The mystery of COVID-19 reinfections: A global systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Dhillon RA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8642249 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundA vaccine against COVID-19 is a vital tool in managing the current pandemic. It is becoming evident that an effective vaccine would be required to control COVID-19. Effective use of vaccines is very important in controlling pandemics and paving the way for an acceptable exit strategy. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the global COVID-19 acceptance rate that is necessary for better management of COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis review was conducted based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocols and considered the studies conducted on acceptance and/or hesitancy of COVID-19 vaccine. Articles were searched using electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, and Google Scholar. The quality of the study was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical assessment tool to determine the relevance of each included article to the study.ResultsOf the 6,021 articles identified through the electronic database search, 68 articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The global pooled acceptance rate of the COVID-19 vaccine was found to be 64.9% [95% CI of 60.5 to 69.0%]. Based on the subgroup analysis of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate by the World Health Organization's region, the countries where the study was conducted, occupation, and survey period, the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate was 60.8% [95% CI: 56.3, 65.2%], 61.9% [95% CI: 61.3, 62.4%], 81.6% [95% CI: 79.7, 83, 2%] and 64.5% [95% CI: 60.3, 68.5%], respectively.ConclusionsThis review revealed the variation in the level of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate across the world. The study found that the overall prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was 64.9%. This finding indicated that even if the COVID-19 vaccine is developed, the issue of accepting or taking the developed vaccine and managing the pandemic may be difficult.
| S-EPMC9773145 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mucormycosis, a secondary fungal infection, gained much attention in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. This deadly infection has a high all-cause mortality rate and imposes a significant economic, epidemiological, and humanistic burden on the patients and healthcare system. Evidence from the published epidemiological studies showed the varying prevalence of COVID-19-associated mucormycosis (CAM). This study aims to compute the pooled prevalence of CAM and other associated clinical outcomes. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, and WHO COVID-19 databases were scanned to retrieve the relevant articles until August 2021. All studies reporting the prevalence of mucormycosis among COVID-19 patients were eligible for inclusion. Two investigators independently screened the articles against the selection criteria, extracted the data, and performed the quality assessment using the JBI tool. The pooled prevalence of CAM was the primary outcome, and the pooled prevalence of diabetes, steroid exposure, and the mortality rate were the secondary outcomes of interest. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 2 was used for performing the meta-analysis. This meta-analysis comprised six studies with a pooled sample size of 52,916 COVID-19 patients with a mean age of 62.12 ± 9.69 years. The mean duration of mucormycosis onset was 14.59 ± 6.88 days after the COVID-19 diagnosis. The pooled prevalence of CAM (seven cases per 1000 patients) was 50 times higher than the highest recorded background of mucormycosis (0.14 cases per 1000 patients). A high mortality rate was found among CAM patients with a pooled prevalence rate of 29.6% (95% CI: 17.2-45.9%). Optimal glycemic control and the judicious use of steroids should be the approach for tackling rising CAM cases.
| S-EPMC8624337 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsRecent media reports of myocarditis after receiving COVID-19 vaccines, particularly the messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines, are causing public concern. This review summarizes information from published case series and case reports, emphasizing patient and disease characteristics, investigation, and clinical outcomes, to provide a comprehensive picture of the condition.MethodsA systematic literature search of PubMed and Google scholar was conducted from inception to April 27, 2022. Individuals who develop myocarditis after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, regardless of the type of vaccine and dose, were included in the study.ResultsSixty-two studies, including 218 cases, participated in the current systematic review. The median age was 29.2 years; 92.2% were male and 7.8% were female. 72.4% of patients received the Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) vaccine, 23.8% of patients received the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine (mRNA-1273), and the rest of the 3.5% received other types of COVID-19 vaccine. Furthermore, most myocarditis cases (82.1%) occurred after the second vaccine dose, after a median time interval of 3.5 days. The most frequently reported symptoms were chest pain, myalgia/body aches and fever. Troponin levels were consistently elevated in 98.6% of patients. The admission ECG was abnormal in 88.5% of cases, and the left LVEF was lower than 50% in 21.5% of cases. Most patients (92.6%) resolved symptoms and recovered, and only three patients died.ConclusionThese findings may help public health policy to consider myocarditis in the context of the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination.
