-
1.
Postvaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Chandan, S, Khan, SR, Deliwala, S, Mohan, BP, Ramai, D, Chandan, OC, Facciorusso, A
Journal of medical virology. 2022;(4):1428-1441
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Healthcare workers (HCWs) remain on the front line of the battle against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and are among the highest groups at risk of infection during this raging pandemic. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the incidence of postvaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated HCWs. We searched multiple databases from inception through August 2021 to identify studies that reported on the incidence of postvaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled proportions of COVID-19 infection in partially/fully vaccinated as well as unvaccinated individuals. Eighteen studies with 228 873 HCWs were included in the final analysis. The total number of partially vaccinated, fully vaccinated, and unvaccinated HCWs were 132 922, 155 673, and 17 505, respectively. Overall pooled proportion of COVID-19 infections among partially/fully vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs was 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-3.5). Among partially vaccinated, fully vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs, pooled proportion of COVID-19 infections was 2.3% (CI 1.2-4.4), 1.3% (95% CI 0.6-2.9), and 10.1% (95% CI 4.5-19.5), respectively. Our analysis shows the risk of COVID-19 infection in both partially and fully vaccinated HCWs remains exceedingly low when compared to unvaccinated individuals. There remains an urgent need for all frontline HCWs to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 infection.
-
2.
The Impact of Vitamin D Level on COVID-19 Infection: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Teshome, A, Adane, A, Girma, B, Mekonnen, ZA
Frontiers in public health. 2021;:624559
Abstract
Background: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a respiratory and systemic disorder caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or novel Coronavirus (nCoV). To date, there is no proven curative treatment for this virus; as a result, prevention remains to be the best strategy to combat coronavirus infection (COVID-19). Vitamin D deficiency (VDD) has been proposed to play a role in coronavirus infection (COVID-19). However, there is no conclusive evidence on its impact on COVID-19 infection. Therefore, the present review aimed to summarize the available evidence regarding the association between Vitamin D levels and the risk of COVID-19 infection. Methods: A systematic literature search of databases (PUBMED/MEDLINE, Cochrane/Wiley library, Scopus, and SciELO) were conducted from May 15, 2020, to December 20, 2020. Studies that assessed the effect of vitamin D level on COVID-19/SARS-2 infection were considered for the review. The qualities of the included studies were evaluated using the JBI tools. Meta-analysis with a random-effects model was conducted and odds ratio with their 95%CI were reported. This systematic review and meta-analysis are reported according to the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guideline. Results: The electronic and supplementary searches for this review yielded 318 records from which, only 14 of them met the inclusion criteria. The qualitative synthesis indicated that vitamin D deficient individuals were at higher risk of COVID-19 infection as compared to vitamin D sufficient patients. The pooled analysis showed that individuals with Vitamin-D deficiency were 80% more likely to acquire COVID-19 infection as compared to those who have sufficient Vitamin D levels (OR = 1.80; 95%CI: 1.72, 1.88). Begg's test also revealed that there was no significant publication bias between the studies (P = 0.764). The subgroup analysis revealed that the risk of acquiring COVID-19 infection was relatively higher in the case-control study design (OR = 1.81). Conclusions: In conclusion, low serum 25 (OH) Vitamin-D level was significantly associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 infection. The limited currently available data suggest that sufficient Vitamin D level in serum is associated with a significantly decreased risk of COVID-19 infection.
-
3.
Sleep problems during the COVID-19 pandemic by population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Jahrami, H, BaHammam, AS, Bragazzi, NL, Saif, Z, Faris, M, Vitiello, MV
Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine. 2021;(2):299-313
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES No systematic review or meta-analysis has yet been conducted to examine the impact of the pandemic on the prevalence of sleep problems among the general population, health care workers, or patients with COVID-19. Therefore, this systematic review was conducted to assess the impact and prevalence of sleep problems among those categories. METHODS American Psychological Association PsycINFO, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EBSCOhost, EMBASE, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, ProQuest Medical, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Web of Science from November 1, 2019 to July 5, 2020 were used. Additionally, 5 preprints servers (medRxiv.org; preprints.org; psyarxiv.com; arXiv.org; biorxiv.org) were also searched for papers accepted after peer review but not yet published and indexed. There was no language restriction. The random-effect models meta-analysis model was used with the DerSimonian and Laird methodology. RESULTS Forty-four papers, involving a total of 54,231 participants from 13 countries, were judged relevant and contributed to the systematic review and meta-analysis of sleep problems during COVID-19. The global pooled prevalence rate of sleep problems among all populations was 35.7% (95% confidence interval, 29.4-42.4%). Patients with COVID-19 appeared to be the most affected group, with a pooled rate of 74.8% (95% confidence interval, 28.7-95.6%). Health care workers and the general population had comparative rates of sleep problems, with rates of 36.0% (95% confidence interval, 21.1-54.2%) and 32.3% (95% confidence interval, 25.3-40.2%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS The prevalence of sleep problems during the COVID-19 pandemic is high and affects approximately 40% of people from the general and health care populations. Patients with active COVID-19 appeared to have a higher prevalence rates of sleep problems.
