COVID-19 transmission: a rapid systematic review of current knowledge.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
The objective of this study was to identify the potential and definite sources of transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Methods
Due to time constraints and the acute nature of the pandemic, we searched only PubMed/Medline from inception until January 28, 2021. We analyzed the level of evidence and risk of bias in each category and made suggestions accordingly.Results
The virus was traced from its potential origin via possible ways of transmission to the last host. Symptomatic human-to-human transmission remains the driver of the epidemic, but asymptomatic transmission can potentially contribute in a substantial manner. Feces and fomites have both been found to contain viable virus; even though transmission through these routes has not been documented, their contribution cannot be ruled out. Finally, transmission from pregnant women to their children has been found to be low (up to 3%).Conclusion
Even though robust outcomes cannot be easily assessed, medical personnel must maintain awareness of the main routes of transmission (via droplets and aerosols from even asymptomatic patients). This is the first attempt to systematically review the existing knowledge to produce a paper with a potentially significant clinical impact.
SUBMITTER: Mourmouris P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8102883 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThere are uncertainties about mitigating strategies for swimming-related activities in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. There is an opportunity to learn from the experience of previous re-openings to better plan the future one. Our objectives are to systematically review the evidence on (1) the association between engaging in swimming-related activities and COVID-19 transmission; and (2) the effects of strategies for preventing COVID-19 transmission during swimming-related activities.MethodsWe conducted a rapid systematic review. We searched in the L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) platform for COVID-19. The searches covered the period from the inception date of each database until April 19, 2021. We included non-randomized studies for the review on association of COVID-19 transmission and swimming-related activities. We included guidance documents reporting on the strategies for prevention of COVID-19 transmission during swimming-related activities. We also included studies on the efficacy and safety of the strategies. Teams of two reviewers independently assessed article eligibility. For the guidance documents, a single reviewer assessed the eligibility and a second reviewer verified the judgement. Teams of two reviewers extracted data independently. We summarized the findings of included studies narratively. We synthesized information from guidance documents according to the identified topics and subtopics, and presented them in tabular and narrative formats.ResultsWe identified three studies providing very low certainty evidence for the association between engaging in swimming-related activities and COVID-19 transmission. The analysis of 50 eligible guidance documents identified 11 topics: ensuring social distancing, ensuring personal hygiene, using personal protective equipment, eating and drinking, maintaining the pool, managing frequently touched surfaces, ventilation of indoor spaces, screening and management of sickness, delivering first aid, raising awareness, and vaccination. One study assessing the efficacy of strategies to prevent COVID-19 transmission did not find an association between compliance with precautionary restrictions and COVID-19 transmission.ConclusionsThere are major gaps in the research evidence of relevance to swimming-related activities in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the synthesis of the identified strategies from guidance documents can inform public health management strategies for swimming-related activities, particularly in future re-opening plans.
| S-EPMC8553516 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak </mac_aq>started in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, and evolved into a global problem in a short period. The pandemic has led to many social and health-care challenges. In this context, surgery is an area that is facing the need for many adaptations. In this systematic literature review, we analyzed different perspectives concerning this situation, aiming to provide recommendations that could guide surgeons and </mac_aq>entities toward screening, elective and emergency surgeries, decision making, and operating room management. A computerized search in PubMed, Scopus, and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) for relevant literature up to April 4, 2020, was performed. Articles were included if they were related to surgery dynamics in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of the 281 articles found in our initial search and 15 articles from alternative sources, 39 were included in our review after a systematic evaluation. Concerning preoperative testing </mac_aq>for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, 29 (74.4%) articles recommended some kind of </mac_aq>screening. Another major suggestion was postponing all (or at least selected) elective operations (29 articles, </mac_aq>74.4%). Several additional recommendations with respect to surgical practice or surgical staff were also assessed and discussed, such as performing laparoscopic surgeries and avoiding the use of electrocauterization. On the basis of the current literature, we concluded that any surgery that can be delayed should be postponed. COVID-19 screening is strongly recommended for all surgical cases. Moreover, surgical staff should be reduced to the essential members and provided with institutional psychological support.
