COVID-19

by Wouter S. Hoogenboom, Joyce Q. Lu, Benjamin Musheyev, Lara Borg, Rebeca Janowicz, Stacey Pamlayne, Wei Hou, Tim Q. Duong

Introduction Although patients with severe COVID-19 are known to be at high risk of developing thrombotic events, the effects of anticoagulation (AC) dose and duration on in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients remain poorly understood and controversial. The goal of this study was to investigate survival of critically ill COVID-19 patients who received prophylactic or therapeutic dose AC and analyze the mortality rate with respect to detailed demographic and clinical characteristics. Materials and methods We conducted a retrospective, observational study of critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU at Stony Brook University Hospital in New York who received either prophylactic (n = 158) or therapeutic dose AC (n = 153). Primary outcome was in-hospital death assessed by survival analysis and covariate-adjusted Cox proportional hazard model. Results For the first 3 weeks of ICU stay, we observed similar survival curves for prophylactic and therapeutic AC groups. However, after 3 or more weeks of ICU stay, the therapeutic AC group, characterized by high incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), had markedly higher death incidence rates with 8.6 deaths (95% CI = 6.2–11.9 deaths) per 1,000 person-days and about 5 times higher risk of death (adj. HR = 4.89, 95% CI = 1.71–14.0, p = 0.003) than the prophylactic group (2.4 deaths [95% CI = 0.9–6.3 deaths] per 1,000 person-days). Among therapeutic AC users with prolonged ICU admission, non-survivors were characterized by older males with depressed lymphocyte counts and cardiovascular disease. Conclusions Our findings raise the possibility that prolonged use of high dose AC, independent of thrombotic events or clinical background, might be associated with higher risk of in-hospital mortality. Moreover, AKI, age, lymphocyte count, and cardiovascular disease may represent important risk factors that could help identify at-risk patients who require long-term hospitalization with therapeutic dose AC treatment.…

by Sun-a Jeong, Jinhee Kim

Purpose It is necessary to identify factors that influence nurses’ intention to care for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients to improve the quality of care during the pandemic. This study identifies factors that influence nurses’ intention to care for COVID-19 patients, focusing on positive psychological capital and nursing professionalism. Methods This study adopted a descriptive correlational design. Data were collected between August 16 and August 30, 2020, through self-administered questionnaires from 148 bedside nurses caring for COVID-19 patients, from four hospitals designated for COVID-19 treatment. Modified versions of the Nursing Intention Questionnaire for SARS Patient Care, Psychological Capital Questionnaire, and Hall’s Professional Inventory were used. The collected data were analyzed using stepwise multiple regression. Results In total, 165 questionnaires were distributed, and 148 questionnaires (89.7%) were included in the final analysis. Factors influencing nurses’ intention to care were: age (30…

by Qianyi Chen, Shilin Xia, Hua Sui, Xueying Shi, Bingqian Huang, Tingxin Wang

Introduction The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), emerged in late 2019, was caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The risk factors for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and COVID-19 are reported to be common. This study aimed to determine the potential role of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) common in IPF and COVID-19. Materials and methods Based on GEO database, we obtained DEGs from one SARS-CoV-2 dataset and five IPF datasets. A series of enrichment analysis were performed to identify the function of upregulated and downregulated DEGs, respectively. Two plugins in Cytoscape, Cytohubba and MCODE, were utilized to identify hub genes after a protein-protein interaction (PPI) network. Finally, candidate drugs were predicted to target the upregulated DEGs. Results A total of 188 DEGs were found between COVID-19 and IPF, out of which 117 were upregulated and 71 were downregulated. The upregulated DEGs were involved in cytokine function, while downregulated DEGs were associated with extracellular matrix disassembly. Twenty-two hub genes were upregulated in COVID-19 and IPF, for which 155 candidate drugs were predicted (adj.P.value < 0.01). Conclusion Identifying the hub genes aberrantly regulated in both COVID-19 and IPF may enable development of molecules, encoded by those genes, as therapeutic targets for preventing IPF progression and SARS-CoV-2 infections.…

by Fabia Morales-Vives, Jorge-Manuel Dueñas, Pere J. Ferrando, Andreu Vigil-Colet, Maria Dolores Varea