-
4.
Weight Gain Associated with COVID-19 Lockdown in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Chang, TH, Chen, YC, Chen, WY, Chen, CY, Hsu, WY, Chou, Y, Chang, YH
Nutrients. 2021;(10)
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lockdown is an effective nonpharmaceutical intervention to reduce coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission, but it restricts daily activity. We aimed to investigate the impact of lockdown on pediatric body weight and body mass index (BMI). METHODS The systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. Four online databases (EMBASE, Medline, the Cochrane Library and CINAHL) were searched. RESULTS The pooled results showed that lockdown was associated with significant body weight gain (MD 2.67, 95% CI 2.12-3.23; p < 0.00001). The BMI of children with comorbidities or obesity did not change significantly. The BMI of general population was significantly higher during lockdown than before the pandemic (MD 0.94, 95% CI 0.32-1.56; p = 0.003). However, heterogeneity was high (I2 = 84%). Among changes in weight classification, increases in the rates of obesity (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.10-1.37; p = 0.0002) and overweight (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.06-1.29; p = 0.001) were reported. CONCLUSIONS Our meta-analysis showed significant increases in body weight and BMI during lockdown among school-age children and adolescents. The prevalence of obesity and overweight also increased. The COVID-19 pandemic worsened the burden of childhood obesity.
-
5.
Severe COVID-19 Infection and Pediatric Comorbidities: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Tsankov, BK, Allaire, JM, Irvine, MA, Lopez, AA, Sauvé, LJ, Vallance, BA, Jacobson, K
International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases. 2021;:246-256
Abstract
OBJECTIVE There is limited information on the severity of COVID-19 infection in children with comorbidities. We investigated the effects of pediatric comorbidities on COVID-19 severity by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature. METHODS PubMed, Embase, and Medline databases were searched for publications on pediatric COVID-19 infections published January 1st to October 5th, 2020. Articles describing at least one child with and without comorbidities, COVID-19 infection, and reported outcomes were included. RESULTS 42 studies containing 275,661 children without comorbidities and 9,353 children with comorbidities were included. Severe COVID-19 was present in 5.1% of children with comorbidities, and in 0.2% without comorbidities. Random-effects analysis revealed a higher risk of severe COVID-19 among children with comorbidities than for healthy children; relative risk ratio 1.79 (95% CI 1.27 - 2.51; I2 = 94%). Children with underlying conditions also had a higher risk of COVID-19-associated mortality; relative risk ratio 2.81 (95% CI 1.31 - 6.02; I2 = 82%). Children with obesity had a relative risk ratio of 2.87 (95% CI 1.16 - 7.07; I2 = 36%). CONCLUSIONS Children with comorbidities have a higher risk of severe COVID-19 and associated mortality than children without underlying disease. Additional studies are required to further evaluate this relationship.
-
6.
Associations of D-Dimer on Admission and Clinical Features of COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression.
