Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 136 cases of COVID-19 in main district of Chongqing

Epidemiological characteristics of overseas imported COVID-19 cases into China: A scoping literature review

Previous studies investigating the characteristics of imported cases were mostly limited to a certain province/city or a specific sub-group during a certain period with a small sample size, which may not provide an overall picture of the characteristics of imported cases. In this scoping literature review, we comprehensively synthesized the epidemiological characteristics of overseas imported COVID-19 cases into China by retrieving six literature databases, with aims to provide implications for more targeted control, prevention, and medical treatment of this disease. After dropping duplicates and reviewing titles, abstracts, and full-texts, 50 articles were included in the review finally, including 26 (52%) articles in English and 24 (48%) articles in Chinese. According to the type of data sources, the 50 studies were divided into three categories: 13 (26%) articles using data sourced from the Chinese Infectious Diseases Online Reporting System, 15 (30%) articles using data from the websites of national/local health departments, and 22 (44%) articles using hospital admission data. Most of the overseas imported COVID-19 cases were young and middle-aged Chinese students and businessmen returning from the United States, Europe, and some neighboring countries. Airport routine health screening measures could not identify COVID-cases effectively, although scheduled multiple nucleic acid tests were required before boarding. Almost all imported cases were identified during the hotel quarantine period. Although a large proportion of imported cases were asymptomatic or with mild symptoms in the published literature, they may be due to participant selection bias. The exact proportion of asymptomatic cases may need to be further investigated especially through population-based large-scale studies.

Cognition and Social Behaviors Related to COVID-19 Among Students in Medical Colleges: A Cross-Sectional Study in Guangdong Province of China

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic is a public health emergency of international concern. This study aimed to describe the cognition and social behaviors related to COVID-19 among medical college students in China and to explore the relevant factors that have affected individual social behaviors. The study could enrich practical research on the social behaviors of college students during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

From February to April 2020, online questionnaire survey was conducted meticulously. Based on their majors, the students were divided into a medical student group (249 cases) and a near-peer medical student group (397 cases). Descriptive statistics was used to elaborate the cognition related to the pandemic and the status quo of social behaviors among these students. A multiple linear regression model was established to analyze the relevant factors affecting individual social behaviors from various perspectives during the pandemic.

Results

Regarding the cognition situation: 76.32% of those surveyed had good pandemic awareness, and the average general cognition score was 30.55 ± 3.17 points. In terms of social behaviors, the average scores for purposive rational actions and affective actions during the outbreak were relatively high, scoring 8.85 ± 1.72 points (>10 points) and 4.32 ± 1.41 points (>6 points), respectively, while the average value rational actions score was relatively low at 5.95 ± 1.90 points (>10 points). The results of the multiple linear regression model showed that urban college students had higher scores for purposive rational actions; college students with the CCP membership had higher value rational actions scores; school and major were also significant factors affecting affective actions scoring. The COVID-19 cognition score had a significant effect on the social behavior score in all dimensions (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The cognition of COVID-19 among students in Chinese medical colleges was good, and pandemic cognition was an important factor that affected individual social behaviors. Universities and colleges should strengthen the publicity and education of knowledge related to COVID-19, guide students to internalize their knowledge of the pandemic into positive behaviors, and help to win the battle of pandemic prevention and control.

Patient delay in a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in Tianjin, China from January to February 2020

Background

Patient delay of COVID-19 patients occurs frequently, which poses a challenge to the overall epidemic situation. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the extent of patient delay, explore its factors, and investigate the effects of patient interval on epidemic situation.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted with 136 COVID-19 patients in Tianjin, China. Factors associated with patient delay were explored using logistic regression models. The relationship was investigated by spearman correlation analysis and mean absolute error between patient interval of lagging days and epidemic situation.

Results

The factors associated with patient delay of COVID-19 patients were mainly the imported cases, the first presentation to a tertiary hospital, close contacts and spatial accessibility to fever clinic. The longer the patient intervals of lagging days, the greater the number of new-onset and confirmed cases in 3–4 and 5–7 days after the first day symptoms, respectively.

Conclusion

Identification and quarantine of close contacts, promoting the spatial accessibility to fever clinics and creating public awareness are crucial to shortening patient delays to flat the curve for COVID-19.

