-
Journal of Ethnopharmacology Jun 2020Withania somnifera popularly known as Aswagandha or Indian Ginseng/Poison Gooseberry have thousands years of history of use in Indian traditional medicine. Besides,...
ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE
Withania somnifera popularly known as Aswagandha or Indian Ginseng/Poison Gooseberry have thousands years of history of use in Indian traditional medicine. Besides, finding place root of the plant as Indian Ginseng, Ayurveda also uses root of this plant as general health tonic, adaptogenic, nootropic, immunomodulatory etc. With its widespread and growing use, it becomes prudent to scientifically evaluate and document both the efficacy and safety of this plant in humans.
AIM OF THE STUDY
Aswagnadha root is rapidly gaining popularity abroad for use as medicine. Current article attempts to primarily review the human efficacy and safety of Aswagandha generated through clinical trials.
METHODS
A systematic search both for indexed and non-indexed literature was made for W. somnifera using various search engines and databases and the details of research articles pertaining to all clinical trials/human studies, animal studies addressing safety issues of CNS, CVS, general toxicity, mutagenicity, genotoxicity, reproductive safety and herb-drug interactions were reviewed and compiled comprehensively from full texts.
RESULTS
A total of 69 (39 pre-clinical and 30 clinical) studies documenting efficacy and safety aspects were identified and the desired information of these studies is comprehensively presented in this review. Retrieved thirty(30) human studies demonstrated reasonable efficacy of root preparations in subclinical hypothyroidism (1), schizophrenia (3), chronic stress (2), insomnia (2), anxiety (1), memory and cognitive improvement (2), obsessive-compulsive disorder (1), rheumatoid arthritis (2), type-2 diabetes (2), male infertility (6), fertility promotion activity in females (1), adaptogenic (3), growth promoter in children (3) and chemotherapy adjuvant (1). Reasonable safety of root preparations of Aswagandha has been established by these retrieved 30 human trials. No serious adverse events or any changes in haematological, biochemical or vital parameters were reported in these human studies. Only mild and mainly transient type adverse events of somnolence, epigastric pain/discomfort and loose stools were reported as most common (>5%); and giddiness, drowsiness, hallucinogenic, vertigo, nasal congestion (rhinitis), cough, cold, decreased appetite, nausea, constipation, dry mouth, hyperactivity, nocturnal cramps, blurring of vision, hyperacidity, skin rash and weight gain were reported as less common adverse events. Pre-clinical chronic toxicity studies conducted up to 8 months also found root extracts to be safe. No mutagenicity or genotoxicity was reported for the root; only mild CNS depression and increase in thyroxine (T4) levels were reported with rootby some studies. Further, there was no in vitro and in vivo inhibition seen for CYP3A4 and CYP2D6, the two major hepatic drug metabolizing enzymes.
CONCLUSION
Root of the Ayurvedic drug W. somnifera (Aswagandha) appears a promising safe and effective traditional medicine for management of schizophrenia, chronic stress, insomnia, anxiety, memory/cognitive enhancement, obsessive-compulsive disorder, rheumatoid arthritis, type-2 diabetes and male infertility, and bears fertility promotion activity in females adaptogenic, growth promoter activity in children and as adjuvant for reduction of fatigue and improvement in quality of life among cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Properly designed, randomized-controlled, large-size, prospective trials with standardized preparations are needed to ascertain efficacy of Aswagandha root in previously studied and other new indications.