Zhao, R, Su, Z, Komissarov, AA, Liu, SL, Yi, G, Idell, S, Matthay, MA, Ji, HL
Frontiers in immunology. 2021;:691249
Abstract
BACKGROUND Dynamic D-dimer level is a key biomarker for the severity and mortality of COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019). How aberrant fibrinolysis influences the clinical progression of COVID-19 presents a clinicopathological dilemma challenging intensivists. METHODS We performed meta-analysis and meta regression to analyze the associations of plasma D-dimer with 106 clinical variables to identify a panoramic view of the derangements of fibrinolysis in 14,862 patients of 42 studies. There were no limitations of age, gender, race, and country. Raw data of each group were extracted separately by two investigators. Individual data of case series, median and interquartile range, and ranges of median or mean were converted to SDM (standard deviation of mean). FINDINGS The weighted mean difference of D-dimer was 0.97 µg/mL (95% CI 0.65, 1.29) between mild and severe groups, as shown by meta-analysis. Publication bias was significant. Meta-regression identified 58 of 106 clinical variables were associated with plasma D-dimer levels. Of these, 11 readouts were negatively related to the level of plasma D-dimer. Further, age and gender were confounding factors. There were 22 variables independently correlated with the D-dimer level, including respiratory rate, dyspnea plasma K+, glucose, SpO2, BUN (blood urea nitrogen), bilirubin, ALT (alanine aminotransferase), AST (aspartate aminotransferase), systolic blood pressure, and CK (creatine kinase). INTERPRETATION These findings support elevated D-dimer as an independent predictor for both mortality and complications. The identified D-dimer-associated clinical variables draw a landscape integrating the aggregate effects of systemically suppressive and pulmonary hyperactive derangements of fibrinolysis, and the D-dimer-associated clinical biomarkers, and conceptually parameters could be combined for risk stratification, potentially for tracking thrombolytic therapy or alternative interventions.
-
7.
Comparison of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors with other antihypertensives in association with coronavirus disease-19 clinical outcomes.
Bezabih, YM, Bezabih, A, Alamneh, E, Peterson, GM, Bezabhe, W
BMC infectious diseases. 2021;(1):527
Abstract
BACKGROUND Reports on the effects of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors on the clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) have been conflicting. We performed this meta-analysis to find conclusive evidence. METHODS We searched published articles through PubMed, EMBASE and medRxiv from 5 January 2020 to 3 August 2020. Studies that reported clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19, stratified by the class of antihypertensives, were included. Random and fixed-effects models were used to estimate pooled odds ratio (OR). RESULTS A total 36 studies involving 30,795 patients with COVID-19 were included. The overall risk of poor patient outcomes (severe COVID-19 or death) was lower in patients taking RAAS inhibitors (OR = 0.79, 95% CI: [0.67, 0.95]) compared with those receiving non-RAAS inhibitor antihypertensives. However, further sub-meta-analysis showed that specific RAAS inhibitors did not show a reduction of poor COVID-19 outcomes when compared with any class of antihypertensive except beta-blockers (BBs). For example, compared to calcium channel blockers (CCBs), neither angiotensin-I-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) (OR = 0.91, 95% CI: [0.67, 1.23]) nor angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs) (OR = 0.90, 95% CI: [0.62, 1.33]) showed a reduction of poor COVID-19 outcomes. When compared with BBs, however, both ACEIs (OR = 0.85, 95% CI: [0.73, 0.99) and ARBs (OR = 0.72, 95% CI: [0.55, 0.94]) showed an apparent decrease in poor COVID-19 outcomes. CONCLUSIONS RAAS inhibitors did not increase the risk of mortality or severity of COVID-19. Differences in COVID-19 clinical outcomes between different class of antihypertensive drugs were likely due to the underlying comorbidities for which the antihypertensive drugs were prescribed, although adverse effects of drugs such as BBs could not be excluded.
-
8.