Using secondary cases to characterize the severity of an emerging or re-emerging infection

The methods to ascertain cases of an emerging infectious disease are typically biased toward cases with more severe disease, which can bias the average infection-severity profile. Here, we conducted a systematic review to extract information on disease severity among index cases and secondary cases identified by contact tracing of index cases for COVID-19. We identified 38 studies to extract information on measures of clinical severity. The proportion of index cases with fever was 43% higher than for secondary cases. The proportion of symptomatic, hospitalized, and fatal illnesses among index cases were 12%, 126%, and 179% higher than for secondary cases, respectively. We developed a statistical model to utilize the severity difference, and estimate 55% of index cases were missed in Wuhan, China. Information on disease severity in secondary cases should be less susceptible to ascertainment bias and could inform estimates of disease severity and the proportion of missed index cases.

Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Quantification of asymptomatic infections is fundamental for effective public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Discrepancies regarding the extent of asymptomaticity have arisen from inconsistent terminology as well as conflation of index and secondary cases which biases toward lower asymptomaticity. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and World Health Organization Global Research Database on COVID-19 between January 1, 2020 and April 2, 2021 to identify studies that reported silent infections at the time of testing, whether presymptomatic or asymptomatic. Index cases were removed to minimize representational bias that would result in overestimation of symptomaticity. By analyzing over 350 studies, we estimate that the percentage of infections that never developed clinical symptoms, and thus were truly asymptomatic, was 35.1% (95% CI: 30.7 to 39.9%). At the time of testing, 42.8% (95% prediction interval: 5.2 to 91.1%) of cases exhibited no symptoms, a group comprising both asymptomatic and presymptomatic infections. Asymptomaticity was significantly lower among the elderly, at 19.7% (95% CI: 12.7 to 29.4%) compared with children at 46.7% (95% CI: 32.0 to 62.0%). We also found that cases with comorbidities had significantly lower asymptomaticity compared to cases with no underlying medical conditions. Without proactive policies to detect asymptomatic infections, such as rapid contact tracing, prolonged efforts for pandemic control may be needed even in the presence of vaccination.

Impact of screening COVID-19 on orthopedic trauma patients at the emergency department: A consecutive series from a level I trauma center

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) posed a major threat to the clinical practice of orthopedic surgeons, especially in the emergency department. We aim to present: (1) the criteria established by the Surgery Management Committee of Taipei Veterans General Hospital in response to COVID-19 and (2) the impact of COVID-19 screening on orthopedic trauma patients in the emergency department.

METHODS

From April 1 to April 30, 2020, all orthopedic trauma patients in the emergency department were screened for COVID-19 if they fulfilled any of the following: (1) travel from abroad within 14 days, (2) high-risk occupation, (3) contact or cluster history with a COVID-19-positive patient, and (4) any associated symptom, including fever up to 38°C, cough, sore throat, rhinorrhea, loss of taste or smell, muscle soreness, malaise, or shortness of breath. We recorded details on the injury, fever, management, and associated outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 163 orthopedic trauma patients presenting to the emergency department, 24 were screened for COVID-19; of these, 22 received surgery. Sixty-two patients received surgery without screening for COVID-19. Fever was the most common reason to screen for COVID-19 (N = 20; 83.3%). No patients were COVID-19 positive. Screened patients had a significantly longer mean interval from presentation to the emergency department to surgery (2.7 ± 2.5 vs. 1.5 ± 0.8 days, p = 0.037). Of the 20 patients screened because of fever, the focus was not identified in 12 (60.0%) patients. The other eight had urinary tract infection (N = 6; 27.2%), septic hip (N = 1; 4.6%), and concomitant pneumonia and urinary tract infection (N = 1; 4.6%). The mean duration of fever and hospital stay was 4.3 ± 4.6 and 8.7 ± 4.9 days, respectively. There were no thromboembolic events, surgical complications, or in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

We developed safe and reliable screening criteria for this COVID-19 pandemic. The delay in surgery was reasonable and did not adversely affect in-patient outcomes.

