Articles: coronavirus.
-
Observational Study
Psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in the population of Argentina.
In addition to the implications that this pandemic has had on physical health, there are other circumstances that threaten the mental health of the population, such as lockdown measures to prevent the spread of the virus, uncertainty, and the increase in infections and deaths. For this reason, this study explored indicators of psychological distress in the Argentine population, as well as its relationship with sociodemographic and health variables. Cross-sectional observational study, with data collection from May to August 2020. ⋯ There was no evidence of association between psychological distress and contact with people infected with coronavirus disease 2019 or with material suspicious of being infected. This research provided an overview of the mental health status of a significant population sample in Argentina, months after the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. These findings complement those found in other national and international studies, allowing the accumulation of evidence that states the need to demand to draw attention to the mental health of the population, especially the most vulnerable groups, on behalf of the public authorities.
-
The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic presented unique challenges for surveillance of the military population, which include active component service members and their family members. Through integrating multiple Department of Defense surveillance systems, the Army Public Health Center can provide near real-time case counts to Army leadership on a daily basis. ⋯ The pandemic has demonstrated the need for a robust public health enterprise with a focus on data collection, validation, and analysis, allowing leaders to make informed decisions that may impact the health of the Army.
-
Case Reports
A patient with COVID-19 and bleeding complications due to neurofibromatosis type 1 during VV-ECMO: A case report.
The many deaths from coronavirus disease (COVID-19) since 2019 have caused global concern. Effective treatment has not yet been established; supportive care is the main treatment. It has been suggested that veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) may be effective in severe cases that do not respond to ventilator management. ⋯ We propose non-anticoagulation treatment strategy for the management of VV-ECMO in patients with NF1. Especially under the COVID-19 pandemic, more careful consideration should be given to the indications for VV-ECMO in patients with NF1.
-
The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia which is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS CoV-2) virus is the current urgent issue world over. According to the Health Ministry of Turkey, the first COVID-19 patient was diagnosed on March 11, 2020. Since then, approximately 5.5 million patients have been confirmed to be positive SARS CoV-2 virus. ⋯ Furthermore, 20% of patients were found to be positive using IgG antibody against to SARS CoV-2 virus. Our findings showed that HRCT could be most prominent technique compared to real time polymerase chain reaction for the diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia. The novel classification of HRCT findings will be helpful to early diagnosis of the disease, time saving and eventually cost-effective.
-
Observational Study
Hospital-wide antigen screening for coronavirus disease in a tertiary reference center in Sapporo, Japan: A single-center observational study.
Hospital-wide screenings for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) are important to identify healthcare workers at risk of exposure. However, the currently available diagnostic tests are expensive or only identify past infection. Therefore, this single-center observational study aimed to assess the positivity rate of hospital-wide antigen screening tests for COVID-19 and evaluate clinical factors associated with antigen positivity during a COVID-19 institutional outbreak in Sapporo, Japan. ⋯ The positivity rate was high among rehabilitation therapists (2.1%) and employees in the low-risk contact group (6.1%). Although there was no association between the job titles and the seropositivity rate, those in the low-risk contact group had an increased risk of testing positive for the viral antigen (odds ratio, 8.67; 95% confidence interval, 3.30-22.8). The antigen positivity rate was low during the hospital outbreak, suggesting that risk assessment of exposure to COVID-19 patients may provide more useful information than using job titles to identify infected health care providers.