Several studies in different countries have reported that part of the population does not fully comply with the measures recommended to prevent COVID-19, and therefore poses a risk to public health. For this reason, several measures have been developed to assess the level of compliance, although many of them have methodological limitations or do not include a comprehensive set of items. The main goal of the current study was to develop a new instrument with suitable psychometric properties, which includes a more complete set of items and controls the impact of acquiescence bias. The participants were 1410 individuals (59.2% women) from Spain, who answered the new questionnaire and several items on sociodemographic and attitudinal issues. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were carried out, and the results suggested that only one content factor was underlying the data. This solution was replicated in a different subsample, which shows the stability of the solution. Furthermore, the relationships between the scores of the new questionnaire and the sociodemographic and attitudinal variables are similar to those obtained in previous studies, which can be regarded as evidence of the validity of the new questionnaire.

by Stephanie Daley, Nicolas Farina, Laura Hughes, Elise Armsby, Nazire Akarsu, Joanna Pooley, Georgia Towson, Yvonne Feeney, Naji Tabet, Bethany Fine, Sube Banerjee

Introduction COVID-19 has placed unprecedented pressure on dementia health and social care systems worldwide. This has resulted in reduced services and support for people with dementia and their family carers. There are gaps in the evidence on the impact of the pandemic on Quality of Life (QoL). We carried out a study on the impact of the pandemic on the QoL of a group of people with dementia and their family carers who were part of a larger existing cohort study. Methods We quantitatively measured QoL, on two occasions during the two national lockdowns in 2020 and compared these data with those obtained when they entered the study (before the pandemic). Measures used included: DEMQOL-Proxy, Clinical Dementia Rating Scale and C-DEMQOL. To understand how QoL changed over time, a repeated measures ANOVA was run for each dependent variable with the following variables entered as co-variates: duration in study, baseline dementia severity, gender of the family carer, gender of the person with dementia, family carer relationship, dementia type, living status, age of the person with dementia, and age of the family carer. Results 248 participants took part in the study. QoL scores did not significantly decline between either time period for the person with dementia or their family carer. There was variation in subgroups; with co-resident status, carer relationship, gender of the person with dementia, age of the person with dementia, and baseline cognitive status influencing QoL outcomes in family carers. Discussion It is striking that people with dementia and their carers did not report a decline in QoL during the pandemic or in the months following restrictions suggesting the possibility of resilience. Variation in subgroups suggests that specific groups of family carers were more vulnerable to lower QoL; indicating the need for more tailored, nuanced support during this period.…

Science Advances, <a href='https://www.science.org/toc/sciadv/8/3'>Volume 8, Issue 3</a>, January 2022. …

Abstract

Background

To compare differences in the probability of COVID-19-related death between native Italians and immigrants hospitalised with COVID-19.

Methods

This retrospective study of prospectively collected data was conducted at the ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco Hospital in Milan, Italy, between 21 February and 31 November 2020. Uni- and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the impact of the patients' origin on the probability of COVID-19-related death.

Results

The study population consisted of 1,179 COVID-19 patients: 921 Italians (78.1%) and 258 immigrants (21.9%) who came from Latin America (99, 38%), Asia (72, 28%), Africa (50, 19%) and central/eastern Europe (37, 14%). The Italians were significantly older than the immigrants (median age 70 years, interquartile range (IQR) 58–79 vs 51 years, IQR 41–60; p < 0.001), and more frequently had one or more co-morbidities (79.1% vs 53.9%; p < 0.001). Mortality was significantly greater among the Italians than the immigrants as a whole (26.6% vs 12.8%; p < 0.001), and significantly greater among the immigrants from Latin America than among those from Asia, Africa or central/eastern Europe (21% vs 8%, 6% and 8%; p = 0.016). Univariable analysis showed that the risk of COVID-19-related death was lower among the immigrants (hazard ratio [HR] 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30–0.63; p < 0.0001], but the risk of Latin American immigrants did not significantly differ from that of the Italians (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.47–1.15; p = 0.183). However, after adjusting for potential confounders, multivariable analysis showed that there was no difference in the risk of death between the immigrants and the Italians (adjusted HR [aHR] 1.04, 95% CI 0.70–1.55; p = 0.831), but being of Latin American origin was independently associated with an increased risk of death (aHR 1.95, 95% CI 1.17–3.23; p = 0.010).

Conclusions

Mortality was lower among the immigrants hospitalised with COVID-19 than among their Italian counterparts, but this difference disappeared after adjusting for confounders. However, the increased risk of death among immigrants of Latin American origin suggests that COVID-19 information and prevention initiatives need to be strengthened in this sub-population.

…

Objective

This is the first British multicentre study observing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on orthopaedic trauma with respect to referrals, operative caseload and mortality during its peak.