Global prevalence and pathogenesis of headache in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: This study was conducted to determine the prevalence of headache in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to assess its association as a predictor for COVID-19. This study also aimed to discuss the possible pathogenesis of headache in COVID-19. Methods: Available articles from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched as of September 2 nd, 2020. Data on characteristics of the study, headache and COVID-19 were extracted following the PRISMA guidelines. Biases were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The cumulative prevalence of headache was calculated for the general population (i.e. adults and children). The pooled odd ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) was calculated using the Z test to assess the association between headache and the presence of COVID-19 cases. Results: We included 104,751 COVID-19 cases from 78 eligible studies to calculate the global prevalence of headache in COVID-19 and 17 studies were included to calculate the association of headache and COVID-19. The cumulative prevalence of headache in COVID-19 was 25.2% (26,464 out of 104,751 cases). Headache was found to be more prevalent, approximately by two-fold, in COVID-19 patients than in non-COVID-19 patients (other respiratory viral infections), OR: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.94, 2.5 with p=0.04. Conclusion: Headache is common among COVID-19 patients and seems to be more common in COVID-19 patients compared to those with the non-COVID-19 viral infection. No definitive mechanisms on how headache  emerges in COVID-19 patients but several possible hypotheses have been proposed. However, extensive studies are warranted to elucidate the mechanisms. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020210332 (28/09/2020).

Global prevalence and pathogenesis of headache in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: This study was conducted to determine the prevalence of headache in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to assess its association as a predictor for COVID-19. This study also aimed to discuss the possible pathogenesis of headache in COVID-19. Methods: Available articles from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched as of September 2 nd, 2020. Data on characteristics of the study, headache and COVID-19 were extracted following the PRISMA guidelines. Biases were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The cumulative prevalence of headache was calculated for the general population (i.e. adults and children). The pooled odd ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) was calculated using the Z test to assess the association between headache and the presence of COVID-19 cases. Results: We included 104,751 COVID-19 cases from 78 eligible studies to calculate the global prevalence of headache in COVID-19 and 17 studies were included to calculate the association of headache and COVID-19. The cumulative prevalence of headache in COVID-19 was 25.2% (26,464 out of 104,751 cases). Headache was found to be more prevalent, approximately by two-fold, in COVID-19 patients than in non-COVID-19 patients (other respiratory viral infections), OR: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.94, 2.5 with p=0.04. Conclusion: Headache is common among COVID-19 patients and seems to be more common in COVID-19 patients compared to those with the non-COVID-19 viral infection. No definitive mechanisms on how headache  emerges in COVID-19 patients but several possible hypotheses have been proposed. However, extensive studies are warranted to elucidate the mechanisms. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020210332 (28/09/2020).

Epidemiological Characteristics and Clinical Features of Patients Infected With the COVID-19 Virus in Nanchang, Jiangxi, China

Objectives: The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is the biggest public health crises in the 21st century. While most patients infected with the COVID-19 virus have no to moderate symptoms, there is currently limited clinical information about these patients. Methods: In this study, we retrospectively investigated 41 patients infected with the COVID-19 virus in Nanchang, Jiangxi province, China, from February 4 to March 2, 2020. Nanchang is about 260 km southeast of Wuhan, the initial epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic. We retrieved information on patient demographics, physical examination results, epidemiology, clinical manifestations, underlying conditions, laboratory analyses, radiological images, and treatment outcomes. Results: Most patients (70.7%) had a history of close contact with patients with confirmed COVID-19, and 16 patients (39.0%) showed a high degree of family clustering. All 41 patients had no to moderate symptoms. The median age was 39.9 years and common symptoms of illness were fever (69.2%), cough (65.4%), and fatigue (19.2%). The dominant patient group was middle-aged women, with hypertension (14.6%) and chronic liver disease (12.2%) as the most frequent underlying conditions. All patients recovered, with the mean time of viral nucleic acid clearance at 10.6 days. Chest CT scans presented ground-glass opacities in 53.7% of patients while 26.8% had normal CT images. Laboratory results showed that lymphocyte counts, lymphocyte percentages, ESR, CRP, IgG, Fib, and cytokines were correlated to patients' conditions. Approximately 60-90% of patients had abnormally high levels of cytokines IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, and/or TNF-α. Conclusions: Our results showed variable clinical and laboratory presentations among this group of patients infected with the COVID-19 virus. Though all 41 patients recovered, our results suggest that cytokine levels and other biochemical indicators should be monitored for patients infected with the COVID-19 virus showing no to moderate symptoms to ensure quick access for critical medical attention, if needed.

