Nyt fra tidsskrifterne
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102813
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102777
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102685
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102627
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102628
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102591
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102552
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102553
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102546
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102535
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102368
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102363
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://www.infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=corona&setpoint=102363#102341
Søgeord (corona) valgt.
13 emner vises.
Clinical Infectious Diseases, 6.05.2024
Tilføjet 6.05.2024
Abstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination has been associated with reduced outpatient antibiotic prescribing among older adults with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We assessed the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on outpatient antibiotic prescribing in the broader population of older adults, regardless of SARS-CoV-2 infection status.Methods We included adults aged ≥65 years who received their first, second, and/or third COVID-19 vaccine dose from December 2020 to December 2022. We used a self-controlled risk-interval design and included cases who received an antibiotic prescription 2–6 weeks before vaccination (pre-vaccination or control interval) or after vaccination (post-vaccination or risk interval). We used conditional logistic regression to estimate the odds of being prescribed (1) any antibiotic, (2) a typical “respiratory” infection antibiotic, or (3) a typical “urinary tract” infection antibiotic (negative control) in the post-vaccination interval versus the pre-vaccination interval. We accounted for temporal changes in antibiotic prescribing using background monthly antibiotic prescribing counts.Results 469 923 vaccine doses met inclusion criteria. The odds of receiving any antibiotic or a respiratory antibiotic prescription were lower in the post-vaccination versus pre-vaccination interval (aOR, .973; 95% CI, .968–.978; aOR, .961; 95% CI, .953–.968, respectively). There was no association between vaccination and urinary antibiotic prescriptions (aOR, .996; 95% CI, .987–1.006). Periods with high (>10%) versus low (
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedYuxin Zou, Manyi Pan, Tianyu Zhou, Lifeng Yan, Yuntian Chen, Junjie Yun, Zhihua Wang, Huaqi Guo, Kai Zhang, Weining Xiong
PLoS One Infectious Diseases, 4.05.2024
Tilføjet 4.05.2024
by Yuxin Zou, Manyi Pan, Tianyu Zhou, Lifeng Yan, Yuntian Chen, Junjie Yun, Zhihua Wang, Huaqi Guo, Kai Zhang, Weining Xiong Celiac disease exhibits a higher prevalence among patients with coronavirus disease 2019. However, the potential influence of COVID-19 on celiac disease remains uncertain. Considering the significant association between gut microbiota alterations, COVID-19 and celiac disease, the two-step Mendelian randomization method was employed to investigate the genetic causality between COVID-19 and celiac disease, with gut microbiota as the potential mediators. We employed the genome-wide association study to select genetic instrumental variables associated with the exposure. Subsequently, these variables were utilized to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on the risk of celiac disease and its potential influence on gut microbiota. Employing a two-step Mendelian randomization approach enabled the examination of potential causal relationships, encompassing: 1) the effects of COVID-19 infection, hospitalized COVID-19 and critical COVID-19 on the risk of celiac disease; 2) the influence of gut microbiota on celiac disease; and 3) the mediating impact of the gut microbiota between COVID-19 and the risk of celiac disease. Our findings revealed a significant association between critical COVID-19 and an elevated risk of celiac disease (inverse variance weighted [IVW]: P = 0.035). Furthermore, we observed an inverse correlation between critical COVID-19 and the abundance of Victivallaceae (IVW: P = 0.045). Notably, an increased Victivallaceae abundance exhibits a protective effect against the risk of celiac disease (IVW: P = 0.016). In conclusion, our analysis provides genetic evidence supporting the causal connection between critical COVID-19 and lower Victivallaceae abundance, thereby increasing the risk of celiac disease.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedYong XIANG, Yaning FENG, Jinghong QIU, Ruoyu ZHANG, Hon-Cheong SO
International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2.05.2024
Tilføjet 2.05.2024
More than 676 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 and >6.8 million fatalities have been reported as of 3-Oct-2023 (https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html). Despite the rapid development of vaccines, vaccine hesitancy remains a challenge due to concerns about adverse effects and exacerbation of existing conditions[1]. Initial reports of fatalities following COVID-19 vaccination raised safety concerns[2], but no direct evidence so far links vaccination to increased mortality risks.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedClinical Infectious Diseases, 1.05.2024