Design

A longitudinal, multicentre, retrospective, observational, cohort study was conducted during the peak 6 weeks of the first wave from 17 March 2020 compared with the same period in 2019.

Setting

Hospitals from six major urban cities were recruited around the UK, including London.

Participants

A total of 4840 clinical encounters were initially recorded. 4668 clinical encounters were analysed post-exclusion.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

Primary outcomes included the number of acute trauma referrals and those undergoing operative intervention, mortality rates and the proportion of patients contracting COVID-19. Secondary outcomes consisted of the mechanism of injury, type of operative intervention and proportion of aerosolising-generating anaesthesia used.

Results

During the COVID-19 period, there was a 34% reduction in acute orthopaedic trauma referrals compared with 2019 (1792 down to 1183 referrals), and a 29.5% reduction in surgical interventions (993 down to 700 operations). The mortality rate was more than doubled for both risk and odds ratios during the COVID-19 period for all referrals (1.3% vs 3.8%, p=0.0005) and for those undergoing operative intervention (2.2% vs 4.9%, p=0.004). Moreover, mortality due to COVID-19-related complications (vs non-COVID-19 causes) had greater odds by a factor of at least 20 times. For the operative cohort during COVID-19, there was an increase in odds of aerosolising-generating anaesthesia (including those with superimposed regional blocks) by three-quarters, as well as doubled odds of a consultant acting as the primary surgeon.

Conclusion

Although there was a reduction of acute trauma referrals and those undergoing operative intervention, the mortality rate still more than doubled in odds during the peak of the pandemic compared with the same time interval 1 year ago.

…

by Guillermo A. Guaracha-Basáñez, Irazú Contreras-Yáñez, Gabriela Hernández-Molina, Viviana A. Estrada-González, Lexli D. Pacheco-Santiago, Salvador S. Valverde-Hernández, José Roberto Galindo-Donaire, Ingris Peláez-Ballestas, Virginia Pascual-Ramos

Background Previous models that assess quality-of-Life (QoL) in patients with rheumatic diseases have a strong biomedical focus. We evaluated the impact of COVID-19 related-health care interruption (HCI) on the physical, psychological, social relationships and environment QoL-dimensions, and explored factors associated with QoL when patients were reincorporated to the outpatient clinic, and after six-month follow-up. Patients and methods Study phase-1 consisted of a COVID-19 survey administered from June 24th-October 31st 2020, to outpatients with rheumatic diseases who had face-to-face consultation at outpatient clinic reopening. Study phase-2 consisted of 3 consecutive assessments of patient´s QoL (WHOQOL-BREF), disease activity/severity (RAPID-3), and psychological comorbidity/trauma (DASS-21 and IES-R) to patients from phase-1 randomly selected. Sociodemographic, disease and treatment-related information, and comorbidities were obtained. Multiple linear regression analysis identified factors associated with the score assigned to each WHOQOL-BREF dimension. Results Patients included (670 for phase-1 and 276 for phase-2), had primarily SLE and RA (44.2% and 34.1%, respectively), and all the dimensions of their WHOQOL-BREF were affected. There were 145 patients (52.5%) who referred HCI, and they had significantly lower dimensions scores (but the environment dimension score). Psycho-emotional factors (primarily feeling confused, depression and anxiety), sociodemographic factors (age, COVID-19 negative economic impact, years of scholarship, HCI and having a job), and biomedical factors (RAPID-3 score and corticosteroid use) were associated with baseline QoL dimensions scores. Psycho-emotional factors showed the strongest magnitude on dimensions scores. Most consistent predictor of six-month follow-up QoL dimensions scores was each corresponding baseline dimension score, while social determinants (years of scholarship and having a job), emotional factors (feeling bored), and biomedical aspects (RAPID 3) had an additional impact. Conclusions HCI impacted the majority of patient´s QoL dimensions. Psycho-emotional, sociodemographic and biomedical factors were consistently associated with QoL dimensions scores, and these consistently predicted the QoL trajectory.…

by Zorimar Rivera-Núñez, Manuel E. Jimenez, Benjamin F. Crabtree, Diane Hill, Maria B. Pellerano, Donita Devance, Myneka Macenat, Daniel Lima, Marsha Gordon, Brittany Sullivan, Robert J. Rosati, Jeanne M. Ferrante, Emily S. Barrett, Martin J. Blaser, Reynold A. Panettieri Jr., Shawna V. Hudson

