OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence and risk factors for RSV subtypes A and B and PIV types 1-4 among patients hospitalized with pneumonia.
METHODS: In a cross-sectional, pilot study nasopharyngeal swabs were studied with real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assays. Concurrently, we helped Sibu and Kapit Hospitals adapt their first molecular diagnostics for RSV and PIV.
RESULTS: Of 129 specimens collected (June to July 2017), 39 tested positive for RSV-A (30.2%), two were positive for RSV B (1.6%), one was positive for PIV-3 (0.8%) and one was positive for PIV-4 (0.8%). No samples were positive for PIV-1 or PIV-2. Of the 39 RSV-A positive specimens, 46.2% were collected from children under one year of age and only 5.1% were from patients over the age of 18. A multivariable analysis found the odds of children <1 year of age testing positive for RSV-A were 32.7 (95% CI: 3.9, 276.2) times larger than >18 years of age, and the odds of patients hospitalized at Kapit Hospital testing positive for RSV-A were 3.2 (95% CI: 1.3, 7.8) times larger than patients hospitalized at Sibu Hospital.
CONCLUSION: This study found an unusually high prevalence of RSV-A among pneumonia patients admitted to the two hospitals. Subsequently, Sibu Hospital adapted the molecular assays with the goal of providing more directed care for such pneumonia patients.
METHODS: Medical records of patients who underwent thoracic surgery from March 18, 2020 to May 17, 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. All patients undergoing thoracic surgery were tested for Covid-19 using the reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction method. Patients with malignancy were observed for 10 to 14 days in the ward after testing negative. The healthcare workers donned personal protective equipment for all the cases, and the number of healthcare workers in the operating room was limited to the minimum required.
RESULTS: A total of 44 procedures were performed in 26 thoracic surgeries. All of these procedures were classified as aerosol generating, and the mean duration of the surgery was 130 ± 43 minutes. None of the healthcare workers involved in the surgery were exposed or infected by Covid-19.
CONCLUSION: Covid-19 will be a threat for a long time and thoracic surgeons must continue to provide their services, despite having to deal with aerosol generating procedures, in the new normal. Covid-19 testing of all surgical candidates, using the reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, donning full personal protective equipment for healthcare workers, and carefully planned procedures are among the measures suggested to prevent unnecessary Covid-19 exposure in thoracic surgery.
METHODS: Utilizing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, USA) website, and a comprehensive review of PubMed literature, we obtained information regarding clinical signs and symptoms, treatment and diagnosis, transmission methods, protection methods and risk factors for Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and COVID-19. Comparisons between the viruses were made.
RESULTS: Inadequate risk assessment regarding the urgency of the situation, and limited reporting on the virus within China has, in part, led to the rapid spread of COVID-19 throughout mainland China and into proximal and distant countries. Compared with SARS and MERS, COVID-19 has spread more rapidly, due in part to increased globalization and the focus of the epidemic. Wuhan, China is a large hub connecting the North, South, East and West of China via railways and a major international airport. The availability of connecting flights, the timing of the outbreak during the Chinese (Lunar) New Year, and the massive rail transit hub located in Wuhan has enabled the virus to perforate throughout China, and eventually, globally.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that we did not learn from the two prior epidemics of coronavirus and were ill-prepared to deal with the challenges the COVID-19 epidemic has posed. Future research should attempt to address the uses and implications of internet of things (IoT) technologies for mapping the spread of infection.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Lethality was calculated as the rate of deaths in a determinate moment from the outbreak of the pandemic out of the total of identified positives for COVID-19 in a given area/nation, based on the COVID-John Hopkins University website. Lethality of countries located within the 5th parallels North/South on 6 April and 6 May 2020, was compared with that of all the other countries. Lethality in the European areas of The Netherlands, France and the United Kingdom was also compared to the territories of the same nations in areas with a non-temperate climate.
RESULTS: A lower lethality rate of COVID-19 was found in Equatorial countries both on April 6 (OR=0.72 CI 95% 0.66-0.80) and on May 6 (OR=0.48, CI 95% 0.47-0.51), with a strengthening over time of the protective effect. A trend of higher risk in European vs. non-temperate areas was found on April 6, but a clear difference was evident one month later: France (OR=0.13, CI 95% 0.10-0.18), The Netherlands (OR=0.5, CI 95% 0.3-0.9) and the UK (OR=0.2, CI 95% 0.01-0.51). This result does not seem to be totally related to the differences in age distribution of different sites.
CONCLUSIONS: The study does not seem to exclude that the lethality of COVID-19 may be climate sensitive. Future studies will have to confirm these clues, due to potential confounding factors, such as pollution, population age, and exposure to malaria.