SARS-CoV-2-related pneumonia cases in pneumonia picture in Russia in March-May 2020: Secondary bacterial pneumonia and viral co-infections

Background

We are communicating the results of investigating statistics on SARS-CoV-2-related pneumonias in Russia: percentage, mortality, cases with other viral agents, cases accompanied by secondary bacterial pneumonias, age breakdown, clinical course and outcome.

Methods

We studied two sampling sets (Set 1 and Set 2). Set 1 consisted of results of testing 3382 assays of out-patients and hospital patients (5-88 years old) with community-acquired and hospital-acquired pneumonia of yet undetermined aetiology. Set 2 contained results of 1204 assays of hospital patients (12-94 years old) with pneumonia and COVID-19 already diagnosed by molecular biological techniques in test laboratories. The results were collected in twelve Russian cities/provinces in time range 2 March – 5 May 2020. Assays were analysed for 10 bacterial, 15 viral, 2 fungal and 2 parasitic aetiological agents.

Results

In Set 1, 4.35% of total pneumonia cases were related to SARS-CoV-2, with substantially larger proportion (18.75%) of deaths of pneumonia with COVID-19 diagnosed. However, studying Set 2, we revealed that 52.82% patients in it were also positive for different typical and atypical aetiological agents usually causing pneumonia. 433 COVID-19 patients (35.96%) were tested positive for various bacterial aetiological agents, with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus and Haemophilus influenzae infections accounting for the majority of secondary pneumonia cases.

Conclusions

SARS-CoV-2, a low-pathogenic virus itself, becomes exceptionally dangerous if secondary bacterial pneumonia attacks a COVID-19 patient as a complication. An essential part of the severest complications and mortality associated with COVID-19 in Russia in March-May 2020, may be attributed to secondary bacterial pneumonia and to a much less extent viral co-infections. The problem of hospital-acquired bacterial infection is exceptionally urgent in treating SARS-CoV-2 patients. The risk of secondary bacterial pneumonia and its further complications, should be given very serious attention in combating SARS-CoV-2.

Proportion of asymptomatic coronavirus disease 2019: A systematic review and meta-analysis

We aim to systematically review the characteristics of asymptomatic infection in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). PubMed and EMBASE were electronically searched to identify original studies containing the rate of asymptomatic infection in COVID‐19 patients before 20 May 2020. Then mate‐analysis was conducted using R version 3.6.2. A total of 50 155 patients from 41 studies with confirmed COVID‐19 were included. The pooled percentage of asymptomatic infection is 15.6% (95% CI, 10.1%‐23.0%). Ten included studies contain the number of presymptomatic patients, who were asymptomatic at screening point and developed symptoms during follow‐up. The pooled percentage of presymptomatic infection among 180 initially asymptomatic patients is 48.9% (95% CI, 31.6%‐66.2%). The pooled proportion of asymptomatic infection among 1152 COVID‐19 children from 11 studies is 27.7% (95% CI, 16.4%‐42.7%), which is much higher than patients from all aged groups. Abnormal CT features are common in asymptomatic COVID‐19 infection. For 36 patients from 4 studies that CT results were available, 15 (41.7%) patients had bilateral involvement and 14 (38.9%) had unilateral involvement in CT results. Reduced white blood cell count, increased lactate dehydrogenase, and increased C‐reactive protein were also recorded. About 15.6% of confirmed COVID‐19 patients are asymptomatic. Nearly half of the patients with no symptoms at detection time will develop symptoms later. Children are likely to have a higher proportion of asymptomatic infection than adults. Asymptomatic COVID‐19 patients could have abnormal laboratory and radiational manifestations, which can be used as screening strategies to identify asymptomatic infection.

By systematically reviewing the proportion and clinical features of asymptomatic infection in COVID‐19, our study provides a useful quantity to understand the true burden of this disease.