| S-EPMC9135698 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) of the global general population regarding COVID-19.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO were used to identify articles published between 1 January and 30 June 2021 assessing KAP regarding COVID-19 in the global general population. The quality of eligible studies was assessed. Random effects model was used to obtain the pooled proportion of each component of KAP of COVID-19. Heterogeneity (I2) was tested, and subgroup and correlation analyses were performed.ResultsOut of 3099 records, 84 studies from 45 countries across all continents assessing 215 731 participants' COVID-19 KAP were included in this study. The estimated overall correct answers for knowledge, good attitude and good practice in this review were 75% (95% CI 72% to 77%), 74% (95% CI 71% to 77%) and 70% (95% CI 66% to 74%), respectively. Low-income countries, men, people aged below 30 years and people with 12 years of education or less had the lowest practice scores. Practice scores were below 60% in Africa and Europe/Oceania. Overall heterogeneity was high (I2 ≥98%), and publication bias was present (Egger's regression test, p<0.01). A positive significant correlation between knowledge and practice (r=0.314, p=0.006), and attitude and practice (r=0.348, p=0.004) was observed.ConclusionsThis study's findings call for community-based awareness programmes to provide a simple, clear and understandable message to reinforce knowledge especially regarding efficacy of the preventive measures in low and lower middle-income countries, and in Africa and Europe/Oceania, which will translate into good practice. Targeted intervention for men, people with low education, unemployed people and people aged below 30 years should be recommended. As most of the included studies were online surveys, underprivileged and remote rural people may have been missed out. Additional studies are needed to cover heterogeneous populations.Prospero registration numberCRD42020203476.
| S-EPMC8441223 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe body of evidence showed that there is a strong correlation between acute myocardial Injury and COVID-19 infection. However, the link between acute myocardial infection and COVID-19, the prevalence, reliability of diagnostic modalities, independent predictors, and clinical outcomes are still uncertain and a topic of debate. The current study was designed to determine the prevalence, determinants, and outcomes of acute myocardial injury based on a systematic review and meta-analysis the global published peer-reviewed works of literature.MethodsA comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed/Medline; Science direct, CINHAL, and LILACS from December 2019 to May 2021. All observational studies reporting the prevalence of AMI were included while case reports and reviews were excluded. The data were extracted with two independent authors in a customized format. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa appraisal tool.ResultsA total of 397 articles were identified from different databases. Thirty-seven Articles with 21, 204 participants were included while seven studies were excluded. The meta-analysis revealed that the pooled prevalence of myocardial injury during the COVID-19 pandemic was 22.33 % (95 % CI: 17.86 to 26.81, 37).ConclusionOur meta-analysis showed that mortality among patients with an acute myocardial injury during COVID-19 was more than four times more likely as compared to those without AMI. This necessitates a mitigating strategy to prevent and manage before its clinical outcomes getting worse.
