| 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and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, ).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 Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients).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 The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis.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. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Hoste, M. E., et al.
(author)
-
The experiences of patients ill with COVID-19-like symptoms and the role of testing for SARS-CoV-2 in supporting them: A qualitative study in eight European countries during the first wave of the pandemic
- 2023
-
In: European Journal of General Practice. - 1381-4788. ; 29:2
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BackgroundAccess to testing during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic was limited, impacting patients with COVID-19-like symptoms. Current qualitative studies have been limited to one country or were conducted outside Europe.ObjectivesTo explore - in eight European countries - the experiences of patients consulting in primary care with COVID-19-like symptoms during the first wave of the pandemic.MethodsSixty-six semi-structured interviews, informed by a topic guide, were conducted by telephone or in person between April and July 2020. Patients with COVID-19-like symptoms were purposively recruited in primary care sites in eight countries and sampled based on age, gender, and symptom presentation. Deductive and inductive thematic analysis techniques were used to develop a framework representing data across settings. Data adequacy was attained by collecting rich data.ResultsSeven themes were identified, which described the experiences of patients consulting. Two themes are reported in this manuscript describing the role of COVID-19 testing in this experience. Patients described significant distress due to their symptoms, especially those at higher risk of complications from COVID-19, and those with severe symptoms. Patients wanted access to testing to identify the cause of their illness and minimise the burden of managing uncertainty. Some patients testing positive for COVID-19 assumed they would be immune from future infection.ConclusionPatients experiencing novel and severe symptoms, particularly those with comorbidities, experienced a significant emotional and psychological burden due to concerns about COVID-19. Testing provided reassurance over health status and helped patients identify which guidance to follow. Testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 led to some patients thinking they were immune from future infection, thus influencing subsequent behaviour.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Wanat, M., et al.
(author)
-
Patients’ and clinicians’ perspectives on the primary care consultations for acute respiratory infections during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: an eight-country qualitative study in Europe
- 2022
-
In: BJGP Open. - 2398-3795. ; 6:2
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients’ and clinicians’ perceptions of healthcare-seeking behaviour and delivery of care is unclear. The pandemic accelerated the use of remote care, and understanding its benefits and drawbacks may inform its implementation during current and future healthcare emergencies. Aim: To explore patients’ and primary care professionals’ (PCPs) experiences of primary care delivery in the first wave of the pandemic. Design & setting: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews in primary care in eight European countries (England, Ireland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece, Poland, Sweden, and Germany). Method: A total of 146 interviews were conducted with 80 PCPs and 66 patients consulting for respiratory tract infection (RTI) symptoms, in eight European countries. Data were collected between April and July 2020, and analysed using thematic analysis. Results: It was found that patients accepted telemedicine when PCPs spent time to understand and address their concerns, but a minority preferred in-person consultations. PCPs felt that remote consultations created emotional distance between themselves and patients, and they reported having to manage diverse COVID-19-related medical and social concerns. Conclusion: Remote consultations for RTI symptoms may be acceptable long term if both groups are happy to use this format, but it is important that PCPs take time to address patients’ concerns and provide safety-netting advice.
|
|
| 8. |
- Wanat, M., et al.
(author)
-
Supporting Primary Care Professionals to Stay in Work During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Views on Personal Risk and Access to Testing During the First Wave of Pandemic in Europe
- 2021
-
In: Frontiers in Medicine. - : Frontiers Media SA. - 2296-858X. ; 8
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Minimising primary care professionals' (PCPs) risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection is crucial to ensure their safety as well as functioning health care system. PCPs' perspectives on the support they needed in the early stages of a public health crisis can inform future preparedness. Aim: To understand PCPs' experiences of providing care during the COVID-19 pandemic, with focus on personal risk from COVID-19 and testing. Design and Setting: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with PCPs in England, Belgium, the Netherlands, Ireland, Germany, Poland, Greece and Sweden, between April and July 2020. Method: Interviews were analysed using a combination of inductive and deductive thematic analysis techniques. Results: Eighty interviews were conducted, showing that PCPs tried to make sense of their risk of both contracting and severity of COVID-19 by assessing individual risk factors and perceived effectiveness of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). They had limited access to PPE yet continued providing care as their "duty." Some PCPs felt that they were put in high-risk situations when patients or colleagues were not flagging symptoms of COVID-19. Not having access to testing in the initial stages of the pandemic was somewhat accepted but when available, was valued. Conclusion: Access to adequate PPE and testing, as well as training for staff and education for patients about the importance of ensuring staff safety is crucial. Given PCPs' varied response in how they appraised personal risk and their tolerance for working, PCPs may benefit from the autonomy in deciding how they want to work during health emergencies.
|
|
| 9. |
- Wanat, M., et al.
(author)
-
Transformation of primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic: experiences of healthcare professionals in eight European countries
- 2021
-
In: British Journal of General Practice. - : Royal College of General Practitioners. - 0960-1643 .- 1478-5242. ; 71:709
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background I'm Tian/care has a crucial role in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic as the first point of patient care and gatekeeper to secondary care. Qualitative studies exploring the experiences of healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic have mainly focused on secondary care. Aim To gain an understanding of the experiences of European primary care professionals (PCPs) working during the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design and setting An exploratory qualitative study, using semi structured interviews in primary care in England, Belgium, the Netherlands. Ireland. Germany, Poland, Greece, and Sweden, between April and July 7020. Method Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed, and analysed using a combination of inductive and deductive thematic analysis techniques. Results Fighty interviews were conducted with PCPs. PCPs had to make their own decisions on how to rapidly transform services in relation to COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 care. Despite being overwhelmed with guidance. they often lacked access to practical training. Consequently. PCPs turned to their colleagues for moral support and information to try to quickly adjust to new ways of working, including remote care. arid to deal with uncertainty. Conclusion PCPs rapidly transformed primary care delivery despite a number of challenges. Representation of primary care at policy level and engagement with local primary care champions are needed to facilitate easy and coordinated access to practical information on how to adapt services, ongoing training, and access to appropriate mental health support services for PCPs. Preservation of autonomy and responsiveness of primary care are critical to preserve the ability for rapid transformation in any future crisis of care delivery.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
