Comparative effectiveness and safety of 32 pharmacological interventions recommended by guidelines for coronavirus disease 2019: a systematic review and network meta-analysis combining 66 trials

Prescription patterns in an intensive care unit of COVID-19 patients in Bangladesh: A cross-sectional study

Background and Aims

To reduce death rates for critical patients hospitalized in intensive care units (ICUs), coronavirus (COVID-19) lacks proven and efficient treatment methods. This cross-sectional study aims to evaluate how physicians treat severe and suspected COVID-19 patients in the ICU department in the absence of an established approach, as well as assess the rational use of the medication in the ICU department.

Methods

Between June 16, 2021, and December 10, 2022, a total of 428 prescriptions were randomly gathered, including both suspected (yellow zone) and confirmed (red zone) COVID-19 patients. For data management, Microsoft Excel 2021 was utilized, while STATA 17 provided statistical analysis. To find associations between patients' admission status and demographic details, exploratory and bivariate analyses were conducted.

Results

Of the 428 patients admitted to the ICU, 228 (53.27%) were in the yellow zone and 200 (46.73%) were in the verified COVID-19 red zone. The majority of patients were male (54.44%), and the age range from 41 to 60 was the most common (41.82%). No significant deviation was detected to the yellow and red groups' prescription patterns. A total of 4001 medicines (mean 9.35/patient) were prescribed. Antiulcerants, antibiotics, respiratory, analgesics, anticoagulants, vitamins and minerals, steroids, cardiovascular, antidiabetic drugs, antivirals, antihistamines, muscle relaxants, and antifungal treatments were widely prescribed drugs. Enoxaparin (67.06%) appeared as the most prescribed medicine, followed by montelukast (60.51%), paracetamol (58.41%), and dexamethasone (51.64%).

Conclusion

The prescription patterns for the yellow and red groups were comparable and mostly included symptomatic treatment. Respiratory drugs constituted the most frequent therapeutic class. Polypharmacy should be taken under considerations. In ICU settings, the outcomes emphasize the need of correct diagnosis, cautious antibiotic usage, suitable therapy, and attentive monitoring.

Comparative efficacy and safety of antiviral traditional Chinese medicine injections for viral pneumonia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Viral pneumonia (VP) is becoming a persistent and pervasive burden of disease. Traditional Chinese medicine Injections (TCMIs) have been proved effective in the treatment of patients with VP, which are now widely used in China. The evidence of TCMIs for VP is evolving rapidly. This study aims to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of TCMIs to provide more evidence and sights for the treatment selection of VP.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Seven databases were searched from their inception up to 16 March 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are included to compare the efficacy and safety of antiviral TCMIs for the treatment of viral pneumonia. Clinical efficacy and rate of adverse events were considered as primary outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 76 RCTs with eight TCMIs comprising 7925 patients were included in the NMA. According to NMA, Reduning Injection combined with conventional antiviral drugs (CAD) produced superior effects in the effective outcomes and reduced the adverse event incidence rate of VP.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicated that TCMIs combined with CAD was more effective and safer than CAD monotherapy and compared different TCMIs therapies, which provided guidance and reference for the selection of clinical treatment medication.

Efficacy and safety of current treatment interventions for patients with severe COVID-19 infection: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of different medications available at present for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. We searched databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to April 30, 2021, with Chinese or English language restriction, of medications recommended for patients (aged 18 years or older) with severe COVID-19 infection. We extracted data on trials and patient characteristics, and the following primary outcomes: all-cause mortality (ACM), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). We identified 1855 abstracts and of these included 15 RCTs comprising 3073 participants through database searches and other sources. In terms of efficacy, compared with the standard of care (SOC) group, no significant decrease in ACM was found in α-lipoic acid, convalescent plasma (CP), azithromycin, tocilizumab, methylprednisolone, interferon beta, CP/SOC, high dosage sarilumab, low dosage sarilumab, remdesivir, lopinavir-ritonavir, auxora, and placebo group. Compared with placebo, we found that a significant decrease in ACM was only found in methylprednisolone (odds ratio [OR]: 0.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.03-0.75]. With respect to TEAEs, the CP group showed lower TEAEs than placebo (OR: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.01-0.58) or SOC (OR: 0.05, 95% CI: 0.01-0.42) group for the therapy of severe COVID-19 patients. This study only demonstrated that methylprednisolone was superior to placebo in treating patients with severe COVID-19 infection. Meanwhile, this further confirmed that the safety of other treatment interventions might be inferior to CP for the therapy of severe COVID-19 patients.

Prescription Patterns of Drugs Given to Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study in Colombia

The impact of COVID-19 prompted a race to find a treatment that would reduce its mortality. Most studies have not shown favorable results for many of these drugs, but they are still used. The aim as to determine the differences and similarities in the hospital pharmacological management of patients with COVID-19 according to sex, age group, and geographical region of Colombia, 2020–2021. Descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted on the prescription patterns of the medications given to patients diagnosed with COVID-19 treated in eight clinics in Colombia between 6 March 2020 and 31 May 2021. We performed a descriptive analysis of the sociodemographic, clinical, and pharmacological variables of the patients. A total of 8596 patients from 170 cities were identified, with a median age of 53.0 years and 53.3% of them men. A total of 24.3% required care in the intensive care unit, and 18.7% required invasive mechanical ventilation. The most commonly used drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 were systemic corticosteroids (63.6%), followed by colchicine (12.8%), azithromycin (8.9%), and ivermectin (6.4%). Corticosteroids, anticoagulants, colchicine, azithromycin, ivermectin, and hydroxychloroquine were prescribed more frequently in men, and their overall use increased with age. There were differences in prescriptions between geographic regions. The majority of patients were managed with medications included in the management guidelines. There were differences between sexes, age groups, and geographical regions.

Traditional Chinese Medicine for COVID-19: A Network Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

To compare the efficacy of different traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) therapies for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and provide a higher level of evidence in the form of network meta-analysis (NMA) and systematic review. We searched the studies from the following databases: CNKI, VIP, WanFang, SinoMed, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from the establishment of the respective database until December 2021. Relevant studies were screened according to the pre-established inclusion criteria. The quality of the included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) were assessed using the risk of bias (ROB) tool and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS), respectively. R software 4.1.1 and Stata 13.1 were used for data analysis and mapping. A total of 34 studies were included in this network meta-analysis that tested 24 TCM interventions and included 3443 patients. Using cluster analysis of time to negative SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), the length of hospital stay and composite events, we found that Jinyinhua oral liquid (JYH, 120 mL) + conventional Western medicine (CWM) has the highest SUCRA value at 88.64%, 85.61% and 84.24%. The traditional meta-analysis results revealed that Qingfei Paidu decoction + CWM were significantly different compared with CWM alone for the score of clinical symptoms (MD =-0.75, 95% CI [-1.04, -0.47]). Nine studies reported 57 adverse reactions (ADRs) and 3 adverse events (ADEs) in TCM + CWM groups, and eight studies reported 33 ADRs and 8 ADEs in CWM groups. In conclusion, the combination of TCM and CWM approaches may enhance the efficacy of CWM in COVID-19 patients. Based on the NMA result, JYH (120 mL) + CWM may be a more effective treatment and deserves further investigation. However, the differences in many comparisons between TCM interventions did not reach statistical significance; therefore, further high-quality studies are required to validate these findings.