| S-EPMC8316689 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on healthcare systems globally, with a worrying increase in adverse maternal and foetal outcomes. We aimed to assess the changes in maternity healthcare provision and healthcare-seeking by pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies of the effects of the pandemic on provision of, access to and attendance at maternity services (CRD42020211753). We searched MEDLINE and Embase in accordance with PRISMA guidelines from January 1st, 2020 to April 17th 2021 for controlled observational studies and research letters reporting primary data comparing maternity healthcare-seeking and healthcare delivery during compared to before the COVID-19 pandemic. Case reports and series, systematic literature reviews, and pre-print studies were excluded. Meta-analysis was performed on comparable outcomes that were reported in two or more studies. Data were combined using random-effects meta-analysis, using risk ratios (RR) or incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).FindingsOf 4743 citations identified, 56 were included in the systematic review, and 21 in the meta-analysis. We identified a significant decrease in the number of antenatal clinic visits (IRR 0614, 95% CI 0486-0776, P<00001, I2=54.6%) and unscheduled care visits (IRR 0741, 95% CI 0602-0911, P = 00046, I2=00%) per week, and an increase in virtual or remote antenatal care (IRR 4656 95% CI 7762-2794, P<00001, I2=90.6%) and hospitalisation of unscheduled attendees (RR 1214, 95% CI 1118-1319, P<00001, I2=00%). There was a decrease in the use of GA for category 1 Caesarean sections (CS) (RR 0529, 95% CI 0407-0690, P<00001, I2=00%). There was no significant change in intrapartum epidural use (P = 00896) or the use of GA for elective CS (P = 079).InterpretationReduced maternity healthcare-seeking and healthcare provision during the COVID-19 pandemic has been global, and must be considered as potentially contributing to worsening of pregnancy outcomes observed during the pandemic.
| S-EPMC8233134 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe challenge of COVID-19 is very high globally due to a lack of proven treatment and the complexity of its transmission. The prevalence of in-hospital mortality among patients with COVID-19 was very high which ranged from 1 to 52% of hospital admission. The prevalence of mortality among intensive care patients with COVID-19 was very high which ranged from 6% to 86% of admitted patients.MethodsA three-stage search strategy was conducted on PubMed/Medline; Science direct Cochrane Library. The Heterogeneity among the included studies was checked with forest plot, χ2 test, I2 test, and the p-values. Publication bias was checked with a funnel plot and the objective diagnostic test was conducted with Egger's correlation, Begg's regression tests.ResultThe Meta-Analysis revealed that the pooled prevalence of in-hospital mortality in patients with coronavirus disease was 15% (95% CI: 13 to 17). Prevalence of in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19 was strongly related to different factors. Patients with Acute respiratory distress syndrome were eight times more likely to die as compared to those who didn't have, RR = 7.99(95% CI: 4.9 to 13).ConclusionThe review revealed that more than fifteen percent of patients admitted to the hospital with coronavirus died. This presages the health care stakeholders to manage morbidity and mortality among patients with coronavirus through the mobilization of adequate resources and skilled health care providers.RegistrationThis systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in research registry with UIN of reviewregistry1093.
| S-EPMC7931690 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has affected patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) requiring primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) worldwide. In this review we examine the global effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on incidence of STEMI admissions, and relationship between the pandemic and door to balloon time (D2B), all-cause mortality, and other secondary STEMI outcomes.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to primarily compare D2B time and in-hospital mortality of STEMI patients who underwent primary PCI during and before the pandemic. Subgroup analyses were performed to investigate the influence of geographical region and income status of a country on STEMI care. An online database search included studies that compared the aforementioned outcomes of STEMI patients during and before the pandemic.ResultsIn total, 32 articles were analyzed. Overall, 19,140 and 68,662 STEMI patients underwent primary PCI during and before the pandemic, respectively. Significant delay in D2B was observed during the pandemic (weighted mean difference, 8.10 minutes; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.90-12.30 minutes; P = 0.0002; I2 = 90%). In-hospital mortality was higher during the pandemic (odds ratio [OR], 1.27; 95% CI, 1.09-1.49; P = 0.002; I2 = 36%), however this varied with factors such as geographical location and income status of a country. Subgroup analysis showed that low-middle-income countries observed a higher rate of mortality during the pandemic (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.13-2.05; P = 0.006), with a similar but insignificant trend seen among the high income countries (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.95-1.44; P = 0.13).ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic is associated with worse STEMI performance metrics and clinical outcome, particularly in the Eastern low-middle-income status countries. Better strategies are needed to address these global trends in STEMI care during the pandemic.
