| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Axfors, Cathrine, et al.
(author)
-
Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19 : a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
- 2021
-
In: BMC Infectious Diseases. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1471-2334. ; 21:1
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, ). Methods: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I-2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. Conclusions: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care.
|
|
| 3. |
- Gerkin, RC, et al.
(author)
-
The best COVID-19 predictor is recent smell loss: a cross-sectional study
- 2020
-
In: medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences. - : Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)abstract
- BackgroundCOVID-19 has heterogeneous manifestations, though one of the most common symptoms is a sudden loss of smell (anosmia or hyposmia). We investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19.MethodsThis preregistered, cross-sectional study used a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n=4148) or negative (C19-; n=546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified singular and cumulative predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery.ResultsBoth C19+ and C19-groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean±SD, C19+: -82.5±27.2 points; C19-: -59.8±37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both single and cumulative feature models (ROC AUC=0.72), with additional features providing negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms, such as fever or cough. Olfactory recovery within 40 days was reported for ∼50% of participants and was best predicted by time since illness onset.ConclusionsAs smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19, we developed the ODoR-19 tool, a 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss. Numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4<OR<10), which can be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Micah, Angela E., et al.
(author)
-
Tracking development assistance for health and for COVID-19 : a review of development assistance, government, out-of-pocket, and other private spending on health for 204 countries and territories, 1990-2050
- 2021
-
In: The Lancet. - : Elsevier. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 398:10308, s. 1317-1343
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background The rapid spread of COVID-19 renewed the focus on how health systems across the globe are financed, especially during public health emergencies. Development assistance is an important source of health financing in many low-income countries, yet little is known about how much of this funding was disbursed for COVID-19. We aimed to put development assistance for health for COVID-19 in the context of broader trends in global health financing, and to estimate total health spending from 1995 to 2050 and development assistance for COVID-19 in 2020. Methods We estimated domestic health spending and development assistance for health to generate total health-sector spending estimates for 204 countries and territories. We leveraged data from the WHO Global Health Expenditure Database to produce estimates of domestic health spending. To generate estimates for development assistance for health, we relied on project-level disbursement data from the major international development agencies' online databases and annual financial statements and reports for information on income sources. To adjust our estimates for 2020 to include disbursements related to COVID-19, we extracted project data on commitments and disbursements from a broader set of databases (because not all of the data sources used to estimate the historical series extend to 2020), including the UN Office of Humanitarian Assistance Financial Tracking Service and the International Aid Transparency Initiative. We reported all the historic and future spending estimates in inflation-adjusted 2020 US$, 2020 US$ per capita, purchasing-power parity-adjusted US$ per capita, and as a proportion of gross domestic product. We used various models to generate future health spending to 2050. Findings In 2019, health spending globally reached $8. 8 trillion (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 8.7-8.8) or $1132 (1119-1143) per person. Spending on health varied within and across income groups and geographical regions. Of this total, $40.4 billion (0.5%, 95% UI 0.5-0.5) was development assistance for health provided to low-income and middle-income countries, which made up 24.6% (UI 24.0-25.1) of total spending in low-income countries. We estimate that $54.8 billion in development assistance for health was disbursed in 2020. Of this, $13.7 billion was targeted toward the COVID-19 health response. $12.3 billion was newly committed and $1.4 billion was repurposed from existing health projects. $3.1 billion (22.4%) of the funds focused on country-level coordination and $2.4 billion (17.9%) was for supply chain and logistics. Only $714.4 million (7.7%) of COVID-19 development assistance for health went to Latin America, despite this region reporting 34.3% of total recorded COVID-19 deaths in low-income or middle-income countries in 2020. Spending on health is expected to rise to $1519 (1448-1591) per person in 2050, although spending across countries is expected to remain varied. Interpretation Global health spending is expected to continue to grow, but remain unequally distributed between countries. We estimate that development organisations substantially increased the amount of development assistance for health provided in 2020. Continued efforts are needed to raise sufficient resources to mitigate the pandemic for the most vulnerable, and to help curtail the pandemic for all. Copyright (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
|
|
| 6. |
- Al-Rukn, S, et al.