Topics: Herb-Drug Interactions; Humans; Patient Safety; Plant Extracts; Plant Roots; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Withania
PubMed: 32201301
DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2020.112768 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2023Cystic fibrosis (CF) is an inherited life-limiting disorder. Over time persistent infection and inflammation within the lungs contribute to severe airway damage and loss... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cystic fibrosis (CF) is an inherited life-limiting disorder. Over time persistent infection and inflammation within the lungs contribute to severe airway damage and loss of respiratory function. Chest physiotherapy, or airway clearance techniques (ACTs), are integral in removing airway secretions and initiated shortly after CF diagnosis. Conventional chest physiotherapy (CCPT) generally requires assistance, while alternative ACTs can be self-administered, facilitating independence and flexibility. This is an updated review.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness (in terms of respiratory function, respiratory exacerbations, exercise capacity) and acceptability (in terms of individual preference, adherence, quality of life) of CCPT for people with CF compared to alternative ACTs.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was 26 June 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (including cross-over design) lasting at least seven days and comparing CCPT with alternative ACTs in people with CF.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. pulmonary function tests and 2. number of respiratory exacerbations per year. Our secondary outcomes were 3. quality of life, 4. adherence to therapy, 5. cost-benefit analysis, 6. objective change in exercise capacity, 7. additional lung function tests, 8. ventilation scanning, 9. blood oxygen levels, 10. nutritional status, 11. mortality, 12. mucus transport rate and 13. mucus wet or dry weight. We reported outcomes as short-term (seven to 20 days), medium-term (more than 20 days to up to one year) and long-term (over one year).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 21 studies (778 participants) comprising seven short-term, eight medium-term and six long-term studies. Studies were conducted in the USA (10), Canada (five), Australia (two), the UK (two), Denmark (one) and Italy (one) with a median of 23 participants per study (range 13 to 166). Participant ages ranged from newborns to 45 years; most studies only recruited children and young people. Sixteen studies reported the sex of participants (375 males; 296 females). Most studies compared modifications of CCPT with a single comparator, but two studies compared three interventions and another compared four interventions. The interventions varied in the duration of treatments, times per day and periods of comparison making meta-analysis challenging. All evidence was very low certainty. Nineteen studies reported the primary outcomes forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV)and forced vital capacity (FVC), and found no difference in change from baseline in FEV % predicted or rate of decline between groups for either measure. Most studies suggested equivalence between CCPT and alternative ACTs, including positive expiratory pressure (PEP), extrapulmonary mechanical percussion, active cycle of breathing technique (ACBT), oscillating PEP devices (O-PEP), autogenic drainage (AD) and exercise. Where single studies suggested superiority of one ACT, these findings were not corroborated in similar studies; pooled data generally concluded that effects of CCPT were comparable to those of alternative ACTs. CCPT versus PEP We are uncertain whether CCPT improves lung function or has an impact on the number of respiratory exacerbations per year compared with PEP (both very low-certainty evidence). There were no analysable data for our secondary outcomes, but many studies provided favourable narrative reports on the independence achieved with PEP mask therapy. CCPT versus extrapulmonary mechanical percussion We are uncertain whether CCPT improves lung function compared with extrapulmonary mechanical percussions (very low-certainty evidence). The annual rate of decline in average forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of FVC (FEF) was greater with high-frequency chest compression compared to CCPT in medium- to long-term studies, but there was no difference in any other outcome. CCPT versus ACBT We are uncertain whether CCPT improves lung function compared to ACBT (very low-certainty evidence). Annual decline in FEF was worse in participants using the FET component of ACBT only (mean difference (MD) 6.