| S-EPMC8056787 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic, affecting millions of people. However, the relationship between COVID-19 and acute cerebrovascular diseases is unclear.AimsWe aimed to characterize the incidence, risk factors, clinical-radiological manifestations, and outcome of COVID-19-associated stroke.MethodsThree medical databases were systematically reviewed for published articles on acute cerebrovascular diseases in COVID-19 (December 2019-September 2020). The review protocol was previously registered (PROSPERO ID?=?CRD42020185476). Data were extracted from articles reporting ?5 stroke cases in COVID-19. We complied with the PRISMA guidelines and used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess data quality. Data were pooled using a random-effect model.Summary of reviewOf 2277 initially identified articles, 61 (2.7%) were entered in the meta-analysis. Out of 108,571 patients with COVID-19, acute CVD occurred in 1.4% (95%CI: 1.0-1.9). The most common manifestation was acute ischemic stroke (87.4%); intracerebral hemorrhage was less common (11.6%). Patients with COVID-19 developing acute cerebrovascular diseases, compared to those who did not, were older (pooled median difference?=?4.8 years; 95%CI: 1.7-22.4), more likely to have hypertension (OR?=?7.35; 95%CI: 1.94-27.87), diabetes mellitus (OR?=?5.56; 95%CI: 3.34-9.24), coronary artery disease (OR?=?3.12; 95%CI: 1.61-6.02), and severe infection (OR?=?5.10; 95%CI: 2.72-9.54). Compared to individuals who experienced a stroke without the infection, patients with COVID-19 and stroke were younger (pooled median difference?=?-6.0 years; 95%CI: -12.3 to -1.4), had higher NIHSS (pooled median difference?=?5; 95%CI: 3-9), higher frequency of large vessel occlusion (OR?=?2.73; 95%CI: 1.63-4.57), and higher in-hospital mortality rate (OR?=?5.21; 95%CI: 3.43-7.90).ConclusionsAcute cerebrovascular diseases are not uncommon in patients with COVID-19, especially in those whom are severely infected and have pre-existing vascular risk factors. The pattern of large vessel occlusion and multi-territory infarcts suggests that cerebral thrombosis and/or thromboembolism could be possible causative pathways for the disease.
| S-EPMC7859578 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Due to lack of preparedness of health systems, fast spread of the new virus, high mortality rates, and lack of a definite treatment, the outbreak of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) led to high levels of fear and anxiety in different populations. In addition, isolation, mental disorders, and limitations in social interactions as a result of lockdown and travel ban increased the fear of the new coronavirus. Methods: International databases, including Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google scholar, were searched without any time limitation, and all observational studies published in English reporting the mean of fear of COVID-19 based on the Fear of COVID-19 scale (FCV-19S) were included in the analysis. Methodological quality was assessed using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. Random effects model, subgroup analysis, and meta-regression analysis were used to analyze the data. Heterogeneity across studies was examined using Cochran's Q test and I 2 statistic. All the statistical analyses were conducted using R software v4.0.3. Results: A total of 44 articles with a sample size of 52,462 were reviewed. A pooled mean of 18.57 was found for fear of COVID-19. The mean of fear of COVID-19 was higher in women than in men (20.67 vs. 18.21). The highest and lowest means of fear of COVID-19 had been found in Asia (18.36) and Australia (17.43) based on continent, and in hospital staff (19.51) and college students (17.95) based on target population, respectively. In addition, the highest and lowest means of fear of COVID-19 were related to items #1 and #3 of the scale, respectively. According to the results of meta-regression analysis, there was no significant association between the mean of fear of COVID-19 and sample size and participants' age. In addition, publication error was not significant (P = 0.721). Conclusion: The mean of fear of COVID-19 was high around the world; therefore, it seems necessary to pay more attention to the negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health.
| S-EPMC8231929 | biostudies-literature