(author)
-
Stroke in the Middle-East and North Africa: A 2-year prospective observational study of intravenous thrombolysis treatment in the region. Results from the SITS-MENA Registry
- 2020
-
In: International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society. - : SAGE Publications. - 1747-4949. ; 15:9, s. 980-987
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke in the Middle-East and North African (MENA) countries is still confined to the main urban and university hospitals. This was a prospective observational study to examine outcomes of intravenous thrombolysis-treated stroke patients in the MENA region compared to the non-MENA stroke cohort in the SITS International Registry. Results Of 32,160 patients with ischemic stroke registered using the SITS intravenous thrombolysis protocol between June 2014 and May 2016, 500 (1.6%) were recruited in MENA. Compared to non-MENA (all p < 0.001), median age in MENA was 55 versus 73 years, NIH Stroke Scale score 12 versus 9, onset-to-treatment time 138 versus 155 min and door-to-needle time 54 min versus 64 min. Hypertension was the most reported risk factor, but lower in MENA (51.7 vs. 69.7%). Diabetes was more frequent in MENA (28.5 vs. 20.8%) as well as smoking (20.8 vs. 15.9%). Hyperlipidemia was less observed in MENA (17.6 vs. 29.3%). Functional independence (mRS 0–2) at seven days or discharge was similar (53% vs. 52% in non-MENA), with mortality slightly lower in MENA (2.3% vs. 4.8%). SICH rates by SITS-MOST definition were low (<1.4%) in both groups. Conclusions Intravenous thrombolysis patients in MENA were younger, had more severe strokes and more often diabetes. Although stroke severity was higher in MENA, short-term functional independency and mortality were not worse compared to non-MENA, which could partly be explained by younger age and shorter OTT in MENA. Decreasing the burden of stroke in this young population should be prioritized.
|
|
| 7. |
- Al Rukn, S, et al.
(author)
-
Stroke in the Middle-East and North Africa: A 2-year prospective observational study of stroke characteristics in the region-Results from the Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke (SITS)-Middle-East and North African (MENA)
- 2019
-
In: International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society. - : SAGE Publications. - 1747-4949. ; 14:7, s. 715-722
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Stroke incidence and mortality are reported to have increased in the Middle-East and North African (MENA) countries during the last decade. This was a prospective observational study to examine the baseline characteristics of stroke patients in the MENA region and to compare the MENA vs. the non-MENA stroke cohort in the Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke (SITS) International Registry. Results Of the 13,822 patients with ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke enrolled in the SITS-All Patients Protocol between June 2014 and May 2016, 5897 patients (43%) were recruited in MENA. The median onset-to-door time was 5 h (IQR: 2:20–13:00), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score was 8 (4–13) and age was 65 years (56–76). Hypertension (66%) and diabetes (38%) were the prevailing risk factors; large artery stenosis > 50% (25.3%) and lacunar strokes (24.1%) were the most common ischemic stroke etiologies. In comparison, non-MENA countries displayed an onset-to-door time of 5:50 h (2:00–18:45), a median of NIHSS 6 (3–14), and a median age of 66 (56–76), with other large vessel disease and cardiac embolism as the main ischemic stroke etiologies. Hemorrhagic strokes (10%) were less common compared to non-MENA countries (13.9%). In MENA, only a low proportion of patients (21%) was admitted to stroke units. Conclusions MENA patients are slightly younger, have a higher prevalence of diabetes and slightly more severe ischemic strokes, commonly of atherosclerotic or microvascular etiology. Admission into stroke units and long-term follow-up need to be improved. It is suspected that cardiac embolism and atrial fibrillation are currently underdiagnosed in MENA countries.
|
|
| 8. |
- Alegiry, Mohamed H., et al.
