, and CBD. A total of 46 RCTs were identified as suitable for inclusion of which 31 (67%) were conducted in the United Kingdom and Europe. There were 6,216 patients (mean age 58.6 ± 7.5 years; 51% male) included in the analysis, with 3,469 receiving CBMs. Compared with controls, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-containing CBMs significantly increased the incidence of all-cause and treatment-related AEs: THC alone (IRR: 1.42 [95% CI, 1.12 to 1.78]) and (IRR: 1.60 [95% CI, 1.26 to 2.04]); THC:CBD combination (IRR: 1.58 [95% CI,1.26 to 1.98]) and (IRR: 1.70 [95% CI,1.24 to 2.33]), respectively. IRRs of SAEs and deaths were not significantly greater under CBMs containing THC with or without CBD. THC:CBD combination (RR: 1.40 [95% CI, 1.08 to 1.80]) but not THC alone (RR: 1.18 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.57]) significantly increased risk of AE-related withdrawals. CBD alone did not increase the incidence of all-cause AEs (IRR: 1.02 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.16]) or other outcomes as per qualitative synthesis. AE-related withdrawals were significantly associated with THC dose in THC only [QM (df = 1) = 4.696, p = 0.03] and THC:CBD combination treatment ([QM (df = 1) = 4.554, p = 0.033]. THC-containing CBMs significantly increased incidence of dry mouth, dizziness/light-headedness, and somnolence/drowsiness. Study limitations include inability to fully exclude data from those <50 years of age in our primary analyses as well as limitations related to weaknesses in the included trials particularly incomplete reporting of outcomes and heterogeneity in included studies.ConclusionsThis pooled analysis, using data from RCTs with mean participant age ≥50 years, suggests that although THC-containing CBMs are associated with side effects, CBMs in general are safe and acceptable in older adults. However, THC:CBD combinations may be less acceptable in the dose ranges used and their tolerability may be different in adults over 65 or 75 years of age.

Project description:ImportanceThe association of COVID-19 not requiring hospitalization with functional mobility in community-dwelling adults above and beyond the impact of the pandemic control measures implemented in 2020 remains to be elucidated.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between a COVID-19 diagnosis and change in mobility and physical function of adults in Canada aged 50 years or older during the initial pandemic lockdown.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based cohort study used data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) COVID-19 study. This study was launched on April 15, 2020, and the exit questionnaires were completed between September and December 2020. Prepandemic data from the first CLSA follow-up (2015-2018) were also used. Respondents included middle-aged and older community-dwelling participants residing in Canadian provinces. Data were analyzed from February to May 2021.ExposuresThe assessment for self-reported COVID-19 status was adapted from the Public Health Agency of Canada and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention case definition available at the time of data collection; cases were classified as confirmed or probable, suspected, or non-COVID-19.Main outcomes and measuresChanges in mobility since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic were assessed using global rating of change in mobility scales at the COVID-19 exit questionnaire. Participant-reported new onset of difficulty in 3 physical function tasks was also examined.ResultsAmong 51 338 participants at baseline, 21 491 participants (41.9%) were 65 years or older and 26 155 participants (51.0%) were women and 25 183 (49.1%) were men. Of 2748 individuals with confirmed or probable or suspected COVID-19, 113 (94.2%) were not hospitalized. Individuals with confirmed or probable COVID-19 had higher odds of worsening mobility in terms of ability to engage in household activity (odds ratio [OR], 1.89; 95% CI, 1.11-3.22), physical activity (OR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.32-2.76), and standing up after sitting in a chair (OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.06-5.11) compared with adults without COVID-19 during the same pandemic time period. Similar results were found for suspected COVID-19 status (eg, household activity: OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.82-2.41).Conclusions and relevanceThis cohort study among older adults in Canada found that receiving a COVID-19 diagnosis was significantly associated with worse mobility and functioning outcomes even in the absence of hospitalization. These findings suggest that interventions may be needed for individuals with mild to moderate COVID-19 who do not require hospitalization.

Project description:ObjectivesTo identify and review evaluations of strategies to recruit men aged 50 years and over to randomised controlled trials (RCTs).DesignSystematic review and narrative synthesis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and ORRCA databases were searched to 1 December 2017.Eligibility criteriaStudies using quantitative methods to evaluate recruitment strategies to RCTs of men aged 50 years and older.Data extraction and synthesisA single reviewer extracted data (for each strategy, number of participants approached, screened and randomised, and cost). Study quality was assessed using National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute Quality Assessment Tools and considered study design, description of interventions, description and measurement of outcomes, completeness of outcome reporting, performance of statistical testing and consideration of confounders. Recruitment strategies were categorised by the recruitment stage they addressed.ResultsSixteen studies (n >14?000) were included: one good quality, ten fair quality and five poor quality. Studies evaluated strategies to identify prospective participants, and to improve the processes for assessing participant eligibility, providing participant information and seeking consent. In good and fair quality studies, the most effective strategies for identifying participants were referral from an affiliated health service provider (two studies), mass mailing (five studies) and media coverage (two studies). Community outreach activities such as displaying posters and attending local community events were not effective (two studies). Trial-specific training of site recruitment staff, developed using qualitative analysis of recruitment visits (two studies), and provision of study information to prospective participants at a multidisciplinary, group information session (one study) both improved recruitment.ConclusionImproved engagement of men aged 50 years and older in RCTs is needed. A gender-sensitised approach to RCT recruitment may help to address this need. We have identified several promising recruitment strategies that merit further evaluation.Prospero registration numberCRD42017060301.