| S-EPMC7213672 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo carry out a systematic review of the available studies on COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) in neonates seen globally since the onset of the COVID-19 global pandemic in 2020. The paper also describes a premature baby with reverse transcription (RT)-PCR-positive COVID-19 seen at the Blackpool Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, UK.DesignWe conducted a multifaceted search of the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, Medline and PubMed from 1 December 2019 to 12 May 2020 to harvest articles from medical journals and publications reporting cases of COVID-19 in neonates from anywhere in the world. Additional searches were also done so as not to miss any important publications. Write-up was in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, the protocol for the review was registered with International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), and risk of bias was analysed with the Newcastle-Ottawa tool. Additionally, the preterm neonate with COVID-19 from our hospital is also reported.ResultsThe systematic review has revealed eight studies where neonates have been described to have confirmed COVID-19, with low risk of bias. Of the 10 reported cases elsewhere, only three are likely to be vertically transmitted, while seven occurred in the postperinatal period and are likely to have been postnatally acquired. All neonates had a mild course, recovered fully and were negative on retesting. Our case of COVID-19 in a 32-week premature baby from the UK was delivered by emergency caesarean section, with the mother wearing a face mask and the family having no contact with the neonate, suggesting vertical transmission. On day 33, the neonate was asymptomatic but was still RT-PCR-positive on nasopharyngeal airway swab.ConclusionsNeonatal infection is uncommon, with only two previously reported cases likely to be of vertical transmission. The case we report is still RT-PCR-positive on day 28 and is asymptomatic. Ongoing research is needed to ascertain the epidemiology of COVID-19 in neonates.
| S-EPMC7252972 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs SARS-CoV-2 continues to spread worldwide, it has already resulted in over 110 million cases and 2.5 million deaths. Currently, there are no effective COVID-19 treatments, although numerous studies are under way. SARS-CoV-2, however, is not the first coronavirus to cause serious outbreaks. COVID-19 can be compared with previous human coronavirus diseases, such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), to better understand the development of treatments.MethodsDatabases Medline, Embase and WHO COVID-19 was systematically searched on 9 February 2021 for studies reporting on therapeutic effect of COVID-19 treatments. Clinical trials, case reports, observational studies and systematic reviews in the English language were eligible.Results1416 studies were identified and 40 studies were included in this review. Therapies included are: remdesivir, convalescent plasma, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ ritonavir, interferon, corticosteroids, cytokine storm inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies. Remdesivir, convalescent plasma and interferon seems to provide some clinical benefits such as faster recovery time and reduced mortality, but these effects are not clinically significant. Some corticosteroids are effective in reducing mortality in severe COVID-19 patients. Hydroxychloroquine do not convey any beneficial, and therapies such as cytokine storm inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies were also not effective and require further investigation.ConclusionsThere is no single therapy effective against COVID-19. However, a combination of therapies administered at different stages of infection may provide some benefit. This conclusion is reflected in the limited effects of these treatments in previous human coronaviruses.
| S-EPMC8068411 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The world has faced the most challenging pandemic of the modern era, that of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, causing coronavirus disease and affecting over 35 million people globally. The wide range of clinical manifestations associated with this viral disease is thought to be related to the overexpression of inflammatory markers. Due to a dysregulated host response, the most severe form involves multi-organ failure and thromboembolic complications. Immunomodulatory therapies may help prevent its progression and anticoagulation has been shown to reduce the risk of thrombotic complications. As this is a new entity for the medical world, there are no known therapeutic options nor has the prevention of complications been established. Anti-inflammatory agents, antimicrobial therapy, and vitamin supplements are short of clear benefits, but there is limited data to review. Other agents, such as convalescent plasma, eculizumab, immunoglobulins, neutralizing IgG1 monoclonal antibodies, remdesivir, steroids, and tocilizumab, have shown a possible impact on inpatient length of stay and mortality rate. This review aims to assess the efficacy and safety of these available therapies in light of current evidence. We compare these treatment options based on their impact on symptom management, inpatient length of stay, and overall morbidity and mortality.
| S-EPMC7850293 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:Otorhinolaryngological manifestations are common symptoms of COVID-19. This study provides a brief and precise review of the current knowledge regarding COVID-19, including disease transmission, clinical characteristics, diagnosis, and potential treatment. The article focused on COVID-19-related information useful in otolaryngologist practice. METHODS:The Medline and Web of Science databases were searched without a time limit using terms "COVID-19", "SARS-CoV-2" in conjunction with "otorhinolaryngological manifestation", "ENT", and "olfaction". RESULTS:The most common otolaryngological dysfunctions of COVID-19 were cough, sore throat, and dyspnea. Rhinorrhea, nasal congestion and dizziness were also present. COVID-19 could manifest as an isolated sudden hyposmia/anosmia. Upper respiratory tract (URT) symptoms were commonly observed in younger patients and usually appeared initially. They could be present even before the molecular confirmation of SARS-CoV-2. Otolaryngologists are of great risk of becoming infected with SARS-CoV-2 as they cope with URT. ENT surgeons could be easily infected by SARS-CoV-2 during performing surgery in COVID-19 patients. CONCLUSION:Ear, nose and throat (ENT) symptoms may precede the development of severe COVID-19. During COVID-19 pandemic, patients with cough, sore throat, dyspnea, hyposmia/anosmia and a history of travel to the region with confirmed COVID-19 patients, should be considered as potential COVID-19 cases. An otolaryngologist should wear FFP3/N95 mask, glasses, disposable and fluid resistant gloves and gown while examining such individuals. Not urgent ENT surgeries should be postponed. Additional studies analyzing why some patients develop ENT symptoms during COVID-19 and others do not are needed. Further research is needed to determine the mechanism leading to anosmia.
| S-EPMC7166003 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In December 2019, an acute respiratory disease caused by novel species of coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), emerged in China and has spread throughout the world. On 11th March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) a pandemic, severe coronavirus-mediated human disease. Based on genomic and phylogenetic studies, SARS-CoV-2 might originate from bat coronaviruses and infects humans directly or through intermediate zoonotic hosts. However, the exact origin or the host intermediate remains unknown. Genetically, SARS-CoV-2 is similar to several existing coronaviruses, particularly SARS-CoV, but differs by silent and non-silent mutations. The virus uses different transmission routes and targets cells and tissues with angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) protein, which makes it contagious. COVID-19 shares both the main clinical features and excessive/dysregulated cell responses with the two previous Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS) and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS) epidemics. In this review, we provide an update of the current knowledge on the COVID-19 pandemic. Gaining a deeper understanding of SARS-CoV-2 structure, transmission routes, and molecular responses, will assist in the prevention and control of COVID-19 outbreaks in the future.
| S-EPMC7545713 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSearching through the COVID-19 research literature to gain actionable clinical insight is a formidable task, even for experts. The usefulness of this corpus in terms of improving patient care is tied to the ability to see the big picture that emerges when the studies are seen in conjunction rather than in isolation. When the answer to a search query requires linking together multiple pieces of information across documents, simple keyword searches are insufficient. To answer such complex information needs, an innovative artificial intelligence (AI) technology named a knowledge graph (KG) could prove to be effective.MethodsWe conducted an exploratory literature review of KG applications in the context of COVID-19. The search term used was "covid-19 knowledge graph". In addition to PubMed, the first five pages of search results for Google Scholar and Google were considered for inclusion. Google Scholar was used to include non-peer-reviewed or non-indexed articles such as pre-prints and conference proceedings. Google was used to identify companies or consortiums active in this domain that have not published any literature, peer-reviewed or otherwise.ResultsOur search yielded 34 results on PubMed and 50 results each on Google and Google Scholar. We found KGs being used for facilitating literature search, drug repurposing, clinical trial mapping, and risk factor analysis.ConclusionsOur synopses of these works make a compelling case for the utility of this nascent field of research.
| S-EPMC8070774 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Successful detection of SARS-COV-2 in wastewater suggests the potential utility of wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) for COVID-19 community surveillance. This systematic review aims to assess the performance of wastewater surveillance as early warning system of COVID-19 community transmission. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Medline, Embase and the WBE Consortium Registry according to PRISMA guidelines for relevant articles published until 31st July 2021. Relevant data were extracted and summarized. Quality of each paper was assessed using an assessment tool adapted from Bilotta et al.'s tool for environmental science. Of 763 studies identified, 92 studies distributed across 34 countries were shortlisted for qualitative synthesis. A total of 26,197 samples were collected between January 2020 and May 2021 from various locations serving population ranging from 321 to 11,400,000 inhabitants. Overall sample positivity was moderate at 29.2% in all examined settings with the spike (S) gene having maximum rate of positive detections and nucleocapsid (N) gene being the most targeted. Wastewater signals preceded confirmed cases by up to 63 days, with 13 studies reporting sample positivity before the first cases were detected in the community. At least 50 studies reported an association of viral load with community cases. While wastewater surveillance cannot replace large-scale diagnostic testing, it can complement clinical surveillance by providing early signs of potential transmission for more active public health responses. However, more studies using standardized and validated methods are required along with risk analysis and modelling to understand the dynamics of viral outbreaks.
| S-EPMC8423771 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Effective therapeutic interventions for the treatment and prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are urgently needed. A systematic review was conducted to identify clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for COVID-19 published between 1 December 2019 and 14 October 2020. Data regarding efficacy of interventions, in terms of mortality, hospitalisation and need for ventilation, were extracted from identified studies and synthesised qualitatively. In total, 42 clinical trials were included. Interventions assessed included antiviral, mucolytic, antimalarial, anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory therapies. Some reductions in mortality, hospitalisation and need for ventilation were seen with interferons and remdesivir, particularly when administered early, and with the mucolytic drug, bromhexine. Most studies of lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine did not show significant efficacy over standard care/placebo. Dexamethasone significantly reduced mortality, hospitalisation and need for ventilation versus standard care, particularly in patients with severe disease. Evidence for other classes of interventions was limited. Many trials had a moderate-to-high risk of bias, particularly in terms of blinding; most were short-term and some included low patient numbers.This review highlights the need for well-designed clinical trials of therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 to increase the quality of available evidence. It also emphasises the importance of tailoring interventions to disease stage and severity for maximum efficacy.
| S-EPMC9489065 | biostudies-literature