(author)
-
Attitudes Toward Psychological Disorders and Alternative Medicine in Saudi Participants
- 2021
-
In: Frontiers in Psychiatry. - : Frontiers Media S.A.. - 1664-0640. ; 12
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: This study was designed to investigate Saudis' attitudes toward mental distress and psychotropic medication, attribution of causes, expected side effects, and to analyze participants' expectations toward alternative or complementary medicine using aromatic and medicinal plants, through a survey.Method: The study included 674 participants (citizens and residents in Saudi Arabia) who were randomly contacted via email and social media and gave their consent to complete a questionnaire dealing with 39 items that can be clustered in six parts. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square for cross-tabulation were generated using SPSS.Results: Among the 664 participants, 73.4% believed that there are some positive and negative outcomes of psychotropic medication. Participants (72.0%) think that the most important reason leading to psychological disorders is mainly due to the loss of a relative or beloved person, and 73.9% considered psychic session as one of the possible treatments of psychological disorders. Surprisingly, only 18.8% of the participants agreed that medicinal and aromatic plants could be a possible treatment of the psychological disorder. Participants (82%) consider that physicians are the most trustful and preferred source of information about alternative and complementary medicine.
|
|
| 9. |
- Warsame, Marian, et al.
(author)
-
High therapeutic efficacy of artemether-lumefantrine and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Somalia
- 2019
-
In: Malaria Journal. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1475-2875. ; 18
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Artemether-lumefantrine (AL) and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DHA/PPQ) are the recommended first- and second-line treatments, respectively, for uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Somalia. The studies reported here were conducted to assess the efficacy of these artemisinin-based combinations and the mutations in Plasmodium falciparum K13-propeller (Pfk13) domain and amplification in Pfplasmepsin 2 (Pfpm2) gene in Somalia. Methods: One-arm prospective studies were conducted to assess the clinical and parasitological responses to DHA/PPQ and AL at two sites in 2016 and 2017, respectively, using the standard WHO protocol. The patterns of molecular markers associated with artemisinin and PPQ resistance were investigated for the first time in Somalia. Results: A total of 339 patients were enrolled with 139 for AL and 200 for DHA/PPQ. With AL, no parasite recurrence was observed among patients treated at either site, corresponding to 100% clinical and parasitological responses. For DHA-PPQ, an adequate clinical and parasitological response rate > 97% was observed. All study patients on both treatments at both sites were parasite-free on day 3. Of the 138 samples with interpretable results for the polymorphism in Pfk13, only one (0.7%), from Bosaso, contained a non-synonymous mutation (R622I), which is not one of the known markers of artemisinin resistance. No Pfpm2 amplification was observed among the 135 samples with interpretable results. Conclusions: AL and DHA/PPQ were highly effective in the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria, and there was no evidence of resistance to artemisinin or PPQ. These two combinations are thus relevant in the chemotherapeutic strategy for malaria control in Somalia.
|
|
| 10. |
- Ademuyiwa, Adesoji O., et al.
(author)
-
Determinants of morbidity and mortality following emergency abdominal surgery in children in low-income and middle-income countries
- 2016
-
In: BMJ Global Health. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2059-7908. ; 1:4
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Child health is a key priority on the global health agenda, yet the provision of essential and emergency surgery in children is patchy in resource-poor regions. This study was aimed to determine the mortality risk for emergency abdominal paediatric surgery in low-income countries globally.Methods: Multicentre, international, prospective, cohort study. Self-selected surgical units performing emergency abdominal surgery submitted prespecified data for consecutive children aged <16 years during a 2-week period between July and December 2014. The United Nation's Human Development Index (HDI) was used to stratify countries. The main outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality, analysed by multilevel logistic regression.Results: This study included 1409 patients from 253 centres in 43 countries; 282 children were under 2 years of age. Among them, 265 (18.8%) were from low-HDI, 450 (31.9%) from middle-HDI and 694 (49.3%) from high-HDI countries. The most common operations performed were appendectomy, small bowel resection, pyloromyotomy and correction of intussusception. After adjustment for patient and hospital risk factors, child mortality at 30 days was significantly higher in low-HDI (adjusted OR 7.14 (95% CI 2.52 to 20.23), p<0.001) and middle-HDI (4.42 (1.44 to 13.56), p=0.009) countries compared with high-HDI countries, translating to 40 excess deaths per 1000 procedures performed.Conclusions: Adjusted mortality in children following emergency abdominal surgery may be as high as 7 times greater in low-HDI and middle-HDI countries compared with high-HDI countries. Effective provision of emergency essential surgery should be a key priority for global child health agendas.
|
|
