Lessons learned from international responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)

Keeping up with the COVID's-Could siRNA-based antivirals be a part of the answer?

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly contagious viral disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This deadly infection has resulted in more than 5.2 million deaths worldwide. The global rollout of COVID-19 vaccines has without doubt saved countless lives by reducing the severity of symptoms for patients. However, as the virus continues to evolve, there is a risk that the vaccines and antiviral designed to target the infection will no longer be therapeutically viable. Furthermore, there remain fears over both the short and long-term side effects of repeat exposure to currently available vaccines. In this review, we discuss the pros and cons of the vaccine rollout and promote the idea of a COVID medicinal toolbox made up of different antiviral treatment modalities, and present some of the latest therapeutic strategies that are being explored in this respect to try to combat the COVID-19 virus and other COVID viruses that are predicted to follow. Lastly, we review current literature on the use of siRNA therapeutics as a way to remain adaptable and in tune with the ever-evolving mutation rate of the COVID-19 virus.

Coronavirus lockdown and virus suppression: An international analysis

This paper analyses the effect of lockdown against the coronavirus which is one of the fastest growing threats in the world. We focus on three categories of lockdown and group four continents, Asia, America, Europe, and Africa together to assess the effectiveness of such a measure to contain the virus. We also look at a number of variables linked to the spread of the virus to determine the factors affecting the growth of new confirmed cases. We show evidence that countries in Europe are more likely to impose a national lockdown than any other continent. For the empirical analysis, we undertake the cross-sectional regression model, logistic regression model and logistic growth curve as a method to apply the data collected over the period March to June 2020 as this is the data available at the time this paper is composed. The empirical results of this paper indicate that countries which impose the strictest form of lockdown will result in a reduction in growth of new confirmed cases.

Coronavirus lockdown and virus suppression: An international analysis

This paper analyses the effect of lockdown against the coronavirus which is one of the fastest growing threats in the world. We focus on three categories of lockdown and group four continents, Asia, America, Europe, and Africa together to assess the effectiveness of such a measure to contain the virus. We also look at a number of variables linked to the spread of the virus to determine the factors affecting the growth of new confirmed cases. We show evidence that countries in Europe are more likely to impose a national lockdown than any other continent. For the empirical analysis, we undertake the cross-sectional regression model, logistic regression model and logistic growth curve as a method to apply the data collected over the period March to June 2020 as this is the data available at the time this paper is composed. The empirical results of this paper indicate that countries which impose the strictest form of lockdown will result in a reduction in growth of new confirmed cases.

Tools for Assessment of Country Preparedness for Public Health Emergencies: A Critical Review

Recent international communicable disease crises have highlighted the need for countries to assure their preparedness to respond effectively to public health emergencies. The objective of this study was to critically review existing tools to support a country's assessment of its health emergency preparedness. We developed a framework to analyze the expected effectiveness and utility of these tools. Through mixed search strategies, we identified 12 tools with relevance to public health emergencies. There was considerable consensus concerning the critical preparedness system elements to be assessed, although their relative emphasis and means of assessment and measurement varied considerably. Several tools identified appeared to have reporting requirements as their primary aim, rather than primary utility for system self-assessment of the countries and states using the tool. Few tools attempted to give an account of their underlying evidence base. Only some tools were available in a user-friendly electronic modality or included quantitative measures to support the monitoring of system preparedness over time. We conclude there is still a need for improvement in tools available for assessment of country preparedness for public health emergencies, and for applied research to increase identification of system measures that are valid indicators of system response capability.

Comparative Analysis of the Japanese Version of the Revised Impact of Event Scale: A Study of Firefighters

Introduction:

The Impact of Event Scale Revised (IES-R) has been used in various epidemiological studies to assess the prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Previous studies using the IES-R Japanese version to assess the mental health of firefighters were based on the premise that firefighters had experienced a traumatic event(s) as a matter of course. However, use of the IES-R-J does not indicate whether or not a traumatic event was experienced. The purpose of this study is to clarify the differences between: (1) IES-R-J high and low score groups; and (2) those who report symptoms similar to those of PTSD with and without having been being exposed to a traumatic event.

Methods:

Questionnaire packets distributed to all 157 workers in a Japanese fire station included the IES-R, the Japan Brief Job Stress Questionnaire, a questionnaire regarding traumatic event experiences, and demographic questions. Participants who scored ≥25 points on the IES-R-J scale were defined as the PTSD high risk (HR) group; those with scores <25 points as the PTSD low risk (LR) group.

Results:

One hundred thirty-one of the 157 subjects (83.4%) responded to the questionnaire; three were excluded from the analysis because of missing data. The mean total IES-R-J score was 14.9 ±15.2. Twenty-eight subjects scored in the PTSD HR group (≥25); 100 scored in the LR group (<25). A total of 54 (42.2%) participants had experienced a traumatic event; 57.8% had not. In the HR group, 14 subjects had experienced a traumatic event and 14 had not. Participants who had experienced a traumatic event reported a higher incidence of intrusion/re-experience symptoms than did those who had not experienced a traumatic event. The level of social support significantly affected the risk for PTSD.

Firefighters who scored ≥25 on the IES-R-J and, thus, considered to be at high risk for the development of PTSD, were less confident about their health, experienced more job stressors and had less social support than did those whose IES-R-J scores were <25. Having experienced a traumatic event was reported by only 42% of all the participants and by only 50% of those in the high risk PTSD group.

Conclusions:

Although the IES-R is an easily-administered tool useful in epidemiological studies evaluating psychological stress, it is recommended that the questionnaire be amended to include a question regarding the existence of a threatened experience or event and to analyze the data using positive and negative predictive value methodology.