COVID-19: Wie impft man richtig? Intramuscular injection technique for COVID vaccination: A critical appraisal
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Alius F
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8518274 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:AimTo review the effect of different intramuscular injection (IMI) techniques on injection associated pain, in adults.MethodsThe review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42019136097). MEDLINE, EMBASE, British Nursing Index and CINAHL were searched up to June 2020. Included studies were appraised and a meta-analysis, where appropriate, was conducted with a random effects model and test for heterogeneity. Standardised mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval in reported injection pain (intervention cf. control) was reported.Results29 studies were included in the systematic review and 20 studies in the meta-analysis. 13 IMI techniques were identified. 10 studies applied local pressure to the injection site. Of these, applying manual pressure (4 studies, SMD = -0.85[-1.36,-0.33]) and Helfer (rhythmic) tapping (3 studies, SMD = -2.95[-5.51,-0.39]) to the injection site reduced injection pain, whereas the use of a plastic device to apply local pressure to the skin (ShotBlocker) did not significantly reduce pain (2 studies, SMD = -0.51[-1.58,0.56]). Acupressure techniques which mostly involved applying sustained pressure followed by intermittent pressure (tapping) to acupressure points local to the injection site reduced pain (4 studies: SMD = -1.62[-2.80,-0.44]), as did injections to the ventrogluteal site compared to the dorsogluteal site (2 studies, SMD = -0.43[-0.81,-0.06]). There was insufficient evidence on the benefits of the 'Z track technique' (2 studies, SMD = -0.20[-0.41,0.01]) and the cold needle technique (2 studies, SMD = -0.73[-1.83,0.37]) on injection pain. The effect of changing the needle after drawing up the injectate on injection pain was conflicting and warming the injectate did not reduce pain. Limitations included considerable heterogeneity, poor reporting of randomisation, and possible bias in outcome measures from unblinding of assessors or participants.ConclusionsManual pressure or rhythmic tapping over the injection site and applying local pressure around the injection site reduced IMI pain. However, there was very high unexplained heterogeneity between studies and risk of significant bias within small studies.
| S-EPMC8092782 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A few cases of parkinsonism linked to COVID-19 infection have been reported so far, raising the possibility of a post-viral parkinsonian syndrome. The objective of this review is to summarize the clinical, biological, and neuroimaging features of published cases describing COVID-19-related parkinsonism and to discuss the possible pathophysiological mechanisms. A comprehensive literature search was performed using NCBI's PubMed database and standardized search terms. Thirteen cases of COVID-19-related parkinsonism were included (7 males; mean age: 51 years ± 14.51, range 31-73). Patients were classified based on the possible mechanisms of post-COVID-19 parkinsonism: extensive inflammation or hypoxic brain injury within the context of encephalopathy (n = 5); unmasking of underlying still non-symptomatic Parkinson's Disease (PD) (n = 5), and structural and functional basal ganglia damage (n = 3). The various clinical scenarios show different outcomes and responses to dopaminergic treatment. Different mechanisms may play a role, including vascular damage, neuroinflammation, SARS-CoV-2 neuroinvasive potential, and the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on α-synuclein. Our results confirm that the appearance of parkinsonism during or immediately after COVID-19 infection represents a very rare event. Future long-term observational studies are needed to evaluate the possible role of SARS-CoV-2 infection as a trigger for the development of PD in the long term.
| S-EPMC9313170 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Remdesivir is presently been considered as 'molecule of hope' to curb the menace of COVID19. Non-availability of any USFDA approved drug has led to several attempt of drug-repurposing and development of new therapeutic molecules. However, Remdesivir has been found to be effective against a broad range of virus including SARS, MERS and COVID 19 through in-vitro studies. Several clinical research attempt are presently being conducted showing promising result yet not conclusive. This review summarized all such clinical trials to critically appraise the usage of Remdesivir against COVID 19 along with the publications related to the results of the clinical studies. The present regulatory aspect i. e. Emergency Use Authorization (EYA) and information of molecule and plausible mechanism is also dealt.