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 11.45; 1 study, 63 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One short-term study reported that directed coughing was as effective as CCPT for all lung function outcomes, but with no analysable data. One study found no difference in hospital admissions and days in hospital for exacerbations. CCPT versus O-PEP We are uncertain whether CCPT improves lung function compared to O-PEP devices (Flutter device and intrapulmonary percussive ventilation); however, only one study provided analysable data (very low-certainty evidence). No study reported data for number of exacerbations. There was no difference in results for number of days in hospital for an exacerbation, number of hospital admissions and number of days of intravenous antibiotics; this was also true for other secondary outcomes. CCPT versus AD We are uncertain whether CCPT improves lung function compared to AD (very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported the number of exacerbations per year; however, one study reported more hospital admissions for exacerbations in the CCPT group (MD 0.24, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.42; 33 participants). One study provided a narrative report of a preference for AD. CCPT versus exercise We are uncertain whether CCPT improves lung function compared to exercise (very low-certainty evidence). Analysis of original data from one study demonstrated a higher FEV % predicted (MD 7.05, 95% CI 3.15 to 10.95; P = 0.0004), FVC (MD 7.83, 95% CI 2.48 to 13.18; P = 0.004) and FEF (MD 7.05, 95% CI 3.15 to 10.95; P = 0.0004) in the CCPT group; however, the study reported no difference between groups (likely because the original analysis accounted for baseline differences).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We are uncertain whether CCPT has a more positive impact on respiratory function, respiratory exacerbations, individual preference, adherence, quality of life, exercise capacity and other outcomes when compared to alternative ACTs as the certainty of the evidence is very low. There was no advantage in respiratory function of CCPT over alternative ACTs, but this may reflect insufficient evidence rather than real equivalence. Narrative reports indicated that participants prefer self-administered ACTs. This review is limited by a paucity of well-designed, adequately powered, long-term studies. This review cannot yet recommend any single ACT above others; physiotherapists and people with CF may wish to try different ACTs until they find an ACT that suits them best.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Middle Aged; Cystic Fibrosis; Drainage, Postural; Physical Therapy Modalities; Quality of Life; Respiratory Therapy
PubMed: 37144842
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002011.pub3 -
Journal of Clinical Hypertension... Aug 2023Studies have shown that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are superior in primary and secondary prevention for cardiac mortality and morbidity to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Studies have shown that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are superior in primary and secondary prevention for cardiac mortality and morbidity to angiotensin receptor blocker (ARBs). One of the common side effects from ACEI is dry cough. The aims of this systematic review, and network meta-analysis are to rank the risk of cough induced by different ACEIs and between ACEI and placebo, ARB or calcium channel blockers (CCB). We performed a systematic review, and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to rank the risk of cough induced by each ACEI and between ACEI and placebo, ARB or CCB. A total of 135 RCTs with 45,420 patients treated with eleven ACEIs were included in the analyses. The pooled estimated relative risk (RR) between ACEI and placebo was 2.21 (95% CI: 2.05-2.39). ACEI had more incidences of cough than ARB (RR 3.2; 95% CI: 2.91, 3.51), and pooled estimated of RR between ACEI and CCB was 5.30 (95% CI: 4.32-6.50) Moexipril ranked as number one for inducing cough (SUCRA 80.4%) and spirapril ranked the least (SUCRA 12.3%). The order for the rest of the ACEIs are as follows: ramipril (SUCRA 76.4%), fosinopril (SUCRA 72.5%), lisinopril (SUCRA 64.7%), benazepril (SUCRA 58.6%), quinapril (SUCRA 56.5%), perindopril (SUCRA 54.1%), enalapril (SUCRA 49.7%), trandolapril (SUCRA 44.6%) and, captopril (SUCRA 13.7%). All ACEI has the similar risk of developing a cough. ACEI should be avoided in patients who have risk of developing cough, and an ARB or CCB is an alternative based on the patient's comorbidity.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Cough; Hypertension; Calcium Channel Blockers
PubMed: 37417783
DOI: 10.1111/jch.14695 -
European Review For Medical and... Jun 2022The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), also known as COVID-19, a viral outbreak that started in December 2019, eventually lead to a worldwide...
OBJECTIVE
The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), also known as COVID-19, a viral outbreak that started in December 2019, eventually lead to a worldwide pandemic. COVID-19 usually presents with flu-like symptoms, such as headaches, dry cough, fever, fatigue, myalgia, shortness of breath, diarrhea and loss of smell or taste. However, it can also have major effects on the cardiovascular system. Based on the available relevant literature, we aimed to elaborate the possible mechanisms influencing cardiovascular damage, myocardial injury and thromboembolic disease process in particular.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
After considering our inclusion and exclusion criteria, the systematic review included 8 studies in total.