Black and Latinx individuals, and in particular women, comprise an essential health care workforce often serving in support roles such as nursing assistants and dietary service staff. Compared to physicians and nurses, they are underpaid and potentially undervalued, yet play a critical role in health systems. This study examined the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic from the perspective of Black and Latinx health care workers in support roles (referred to here as HCWs). From December 2020 to February 2021, we conducted 2 group interviews (n = 9, 1 group in English and 1 group in Spanish language) and 8 individual interviews (1 in Spanish and 7 in English) with HCWs. Participants were members of a high-risk workforce as well as of communities that suffered disproportionately during the pandemic. Overall, they described disruptive changes in responsibilities and roles at work. These disruptions were intensified by the constant fear of contracting COVID-19 themselves and infecting their family members. HCWs with direct patient care responsibilities reported reduced opportunities for personal connection with patients. Perspectives on vaccines reportedly changed over time, and were influenced by peers’ vaccination and information from trusted sources. The pandemic has exposed the stress endured by an essential workforce that plays a critical role in healthcare. As such, healthcare systems need to dedicate resources to improve the work conditions for this marginalized workforce including offering resources that support resilience. Overall working conditions and, wages must be largely improved to ensure their wellbeing and retain them in their roles to manage the next public health emergency. The role of HCWs serving as ambassadors to provide accurate information on COVID-19 and vaccination among their coworkers and communities also warrants further study.

by Nisreen N. Al Awaji, Alanoud A. AlMudaiheem, Eman M. Mortada

Purpose The study aimed to investigate changes in the role of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) during the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia. It also assessed the SLPs’ perceptions of delivering services using telehealth as a part of their everyday clinical practice before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method SLPs in Saudi Arabia were invited to complete a web-based survey covering questions related to changes to the role of SLPs during the COVID-19 pandemic, changes in the ways speech services are delivered; and the benefits and barriers of using telehealth in clinical practice as identified by SLPs. Results Ninety-one SLPs completed the survey. About 94% of the respondents experienced changes in their role as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The nature of changes they had experienced including decreased work time, providing support and counseling to patients or caregivers using the telephone, providing assessment and therapy using telehealth, and working with a limited number of cases. Ninety-three percent of the respondents who have used telehealth started to use it only during the pandemic. Mostly seen caseloads were pediatric speech and language disorders. Further, 96% of respondents used telehealth for counseling, 69% for rehabilitation or treatment, 63% for screening, 56% for evaluation or assessment, 48% for a referral to other professional services, and 46% for differential diagnosis. About 70% of the SLPs showed interest to continue using telehealth in the future. Several benefits were identified to using telehealth, including accessibility, cost efficiency, and the ability to engage patients with their families in therapy sessions. On the other hand, barriers to using telehealth included internet and technical issues, lack of direct communication, and difficulty controlling the therapy setting. Conclusions The study has shown that SLPs in Saudi Arabia have experienced changes during the COVID-19 outbreak. The survey responses also indicate that the SLPs are adopting telehealth applications at an accelerated pace as a result of the pandemic.…

by Yit Siew Chin, Fui Chee Woon, Yoke Mun Chan

Background The COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns have affected daily lives of the communities worldwide. This study aims to determine the lifestyle behaviours and their associations with body weight changes among Malaysian adults during the Movement Control Order (MCO) due to COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A total of 1319 Malaysian adults participated in this cross-sectional online survey. Information on anthropometric data including body weight and height, and lifestyle behaviours including eating pattern, physical activity, and sleep pattern were self-reported by the respondents. A multivariable generalised linear mixed model was used to assess the associations between lifestyle behaviours and body weight changes with adjustment of confounding factors; namely, age, sex, ethnicity, and body weight status before MCO. Results During MCO, 41.2% of the respondents perceived that their eating patterns were healthier, but 36.3% reduced their physical activities, and 25.7% had a poorer sleep quality. Further, the proportion of adults who reported having lose weight (32.2%) was almost similar to those who reported having gained weight (30.7%). Lifestyle behaviours including less frequent practice of healthy cooking methods and lunch skipping were associated with weight gain, while less frequent consumption of high fat foods, more frequent physical activity, and good sleep latency were associated with lower risk of weight gain. In contrast, practicing healthy eating concept, skipped lunch, and more frequent physical activity were significantly associated with weight loss. Conclusion Lifestyle behaviours were associated with body weight changes during MCO. While the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown is necessary to prevent further spread of the disease, promoting healthy lifestyle practices during lockdown should be implemented for a healthy weight and better health.…