| S-EPMC8043717 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Influenza imposes a significant burden worldwide from the healthcare and socio-economic standpoints. This is also due to suboptimal vaccination coverage among the target population, even though immunization is recommended since many years and still remains the fundamental tool for its prevention. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of exposure to respiratory pathogens compared with the general population, including flu, with potential threat for their health and for patients' safety. Nevertheless, despite recommendation for immunization of this work-category in most of Western Countries, inadequate flu vaccine uptake is reported during the last decade in the European area. According to recent systematic reviews on this topic, the main determinants of vaccine acceptance among HCWs have been largely investigated and include desire for self-protection and to protect family rather than absolute disease risk or desire to protect patients, among the main drivers. On the other hand, concerns regarding safety of the vaccines resulted in decreased vaccine uptake. Moreover, influenza vaccine hesitancy among HCWs was also associated with several issues such as low risk perception, denial of the social benefit of influenza vaccination, low social pressure, lack of perceived behavioral control, negative attitude toward vaccines, not having been previously vaccinated against influenza, not having previously had influenza, lack of adequate influenza-specific knowledge, lack of access to vaccination facilities, and socio-demographic variables. The topic of influenza vaccination among HCWs is challenging, full of ethical issues. Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of interventions for improving vaccine uptake among HCWs found that combined strategies were more effective than isolate approaches. Mandatory policies are currently under debate in several countries. High quality studies would help policy-makers and stake-holders to shape evidence-based initiatives and programs to improve the control of influenza.
| S-EPMC5861785 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has sparked much interest in the therapeutics of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Its antiviral properties have been studied for years; regarding the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Corona Virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), it has been shown that HCQ may act at multiple levels. These extend from the initial attachment of the virus to the respiratory epithelium to the inhibition of its replication by the alkalinisation of the phagolysosome's microenvironment and the post-translational modification of certain viral proteins. Preliminary clinical evidence from China and France showed significant virological and clinical benefit in HCQ-treated patients, while other studies, mostly including critically ill patients, did not show favorable results. In this review, we critically appraise the existing evidence on HCQ against SARS-CoV-2 with particular emphasis on its protective and therapeutic role. Safety concerns that are relevant to the short-term HCQ use are also discussed. In the context of the rapid evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic that strains the health care systems worldwide and considering limited population-wide testing rates in most of the vulnerable countries, early empiric short-term administration of HCQ in symptomatic individuals, may be a promising, safe and low-cost strategy.
| S-EPMC7431338 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSince the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, a large number of COVID-19-related papers have been published. However, concerns about the risk of expedited science have been raised. We aimed at reviewing and categorizing COVID-19-related medical research and to critically appraise peer-reviewed original articles.MethodsThe data sources were Pubmed, Cochrane COVID-19 register study, arXiv, medRxiv and bioRxiv, from 01/11/2019 to 01/05/2020. Peer-reviewed and preprints publications related to COVID-19 were included, written in English or Chinese. No limitations were placed on study design. Reviewers screened and categorized studies according to i) publication type, ii) country of publication, and iii) topics covered. Original articles were critically appraised using validated quality assessment tools.ResultsAmong the 11,452 publications identified, 10,516 met the inclusion criteria, among which 7468 (71.0%) were peer-reviewed articles. Among these, 4190 publications (56.1%) did not include any data or analytics (comprising expert opinion pieces). Overall, the most represented topics were infectious disease (n = 2326, 22.1%), epidemiology (n = 1802, 17.1%), and global health (n = 1602, 15.2%). The top five publishing countries were China (25.8%), United States (22.3%), United Kingdom (8.8%), Italy (8.1%) and India (3.4%). The dynamic of publication showed that the exponential growth of COVID-19 peer-reviewed articles was mainly driven by publications without original data (mean 261.5 articles ± 51.1 per week) as compared with original articles (mean of 69.3 ± 22.3 articles per week). Original articles including patient data accounted for 713 (9.5%) of peer-reviewed studies. A total of 576 original articles (80.8%) showed intermediate to high risk of bias. Last, except for simulation studies that mainly used large-scale open data, the median number of patients enrolled was of 102 (IQR = 37-337).ConclusionsSince the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority of research is composed by publications without original data. Peer-reviewed original articles with data showed a high risk of bias and included a limited number of patients. Together, these findings underscore the urgent need to strike a balance between the velocity and quality of research, and to cautiously consider medical information and clinical applicability in a pressing, pandemic context. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/5zjyx/.
| S-EPMC7780085 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIntravitreal injection of therapeutic medications has become one of the most commonly performed procedures in ophthalmology. Over the past decade, a number of guidelines have been published that recommend proper techniques to increase the safety of intravitreal injections. In this course, we teach and practice the skills necessary to perform safe intravitreal injections.MethodsThe course was developed for first-year ophthalmology residents and was designed to be delivered in one 2-hour session. Associated materials include guidelines for faculty facilitators and residents to prepare them for safe intravitreal injection of therapeutic medications. Also included are a slide presentation, wet-lab practice guidelines, and an evaluation form.ResultsLearner response has been universally very positive. Residents (N = 15) have reported that structured lectures with practice in the wet lab improved their skill for intravitreal injection of therapeutic medication.DiscussionOverall, we found that our curriculum improved learner knowledge about safe intravitreal injections and learners' self-assessed confidence in the three objectives of the curriculum.