Cardiac biomarkers and COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
An, W, Kang, JS, Wang, Q, Kim, TE
Journal of infection and public health. 2021;(9):1191-1197
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To systematically investigate the relationship between cardiac biomarkers and COVID-19 severity and mortality. METHODS We performed a literature search using PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were applied to estimate the combined results of 67 studies. A meta-analysis of cardiac biomarkers was used to evaluate disease mortality and severity in COVID-19 patients. RESULTS A meta-analysis of 7812 patients revealed that patients with high levels of cardiac troponin I (SMD = 0.81 U/L, 95% CI = 0.14-1.48, P = 0.017), cardiac troponin T (SMD = 0.78 U/L, 95% CI = 0.07-1.49, P = 0.032), high-sensitive cardiac troponin I (SMD = 0.66 pg/mL, 95% CI = 0.51-0.81, P < 0.001), high-sensitive cardiac troponin T (SMD = 0.93 U/L, 95% CI = 0.21-1.65, P = 0.012), creatine kinase-MB (SMD = 0.54 U/L, 95% CI = 0.39-0.69, P < 0.001), and myoglobin (SMD = 0.80 U/L, 95% CI = 0.57-1.03, P < 0.001) were associated with prominent disease severity in COVID-19 infection. Moreover, 9532 patients with a higher serum level of cardiac troponin I (SMD = 0.51 U/L, 95% CI = 0.37-0.64, P < 0.001), high-sensitive cardiac troponin (SMD = 0.51 ng/L, 95% CI = 0.29-0.73, P < 0.001), high-sensitive cardiac troponin I (SMD = 0.51 pg/mL, 95% CI = 0.38-0.63, P < 0.001), high-sensitive cardiac troponin T (SMD = 0.85 U/L, 95% CI = 0.63-1.07, P < 0.001), creatine kinase-MB (SMD = 0.48 U/L, 95% CI = 0.32-0.65, P < 0.001), and myoglobin (SMD = 0.55 U/L, 95% CI = 0.45-0.65, P < 0.001) exhibited a prominent level of mortality from COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSION Cardiac biomarkers (cardiac troponin I, cardiac troponin T, high-sensitive cardiac troponin, high-sensitive cardiac troponin I, high-sensitive cardiac troponin T, creatine kinase-MB, and myoglobin) should be more frequently applied in identifying high-risk COVID-19 patients so that timely treatment can be implemented to reduce severity and mortality in COVID-19 patients.
-
9.
Vitamin D supplementation, COVID-19 and disease severity: a meta-analysis.
Shah, K, Saxena, D, Mavalankar, D
QJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians. 2021;(3):175-181
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Current meta-analysis aims to understand the effect of oral supplementation of vitamin D on intensive care unit (ICU) requirement and mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS Databases PubMed, preprint servers, and google scholar were searched from December 2019 to December 2020. Authors searched for the articles assessing role of vitamin D supplementation on COVID-19. Cochrane RevMan tool was used for quantitative assessment of the data, where heterogeneity was assessed using I2 and Q statistics and data was expressed using odds ratio with 95% confidence interval. RESULTS Final meta-analysis involved pooled data of 532 hospitalized patients (189 on vitamin D supplementation and 343 on usual care/placebo) of COVID-19 from three studies (Two randomized controlled trials, one retrospective case-control study). Statistically (p<0.0001) lower ICU requirement was observed in patients with vitamin D supplementation as compared to patients without supplementations (odds ratio: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.210-0.626). However, it suffered from significant heterogeneity, which reduced after sensitivity analysis. In case of mortality, vitamin D supplements has comparable findings with placebo treatment/usual care (odds ratio: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.413-2.113; p=0.87). The studies did not show any publication bias and had fair quality score. Subgroup analysis could not be performed due to limited number of studies and hence dose and duration dependent effect of vitamin D could not be evaluated. CONCLUSIONS Although the current meta-analysis findings indicate potential role of vitamin D in improving COVID-19 severity in hospitalized patients, more robust data from randomized controlled trials are needed to substantiate its effects on mortality.
-
10.
Low vitamin D status is associated with coronavirus disease 2019 outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Liu, N, Sun, J, Wang, X, Zhang, T, Zhao, M, Li, H
International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases. 2021;:58-64
Abstract
BACKGROUND Observational studies suggest that the risk and clinical prognosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are related to low vitamin D status; however, the data are inconsistent. OBJECTIVES We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between low vitamin D status and COVID-19. METHODS A systematic search was conducted with PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from database inception to September 25, 2020. The standardized mean difference (SMD) or odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was applied to estimate pooled results. Random - or fixed-effect models based on heterogeneity were used for the meta-analysis. Funnel plots and Egger regression tests were used to assess publication bias. RESULTS A total of ten articles with 361,934 participants were selected for meta-analysis. Overall, the pooled OR in the fixed-effect model showed that vitamin D deficiency or insufficiency was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 (OR = 1.43, 95% CI 1.00-2.05). In addition, COVID-19-positive individuals had lower vitamin D levels than COVID-19-negative individuals (SMD = -0.37, 95% CI = -0.52 to -0.21). Significant heterogeneity existed in both endpoints. Funnel plots and Egger regression tests revealed significant publication bias. CONCLUSIONS This systematic review and meta-analysis indicated that low vitamin D status might be associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 infection. Further studies are needed to evaluate the impact of vitamin D supplementation on the clinical severity and prognosis in patients with COVID-19. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION PROSPERO registration no: CRD42020216740.