Tilføjet 1.05.2024
Abstract Background Metformin has antiviral activity against RNA viruses including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The mechanism appears to be suppression of protein translation via targeting the host mechanistic target of rapamycin pathway. In the COVID-OUT randomized trial for outpatient coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), metformin reduced the odds of hospitalizations/death through 28 days by 58%, of emergency department visits/hospitalizations/death through 14 days by 42%, and of long COVID through 10 months by 42%.Methods COVID-OUT was a 2 × 3 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial that assessed metformin, fluvoxamine, and ivermectin; 999 participants self-collected anterior nasal swabs on day 1 (n = 945), day 5 (n = 871), and day 10 (n = 775). Viral load was quantified using reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction.Results The mean SARS-CoV-2 viral load was reduced 3.6-fold with metformin relative to placebo (−0.56 log10 copies/mL; 95% confidence interval [CI], −1.05 to −.06; P = .027). Those who received metformin were less likely to have a detectable viral load than placebo at day 5 or day 10 (odds ratio [OR], 0.72; 95% CI, .55 to .94). Viral rebound, defined as a higher viral load at day 10 than day 5, was less frequent with metformin (3.28%) than placebo (5.95%; OR, 0.68; 95% CI, .36 to 1.29). The metformin effect was consistent across subgroups and increased over time. Neither ivermectin nor fluvoxamine showed effect over placebo.Conclusions In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial of outpatient treatment of SARS-CoV-2, metformin significantly reduced SARS-CoV-2 viral load, which may explain the clinical benefits in this trial. Metformin is pleiotropic with other actions that are relevant to COVID-19 pathophysiology.Clinical Trials Registration NCT04510194.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedClinical Infectious Diseases, 1.05.2024
Tilføjet 1.05.2024
Approximately 4 years into the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, available treatment options for outpatients have a mixed track record. The most notable success is nirmatrelvir-ritonavir, which significantly reduces the risk of hospitalization and death in high-risk, unvaccinated outpatients [1]. Yet, nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is not a panacea. Whereas observational studies suggest a similar benefit in high-risk, vaccinated individuals [2, 3], a randomized study in a standard-risk population did not show improvement in either time to resolution of symptoms or the incidence of hospitalization or death [4]. Multiple drug interactions and virologic rebound [5, 6] further complicate its use. While remdesivir and molnupiravir are reasonable alternatives in select populations, they also have weaknesses. Remdesivir must be given intravenously, which is a substantial logistical challenge, and molnupiravir has both questionable efficacy in vaccinated or otherwise immune populations as well as safety concerns. This latter issue is related to the mechanism of action of molnupiravir, which leads to possible mutagenesis, limiting its use in women and men with “pregnancy potential” [7]. Meanwhile, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has developed escape mutants to monoclonal antibodies faster than these intravenous agents can be developed; although one such agent, pemivibart, has recently been made available for prevention of COVID-19 in high-risk groups, none have been available for treatment since the US Food and Drug Administration halted use of bebtelovimab in November 2022 [8]. Several other experimental agents are in development, yet the timeline for their availability is uncertain.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedPramitha Esha Nirmala Dewi, Montaya Sunantiwat, Montarat Thavorncharoensap, Sitaporn Youngkong, Surakit Nathisuwan, Bangunawati Rahajeng
PLoS One Infectious Diseases, 30.04.2024
Tilføjet 30.04.2024
by Pramitha Esha Nirmala Dewi, Montaya Sunantiwat, Montarat Thavorncharoensap, Sitaporn Youngkong, Surakit Nathisuwan, Bangunawati Rahajeng Delay in treatment seeking is recognized as a major contributor for Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) mortality in Indonesia. Despite the significance of timely treatment, decline in admission and delay in presentation of patients with ACS were consistently reported during the COVID-19 pandemic. These suggested that treatment seeking performance of patients during the pandemic might be different from the previous period. This qualitative study aimed to explore treatment seeking behaviour, barriers in seeking medical treatment, and experiences of patients with ACS in Yogyakarta, Indonesia during COVID-19 pandemic. In depth-interviews were carried out with 30 patients, who were hospitalized with ACS at one of the three selected hospitals in Yogyakarta during the pandemic period. Thematic analysis was performed to create vital explanations for treatment seeking practices of patients with ACS during pandemic. Three significant themes were identified: treatment