RESULTS
In general, underlying cardiovascular diseases were associated with poorer clinical outcomes. This may be due to immunological dysregulation. The disease outcomes were also positively correlated with the severity of the disease, especially with myocardial injury. Thus, cardiac biomarkers, such as Troponin T, CK-MB and myoglobin could be utilized in prediction algorithms for deciphering the clinical outcome in COVID-19 patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Venous thromboembolisms were commonly encountered complications despite the administration of thromboprophylaxis, and they mostly presented as pulmonary embolisms, warranting the need for relevant investigations in hemodynamically unstable patients. However, more studies need to be conducted to better understand the mechanisms at play and the ensuing complications, to better treat COVID-19 patients.
Topics: Anticoagulants; COVID-19; Humans; SARS-CoV-2; Troponin T; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 35776052
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202206_29090 -
BMC Ophthalmology Jul 2023Dry eye disease (DED) is caused by a persistently unstable tear film leading to ocular discomfort and is treated mainly with tear supplementation. There is emerging... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Dry eye disease (DED) is caused by a persistently unstable tear film leading to ocular discomfort and is treated mainly with tear supplementation. There is emerging evidence that nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) agonists (e.g., varenicline and simpinicline) nasal sprays are effective for DED. Our systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of varenicline nasal spray (VNS) for DED treatment.
METHODS
The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of VNS versus placebo were included. The efficacy endpoint was the mean change in the anesthetized Schirmer test score (STS), a measure of basal tear production, from baseline. The safety endpoints were serious adverse events (SAEs) and adverse events (AEs). The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used for continuous outcomes, while the risk ratio (RR) was used to demonstrate dichotomous variables. The certainty of the evidence was rated utilizing the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The risk of bias assessment was conducted using the Revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials.
RESULTS
Three RCTs (n = 1063) met the eligibility criteria. All RCTs had a low risk of bias. The meta-analysis found a statistically significant increase in the mean STS change from baseline on day 28. The pooled analysis found no significant difference between VNS and placebo in the frequency of SAEs and ocular AEs. However, VNS had a significant effect on developing nasal cavity-related AEs.
CONCLUSION
VNS caused a highly significant improvement regarding the efficacy endpoint but caused an increased frequency of some nasal cavity-related AEs (i.e., cough and throat irritation). However, it caused neither SAEs nor ocular AEs. Included studies had a low risk of bias.
Topics: Humans; Nasal Sprays; Varenicline; Dry Eye Syndromes
PubMed: 37452334
DOI: 10.1186/s12886-023-03069-y -
Evidence-based Complementary and... 2019Fr. Schmidt ex Miq, the sole species in the genus (Apiaceae), has long been used in traditional Chinese medicine to treat fatigue, weakness, stomach-yin deficiency,... (Review)
Review
Fr. Schmidt ex Miq, the sole species in the genus (Apiaceae), has long been used in traditional Chinese medicine to treat fatigue, weakness, stomach-yin deficiency, lung heat, cough, dry throat, and thirst. Recently, has also been incorporated into a wide range of Chinese vegetarian cuisines. Based on the comprehensive information, advances in botany, known uses, phytochemistry, pharmacology, and toxicity of , we aim to highlight research gaps and challenges in studying as well as to explore its potential use in plant biotechnology. This may provide more efficient therapeutic agents and health products from . A literature search of SciFinder, ScienceDirect, Scopus, TPL, Google Scholar, Baidu Scholar, and Web of Science, books, PhD and MSc dissertations, and peer-reviewed papers on research was conducted and comprehensively analyzed. We confirmed that the ethnomedical uses of have been recorded in China, Japan, and Korea for thousands of years. A phytochemical investigation revealed that the primary active compounds were phenylpropanoids, coumarins, lignanoids, and flavonoids, organic acids and derivatives, terpenoids, polyacetylenes, steroids, nitrogen compounds, and others. Our analysis also confirmed that the extracts of possess immunoregulatory, antitumor, anti-inflammatory, hepatoprotective, antioxidant, neuroprotective, antibacterial, antifungal, and analgesic properties. Although further studies are required, there is strong evidence of the antitumor and immunoregulatory potential of . Also, more studies are needed to elucidate the mechanisms of action of its active compounds (e.g., falcarinol and panaxydiol) before any clinical studies can be carried out.
PubMed: 31915441
DOI: 10.1155/2019/1253493 -
JMIR MHealth and UHealth Jun 2022Mobile health (mHealth) apps have facilitated symptom monitoring of COVID-19 symptoms globally and have been used to share data with health care professionals and...
BACKGROUND
Mobile health (mHealth) apps have facilitated symptom monitoring of COVID-19 symptoms globally and have been used to share data with health care professionals and support disease prediction, prevention, management, diagnostics, and improvements in treatments and patient education.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this review is to evaluate the quality and functionality of COVID-19 mHealth apps that support tracking acute and long-term symptoms of COVID-19.
METHODS
We systematically reviewed commercially available mHealth apps for COVID-19 symptom monitoring by searching Google Play and Apple iTunes using search terms such as "COVID-19," "Coronavirus," and "COVID-19 and symptoms." All apps underwent three rounds of screening. The final apps were independently assessed using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS), an informatics functionality scoring system, and the Center for Disease Control and World Health Organization symptom guidelines. The MARS is a 19-item standardized tool to evaluate the quality of mHealth apps on engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information quality. Functionality was quantified across the following criteria: inform, instruct, record (collect, share, evaluate, and intervene), display, guide, remind or alert, and communicate. Interrater reliability between the reviewers was calculated.
RESULTS
A total of 1017 mobile apps were reviewed, and 20 (2%) met the inclusion criteria. The majority of the 20 included apps (n=18, 90%) were designed to track acute COVID-19 symptoms, and only 2 (10%) addressed long-term symptoms. Overall, the apps scored high on quality, with an overall MARS rating of 3.89 out of 5, and the highest domain score for functionality (4.2). The most common functionality among all apps was the instruct function (n=19, 95%). The most common symptoms included in the apps for tracking were fever and dry cough (n=18, 90%), aches and pains (n=17, 85%), difficulty breathing (n=17, 85%), tiredness, sore throat, headache, loss of taste or smell (n=16, 80%), and diarrhea (n=15, 75%). Only 2 (10%) apps specifically tracked long-term symptoms of COVID-19. The top 4 rated apps overall were state-specific apps developed and deployed for public use.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, mHealth apps designed to monitor symptoms of COVID-19 were of high quality, but the majority of apps focused almost exclusively on acute symptoms. Future apps should also incorporate monitoring long-term symptoms of COVID-19 and evidence-based educational materials; they should also include a feature that would allow patients to communicate their symptoms to specific caregivers or their own health care team. App developers should also follow updated technical and clinical guidelines from the Center for Disease Control and the World Health Organization.
Topics: COVID-19; Health Personnel; Humans; Mobile Applications; Reproducibility of Results; Telemedicine
PubMed: 35609313
DOI: 10.2196/36065 -
Journal of Preventive Medicine and... Jun 2021We aimed to estimate the prevalence of reported symptoms and comorbidities, and investigate the factors associated with age of the SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to estimate the prevalence of reported symptoms and comorbidities, and investigate the factors associated with age of the SARS-CoV-2 infected patients.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020182677) where the databases (PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, WHO, Semantic Scholar, and COVID-19 Primer) were searched for clinical studies published from January to April, 2020. Initially, the pooled prevalence of symptoms and comorbidity of COVID-19 patients were estimated using random effect model and the age -related factors were identified performing multivariate analysis [factor analysis].
RESULTS
Twenty-nine articles with 4,884 COVID-19 patients were included in this study. Altogether, we found 33 symptoms and 44 comorbidities where the most frequent 19 symptoms and 11 comorbidities were included in the meta-analysis. The fever (84%), cough/dry cough (61%), and fatigue/weakness (42%) were found more prevalent while acute respiratory distress syndrome, hypertension and diabetes were the most prevalent comorbid condition. The factor analysis showed positive association between a cluster of symptoms and comorbidities with patients' age. The symptoms comprising fever, dyspnea/shortness of breath, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, dizziness, anorexia and pharyngalgia; and the comorbidities including diabetes, hypertension, coronary heart disease, COPD/lung disease and ARDS were the factors positively associated with COVID-19 patient's age.
CONCLUSION
As an unique effort, this study found a group of symptoms (fever, dyspnea/shortness of breath, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, dizziness, anorexia and pharyngalgia) and comorbidities (diabetes, hypertension, coronary heart disease, COPD/lung disease and ARDS), associated with the age of COVID-19 infected patients.
Topics: Age Factors; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; COVID-19; Comorbidity; Female; Fever; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pandemics; Prevalence; Risk Factors; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34604574
DOI: 10.15167/2421-4248/jpmh2021.62.2.1946 -
Chinese Medicine Jun 2022To systematically review the clinical efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) with and without Western medicine (WM) for different severity of COVID-19. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the clinical efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) with and without Western medicine (WM) for different severity of COVID-19.
METHODS
CNKI, PubMed, Wanfang Database, ClinicalTrails.gov, Embase, ChiCTR and ICTRP were searched from 01 Jan, 2020 to 30 Jun, 2021. Two authors independently assessed all the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for trial inclusion, data extraction and quality assessment. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager software (RevMan 5.4.1). Evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcomes included total effectiveness rate. Secondary outcomes included improvements in symptom improvement and total adverse event rate. Different severity of COVID-19 patients was assessed in subgroup analysis. This study was registered with INPLASY, INPLASY202210072.
RESULTS
22 high quality RCTs involving 1789 participants were included. There were no trial used CHM alone nor compare placebo or no treatment. Compared with WM, combined CHM and WM (CHM-WM) treatment showed higher total effectiveness rate, lower symptom scores of fever, cough, fatigue, dry throat and pharyngalgia, shorter mean time to viral conversion, better Computerized Tomography (CT) image and blood results, fewer total adverse events and worse conditions (P < 0.05). Subgroup analysis showed that the total effectiveness rate of combined CHM-WM group was significantly higher than WM group, especially for mild and moderate patients. No significant differences in mortality and adverse events were found between combined CHM-WM and WM treatment. No serious adverse events and long-term outcomes were reported.
CONCLUSION
Current evidence supported the therapeutic effects and safety of combined CHM-WM treatment on COVID-19, especially for patients with mild and moderate symptoms. Long-term effects of therapy are worthy in further study.
PubMed: 35729581
DOI: 10.1186/s13020-022-00600-z -
Virusdisease Jun 2020Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the seventh-generation coronavirus family causing viral pandemic coronavirus disease (COVID-19) across... (Review)
Review
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the seventh-generation coronavirus family causing viral pandemic coronavirus disease (COVID-19) across globe affecting millions of people. The objectives of this study are to (1) identify the major research themes in COVID-19 literature, (2) determine the origin, symptoms and modes of transmission of COVID, (3) recommend the intervention and mitigation strategies adopted by the Governments globally against the spread of COVID-19 and the traumatization among the public? and (4) study the possible drugs/treatment plans against COVID-19. A systematic literature review and comprehensive analysis of 38 research articles on COVID-19 are conducted. An integrated Research focus parallel-ship network and keyword co-occurrence analysis are carried out to visualize the three research concepts in COVID-19 literature. Some of our observations include: (1) as SARS-CoV-2's RNA matches ~ 96% to SARS-CoV, it is assumed to be transmitted from the bats. (2) The common symptoms are high fever, dry cough, fatigue, sputum production, shortness of breath, diarrhoea etc. (3) A lockdown across 180 affected counties for more than a month with social-distancing and the precautions taken in SARS and MERS are recommended by the Governments. (4) Researchers' claim that nutrition and immunity enhancers and treatment plans such as arbidol, lopinavir/ritonavir, convalescent plasma and mesenchymal stem cells and drugs including remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and favipiravir are effective against COVID-19. This complied report serves as guide to help the administrators, researchers and the medical officers to adopt recommended intervention strategies and the optimal treatment/drug against COVID-19.
PubMed: 32656310
DOI: 10.1007/s13337-020-00604-z