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, <a href='https://journals.asm.org/toc/aac/0/ja'>Volume 0, Issue ja</a>, -Not available-. …

Science Translational Medicine, Ahead of Print. …

Because venous and arterial thromboembolism are common among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, anticoagulant therapies were among the first to be evaluated in clinical trials to improve outcomes in moderately ill patients hospitalized with COVID-19. These studies have yielded thus far somewhat mixed results, varying from beneficial effects of therapeutic doses of low-molecular-weight heparin in the ATTACC, ACTIV-4a, and REMAP-CAP trials to no difference between therapeutic and prophylactic doses of low-molecular-weight heparin in the INSPIRATION, ACTION, and RAPID trials. Therefore, it remains to be determined whether the addition of antiplatelet therapy will yield different results.

This randomized clinical trial evaluates the benefits and risks of the addition of a P2Y12 inhibitor to anticoagulant therapy compared with anticoagulant therapy only among non–critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

This retrospective study compares ambulatory care patterns before and in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic among patients insured by public and private insurance programs.

The COVID-19 pandemic appears to have halted a more than decade-long increase in life expectancy, according to global mortality data that showed decreases in 2020 in 31 out of 37 high-income countries.

This Viewpoint proposes a multistep plan that US can implement to achieve a “new normal” of living, in which the combined risk of all viral respiratory illnesses, including COVID-19, does not exceed the risk during prepandemic years.

This Viewpoint discusses the areas on which the US needs to improve its public health infrastructure in order to reduce COVID-19 transmission and achieve a “new normal”: testing, surveillance, masking, and ventilation.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) disproportionately results in hospitalization or death in older patients and those with underlying conditions. Sotrovimab is a pan-sarbecovirus monoclonal antibody that was designed to prevent progression of Covid-19 in high-risk patients early in the course of disease.

A daily dose with 6 mg of dexamethasone is recommended for up to 10 days in patients with severe and critical COVID-19, but a higher dose may benefit those with more severe disease.

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are laboratory-produced molecules derived from the B cells of an infected host. They are being investigated as a potential therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

REGEN-COV (previously known as REGN-COV2), a combination of the monoclonal antibodies casirivimab and imdevimab, has been shown to markedly reduce the risk of hospitalization or death among high-risk persons with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Whether subcutaneous REGEN-COV prevents severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and subsequent Covid-19 in persons at high risk for infection because of household exposure to a person with SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown.

The acute clinical manifestations of COVID-19 have been well characterized, but the post-acute sequelae of this disease have not been comprehensively described. Here we use the national healthcare databases of the US Department of Veterans Affairs to systematically and comprehensively identify 6-month incident sequelae-including diagnoses, medication use and laboratory abnormalities-in patients with COVID-19 who survived for at least 30 days after diagnosis. We show that beyond the first 30 days of illness, people with COVID-19 exhibit a higher risk of death and use of health resources. Our high-dimensional approach identifies incident sequelae in the respiratory system, as well as several other sequelae that include nervous system and neurocognitive disorders, mental health disorders, metabolic disorders, cardiovascular disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, malaise, fatigue, musculoskeletal pain and anaemia. We show increased incident use of several therapeutic agents-including pain medications (opioids and non-opioids) as well as antidepressant, anxiolytic, antihypertensive and oral hypoglycaemic agents-as well as evidence of laboratory abnormalities in several organ systems. Our analysis of an array of prespecified outcomes reveals a risk gradient that increases according to the severity of the acute COVID-19 infection (that is, whether patients were not hospitalized, hospitalized or admitted to intensive care). Our findings show that a substantial burden of health loss that spans pulmonary and several extrapulmonary organ systems is experienced by patients who survive after the acute phase of COVID-19. These results will help to inform health system planning and the development of multidisciplinary care strategies to reduce chronic health loss among individuals with COVID-19.

The degree to which infection with SARS-CoV-2 confers protection towards subsequent reinfection is not well described. In 2020, as part of Denmark's extensive, free-of-charge PCR-testing strategy, approximately 4 million individuals (69% of the population) underwent 10·6 million tests. Using these national PCR-test data from 2020, we estimated protection towards repeat infection with SARS-CoV-2.

The efficacy of interleukin-6 receptor antagonists in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is unclear.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pneumonia is often associated with hyperinflammation. Despite the disproportionate incidence of Covid-19 among underserved and racial and ethnic minority populations, the safety and efficacy of the anti-interleukin-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab in patients from these populations who are hospitalized with Covid-19 pneumonia are unclear.