seeking decisions, barriers in seeking medical treatment during COVID-19, and experiencing both good and bad impression from entering and staying in the hospital. The intensity of ACS symptoms and fear of COVID-19 infection dominated the delay in seeking medical treatment. Strict safety measures, religious belief, and fear of ACS helped patients overcome barriers and seek medical treatment during pandemic. ACS patients also had convenient medical care during the pandemic and believed medical staff would provide excellent care to them. However, visit restriction policy could cause psychological discomfort. Increase awareness of ACS symptoms and the risk of delays ACS treatment are essential to support patients’ decisions to seek medical helps in a timely manner at any situations including pandemic. Interventions aim at alleviating psychological distress should also be designed and implemented to improve treatment experiences of ACS patients, who sought medical treatment during the pandemic crisis.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedXiaolong Yan, Xin Zhao, Yin Du, Hao Wang, Li Liu, Qi Wang, Jianhua Liu, Sheng Wei
International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 30.04.2024
Tilføjet 30.04.2024
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has profound implications for global public health. As of March 17, 2023, there have been a staggering 774.9 million confirmed cases and 7.0 million deaths around the world [1]. Following the relaxing of the strict control strategy for COVID-19 in China in December 2022, the number of infections has grown rapidly [2]. Although the World Health Organization declared an end to the pandemic emergency on May 5, 2023 [3], localized endemic remains a possibility in the future due to the waning of vaccine-induced and infection-acquired immunity, and ongoing viral mutations [4].
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedM.L. Martinez-Fierro, A. Perez-Favila, S.M. Zorrilla Alfaro, S.A. Oropeza-de Lara, I. Garza-Veloz, L.S. Hernandez-Marquez, E.F. Gutierrez-Vela, I. Delgado-Enciso, I.P. Rodriguez-Sanchez
International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 30.04.2024
Tilføjet 30.04.2024
To analyze the gene variants of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) and determine their association with the severity and outcome of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19).
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedPadhani, Z. A., Rahman, A. R., Lakhani, S., Yasin, R., Khan, M. H., Mirani, M., Jamali, M., Ali Khan, Z., Khatoon, S., Partab, R., ul Haq, A., Kampalath, V., Hosseinalipour, S.-M., Blanchet, K., Das, J. K.
BMJ Open, 30.04.2024
Tilføjet 30.04.2024
ObjectiveMigrants and refugees are at a disadvantage in accessing basic necessities. The objective of this study is to assess the inequity in access, needs and determinants of COVID-19 vaccination among refugees and migrant populations in Pakistan. DesignWe conducted a mixed-method study comprising a cross-sectional survey and a qualitative study. In this paper, we will only report the findings from the cross-sectional survey. SettingThis survey was conducted in different cities of Pakistan including Quetta, Karachi and Hyderabad. ParticipantsA total of 570 participants were surveyed including refugees and migrants, both in regular and irregular situations. Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome of the study was to estimate the proportion of refugees and migrants, both in regular and irregular situations vaccinated against COVID-19 and assess the inequity. The 2 test and Fisher’s exact test were used to determine the significant differences in proportions between refugees and migrants and between regions. ResultsThe survey showed that only 26.9% of the refugee and migrant population were tested for COVID-19, 4.56% contracted coronavirus, and 3.85% were hospitalised due to COVID-19. About 66% of the refugees and migrants were fully vaccinated including those who received the single-dose vaccine or received all two doses, and 17.6% were partially vaccinated. Despite vaccination campaigns by the government, 14.4% of the refugee and migrant population remained unvaccinated mostly because of vaccines not being offered, distant vaccination sites, limited access, unavailability of COVID-19 vaccine or due to a difficult registration process. Vaccination rates varied across provinces, genders and migrant populations due to misconceptions, and several social, cultural and geographical barriers. ConclusionThis study highlights the COVID-19 vaccine coverage, access and inequity faced by refugees and migrants during the pandemic. It suggests early prioritisation of policies inclusive of all refugees and migrants and the provision of identification documents to ease access to basic necessities.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedZerin Jannat, Hemel Das, Md. Wazed Ali, Tasnuva Wahed, Md. Nurul Alam, Md. Jasim Uddin
PLoS One Infectious Diseases, 29.04.2024
Tilføjet 29.04.2024