| S-EPMC6440421 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCritical appraisal aids in assessing the quality of scientific literature, which is central to the practice of evidence-based medicine. Several tools and guidelines are available for critiquing and assessing the quality of specific study types. However, limited guidance exists for critical appraisal of clinical pharmacokinetic studies.AimWe aimed to achieve experts' consensus regarding the quality markers for clinical pharmacokinetic studies in an attempt to develop a critical appraisal tool.MethodQuality markers related to clinical pharmacokinetic studies, were derived from the published literature and categorized according to manuscript reporting domains (abstract, introduction/background, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion). Questions that aid in appraising pharmacokinetic studies were formulated from these quality markers. Experts were involved in a modified Delphi process to achieve a consensus regarding the formulated questions. The proposed tool was pilot tested on 30 recently published clinical pharmacokinetic studies. Inter-observer agreement was measured to determine the reliability of the included items.ResultsTwenty-five experts consented to participate. Three rounds of a modified Delphi survey were required to generate a consensus for a 21-item tool aimed at appraising the quality of clinical pharmacokinetic studies. When applied to 30 recently published clinical pharmacokinetic studies, most items scored fair to moderate levels of agreement (61.90-95.24%).ConclusionThe clinical pharmacokinetic critical appraisal tool (CACPK) developed in this study consisted of 21 items aimed at helping an end-user to determine the quality of a pharmacokinetic study. Further studies are warranted to reaffirm the validity and reliability of the CACPK tool.
| S-EPMC9393138 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo systematically identify and critically appraise the methodological quality of pediatric guidelines applicable to management of COVID-19 in India.MethodsPediatric COVID-19 guidelines applicable to India, published until 30 April 2021, were identified through a systematic search across ten databases. Each was critically appraised for methodological quality using the AGREE-II tool, by at least two appraisers. Median (interquartile range) of the total score and domain-wise scores were calculated, and compared for Indian vs. foreign guidelines, updated vs. original versions of guidelines, and those developed earlier vs. later in the pandemic.ResultsA total of 62 guidelines was identified. Only 8 (12.9%) were published in India. The overall AGREE-II score ranged from 4.7% to 72.8%; with median (IQR) 37.9% (29.4, 48.6). This suggested overall low(er) methodological quality. The median (IQR) domain-wise scores were as follows: Scope and Purpose 66.7% (58.3, 83.3), Stakeholder Involvement 41.7% (30.6, 83.3), Rigor of Development 23.4% (14.8, 37.5), Clarity of Presentation 59.7% (50.0, 75.0), Applicability 27.1% (18.8, 33.3), and Editorial Independence 8.3% (0.0, 45.8). This suggested diversity in quality of different aspects of the guidelines, with very low quality in the critical domain of methodological rigor. There were no statistically significant differences in the overall scores of Indian vs. foreign guidelines, updated versions vs. original versions, and those developed earlier vs. later in the pandemic.ConclusionThe currently available pediatric COVID-19 guidelines have low methodological quality, adversely affecting their credibility, validity, and applicability. Urgent corrective strategies are presented for consideration.
| S-EPMC8767361 | biostudies-literature
Project description:More than a year has passed since the report of the first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID), and increasing deaths continue to occur. Minimizing the time required for resource allocation and clinical decision making, such as triage, choice of ventilation modes and admission to the intensive care unit is important. Machine learning techniques are acquiring an increasingly sought-after role in predicting the outcome of COVID patients. Particularly, the use of baseline machine learning techniques is rapidly developing in COVID mortality prediction, since a mortality prediction model could rapidly and effectively help clinical decision-making for COVID patients at imminent risk of death. Recent studies reviewed predictive models for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, severity, length of hospital stay, intensive care unit admission or mechanical ventilation modes outcomes; however, systematic reviews focused on prediction of COVID mortality outcome with machine learning methods are lacking in the literature. The present review looked into the studies that implemented machine learning, including deep learning, methods in COVID mortality prediction thus trying to present the existing published literature and to provide possible explanations of the best results that the studies obtained. The study also discussed challenging aspects of current studies, providing suggestions for future developments.
| S-EPMC8467935 | biostudies-literature