Recent data suggest that complications and death from coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) may be related to high viral loads.

The COVID-19 pandemic has created a public health crisis. Because SARS-CoV-2 can spread from individuals with presymptomatic, symptomatic, and asymptomatic infections, the reopening of societies and the control of virus spread will be facilitated by robust population screening, for which virus testing will often be central. After infection, individuals undergo a period of incubation during which viral titers are too low to detect, followed by exponential viral growth, leading to peak viral load and infectiousness and ending with declining titers and clearance. Given the pattern of viral load kinetics, we model the effectiveness of repeated population screening considering test sensitivities, frequency, and sample-to-answer reporting time. These results demonstrate that effective screening depends largely on frequency of testing and speed of reporting and is only marginally improved by high test sensitivity. We therefore conclude that screening should prioritize accessibility, frequency, and sample-to-answer time; analytical limits of detection should be secondary.

Viral epidemics or pandemics of acute respiratory infections (ARIs) pose a global threat. Examples are influenza (H1N1) caused by the H1N1pdm09 virus in 2009, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 in 2019. Antiviral drugs and vaccines may be insufficient to prevent their spread. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2007, 2009, 2010, and 2011. The evidence summarised in this review does not include results from studies from the current COVID-19 pandemic.

The efficacy of interleukin-6 receptor blockade in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) who are not receiving mechanical ventilation is unclear.

Severe pneumonia with hyperinflammation and elevated interleukin-6 is a common presentation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is threatening billions of people worldwide. Tocilizumab has shown promising results in retrospective studies in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia with a good safety profile.

Population-level knowledge on individuals at high risk of severe and fatal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is urgently needed to inform targeted protection strategies in the general population.

This is the eighth version (seventh update) of a living guideline. It replaces earlier versions (4 September 2020, 20 November 2020, 17 December 2020, 31 March 2021, 6 July 2021, 23 September 2021, and 6 December 2021). The previous versions can be found as data supplements. New recommendations will be published as updates to this guideline.

Remdesivir demonstrated clinical benefit in a placebo-controlled trial in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but its effect in patients with moderate disease is unknown.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with diffuse lung damage. Glucocorticoids may modulate inflammation-mediated lung injury and thereby reduce progression to respiratory failure and death.

Remdesivir is an RNA polymerase inhibitor with potent antiviral activity in vitro and efficacy in animal models of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19).

Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), no antiviral agents have yet been shown to be efficacious.

The clinical presentation of European patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 infection is still unknown.

There is no specific antiviral therapy recommended for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In vitro studies indicate that the antiviral effect of chloroquine diphosphate (CQ) requires a high concentration of the drug.

Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in Wuhan in December 2019, by March 10, 2020, a total of 80,932 confirmed cases have been reported in China. Two consecutively negative RT-PCR test results in respiratory tract specimens is required for the evaluation of discharge from hospital, and oropharyngeal swabs were the most common sample. However, false negative results occurred in the late stage of hospitalization, and avoiding false negative result is critical essential.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a novel coronavirus strain disease, has recently emerged in China and rapidly spread worldwide. This novel strain is highly transmittable and severe disease has been reported in up to 16% of hospitalized cases. More than 600,000 cases have been confirmed and the number of deaths is constantly increasing. COVID-19 hospitalized patients, especially those suffering from severe respiratory or systemic manifestations, fall under the spectrum of the acutely ill medical population, which is at increased venous thromboembolism risk. Thrombotic complications seem to emerge as an important issue in patients infected with COVID-19. Preliminary reports on COVID-19 patients' clinical and laboratory findings include thrombocytopenia, elevated D-dimer, prolonged prothrombin time, and disseminated intravascular coagulation. As the pandemic is spreading and the whole picture is yet unknown, we highlight the importance of coagulation disorders in COVID-19 infected patients and review relevant data of previous coronavirus epidemics caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 (SARS-CoV-1) and the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV).

The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presents an unprecedented challenge to identify effective drugs for prevention and treatment. Given the rapid pace of scientific discovery and clinical data generated by the large number of people rapidly infected by SARS-CoV-2, clinicians need accurate evidence regarding effective medical treatments for this infection.

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed.

No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of severe illness caused by SARS-CoV-2.

The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) causing an outbreak of pneumonia in Wuhan, Hubei province of China was isolated in January 2020. This study aims to investigate its epidemiologic history, and analyze the clinical characteristics, treatment regimens, and prognosis of patients infected with 2019-nCoV during this outbreak.