by Zerin Jannat, Hemel Das, Md. Wazed Ali, Tasnuva Wahed, Md. Nurul Alam, Md. Jasim Uddin Background Vaccination has been an indispensable step in controlling the coronavirus disease pandemic. In early 2021, Bangladesh launched a mass vaccination campaign to boost the COVID-19 vaccination rate when doses were available and immunized millions in the country. Although deemed a success, disparities became conspicuous in vaccination coverage across population of different socioeconomic background. Methods The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to assess the vaccination coverage for three doses and detect disparities in uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine among rural population of hard-to-reach areas and urban individuals belonging to the high-risk group -defined in our study as individuals from elusive population such as floating population/street dwellers, transgender, addicts and disabled population. We conducted household survey (n = 12,298) and survey with high risk group of people (2,520). The collected primary data were analysed using descriptive statistical analysis. Results Our findings show that coverage for the first dose of COVID-19 vaccination was high among respondents from both rural Hard-to-reach (HTR) (92.9%) and non-HTR (94.6%) areas. However, the coverage for subsequent doses was observed to reduce significantly, especially for third dose (52.2% and 56.4% for HTR and non-HTR, respectively). Conclusion Vaccination coverage among urbanites of high-risk group was found to be critically low. Vaccine hesitancy was also found to be high among individuals of this group. It is essential that the individuals of urban high-risk group be prioritized. Individuals from this group could be provided incentives (transport for disabled, monetary incentive to transgenders; food and medicine for drug user and floating people) and vaccination centers could be established with flexible schedule (morning/afternoon/evening sessions) so that they receive vaccine at their convenient time. Community engagement can be used for both high-risk group and rural population to enhance the COVID-19 vaccination coverage and lower disparities in uptake of the vaccine doses nationwide.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedJournal of Infectious Diseases, 25.04.2024
Tilføjet 25.04.2024
Abstract Background Understanding the association between the immune response and the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has implications for forthcoming prevention strategies. We evaluated the association between antibody titers and the risk of infection for the general population during the Omicron-dominant phase.Methods This was a prospective cohort study of residents or people affiliated with institutions in Bizen City, which included 1,899 participants. We measured the titers of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 repeatedly every 2 months from June 2022 to March 2023. Infection status was obtained from self-reported questionnaires and the official registry. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) for infection within 2 months of the date of each antibody measurement with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) based on antibody titer categories and spline functions.Results Compared with the
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedHui Xie, Junnan Zhang, Shuang Bai, Min Lv, Juan Li, Weixin Chen, Luodan Suo, Meng Chen, Wei Zhao, Shanshan Zhou, Jian Wang, Ao Zhang, Jianxin Ma, Fengshuang Wang, Le Yan, Dongmei Li, Jiang Wu
International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 25.04.2024
Tilføjet 25.04.2024
The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel coronavirus responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic [1-3]. As the pandemic progressed, new, more transmissible but less virulent variants, like the Omicron variant, emerged and became more dominant, further reducing the mortality rate [4-8]. The World Health Organization (WHO) eventually declared that the COVID-19 pandemic no longer constitutes a public health emergency of international concern on May 2023 [9].
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedClinical Infectious Diseases, 24.04.2024
Tilføjet 24.04.2024
Abstract During pandemics, healthcare providers struggle with balancing obligations to self, family, and patients. While HIV/AIDS seemed to settle this issue, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) rekindled debates regarding treatment refusal. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete, and Web of Science using terms including obligation, refusal, HIV/AIDS, COVID-19, and pandemics. After duplicate removal and dual, independent screening, we analyzed 156 articles for quality, ethical position, reasons, and concepts. Diseases in our sample included HIV/AIDS (72.2%), severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) (10.2%), COVID-19 (10.2%), Ebola (7.0%), and influenza (7.0%). Most articles (81.9%, n = 128) indicated an obligation to treat. COVID-19 had the highest number of papers indicating ethical acceptability of refusal (60%, P < .001), while HIV had the least (13.3%, P = .026). Several reason domains were significantly different during COVID-19, including unreasonable risks to self/family (26.7%, P < .001) and labor rights/workers\' protection (40%, P < .001). A surge in ethics literature during COVID-19 has advocated for permissibility of treatment refusal. Balancing healthcare provision with workforce protection is crucial in effectively responding to a global pandemic.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMed