-
PloS One 2024To review published Physical Activity (PA) on the Mental Health of Children and Adolescents aged 5 to 18 years during COVID-19 pandemic-induced school closures.
PROPOSE
To review published Physical Activity (PA) on the Mental Health of Children and Adolescents aged 5 to 18 years during COVID-19 pandemic-induced school closures.
METHODS
From the database creation to April 2022, 10 databases are retrieved, with 4427 records filtered, 14 included in this research. The research takes Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) evaluation standards.
RESULTS
The thesis selects 14 studies from 6 countries, involving 400009 children and adolescents. These studies happened during the lockdown of COVID-19 (from December 2019 to April 2021). During the lockdown of COVID-19, schools were closed, which was considered part of a more extensive lockdown. Schools were closed for 1 to 4 weeks. There were 10 high quality studies (71.4%) and 4 medium quality studies (28.6%). 4 studies report that the pandemic reduces the time of PA but increases the time of watching screen and sitting. 10 studies (71.4%) identify that PA is positive for the mental health, because it helps reduce mental symptoms to a certain extent, especially anxiety, depression, and emotional disorders. 5 studies show that PA may not improve the mental health of children and adolescents under 12 during the pandemic. 4 studies indicate that the influence of PA on mental health of children and adolescents is determined by the amount of activity, including the extent, intensity, frequency, and duration, etc.
CONCLUSIONS
In this narrative synthesis of reports from the class suspension period, reports that PA has a improve on the mental health of children and adolescents to a certain extent. it is found that PA may be helpful in reducing mental health symptoms of children and adolescents who are influenced by class suspension because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, stakeholders of the mental health of children and adolescents around the world should recommend PA because it is a practicable and beneficial way for long-term mental support.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Child; Adolescent; Mental Health; Exercise; Schools; Pandemics; SARS-CoV-2; Child, Preschool; Anxiety; Quarantine
PubMed: 38917211
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299158 -
PloS One 2024The propensity to accept vaccines and factors that affect vaccine acceptance and hesitancy will determine the overall success of the COVID-19 vaccination program....
The propensity to accept vaccines and factors that affect vaccine acceptance and hesitancy will determine the overall success of the COVID-19 vaccination program. Therefore, countries need to understand the factors that influence vaccine acceptance and hesitancy to prevent further future shocks, and it is necessary to have a thorough understanding of these factors. As a result, this study aims to review selected published works in the study's domain and conduct valuable analysis to determine the most influential factors in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy in Ghana. The review also explored the acceptance rate of COVID-19 vaccines in Ghana. We selected published works from 2021 to April 2023 and extracted, analyzed, and summarized the findings based on the key factors that influence COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy in Ghana, the acceptance rate in Ghana, the demographic factors that are often examined, and the study approach used to examine these factors. The study found that positive vaccination perception, safety, belief in vaccine efficacy, knowledge of COVID-19, and a good vaccine attitude influence COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in Ghana. The negative side effects of the vaccines, mistrust in the vaccine, lack of confidence in the vaccine's safety, fear, and spiritual and religious beliefs all played significant roles in influencing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. For this study, the COVID-19 acceptance rates observed in the reviewed articles ranged from 17.5% to 82.6%. The demographic parameters frequently included in these studies that have a significant impact include educational attainment, gender, religious affiliation, age, and marital status. The positive perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and concerns about its negative effects influenced Ghanaians' acceptance and hesitancy.
Topics: Humans; Ghana; COVID-19 Vaccines; COVID-19; Vaccination Hesitancy; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Vaccination; SARS-CoV-2; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
PubMed: 38917063
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305993 -
BMC Medicine Jun 2024To combat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), booster vaccination strategies are important. However, the optimal administration of booster vaccine platforms remains... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To combat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), booster vaccination strategies are important. However, the optimal administration of booster vaccine platforms remains unclear. Herein, we aimed to assess the benefits and harms of three or four heterologous versus homologous booster regimens.
METHODS
From November 3 2022 to December 21, 2023, we searched five databases for randomised clinical trials (RCT). Reviewers screened, extracted data, and assessed bias risks independently with the Cochrane risk-of-bias 2 tool. We conducted meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses (TSA) on our primary (all-cause mortality; laboratory confirmed symptomatic and severe COVID-19; serious adverse events [SAE]) and secondary outcomes (quality of life [QoL]; adverse events [AE] considered non-serious). We assessed the evidence with the GRADE approach. Subgroup analyses were stratified for trials before and after 2023, three or four boosters, immunocompromised status, follow-up, risk of bias, heterologous booster vaccine platforms, and valency of booster.
RESULTS
We included 29 RCTs with 43 comparisons (12,538 participants). Heterologous booster regimens may not reduce the relative risk (RR) of all-cause mortality (11 trials; RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.33 to 2.26; I 0%; very low certainty evidence); laboratory-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 (14 trials; RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.25; I 0%; very low certainty); or severe COVID-19 (10 trials; RR 0.51; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.33; I 0%; very low certainty). For safety outcomes, heterologous booster regimens may have no effect on SAE (27 trials; RR 1.15; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.95; I 0%; very low certainty) but may raise AE considered non-serious (20 trials; RR 1.19; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.32; I 64.4%; very low certainty). No data on QoL was available. Our TSAs showed that the cumulative Z curves did not reach futility for any outcome.
CONCLUSIONS
With our current sample sizes, we were not able to infer differences of effects for any outcomes, but heterologous booster regimens seem to cause more non-serious AE. Furthermore, more robust data are instrumental to update this review.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19 Vaccines; Immunization, Secondary; COVID-19; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; SARS-CoV-2; Adult; Quality of Life
PubMed: 38915011
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-024-03471-3 -
Physica Medica : PM : An International... Jun 2024This study reviewed and meta-analyzed evidence on radiomics-based hybrid models for predicting radiation pneumonitis (RP). These models are crucial for improving...
PURPOSE
This study reviewed and meta-analyzed evidence on radiomics-based hybrid models for predicting radiation pneumonitis (RP). These models are crucial for improving thoracic radiotherapy plans and mitigating RP, a common complication of thoracic radiotherapy. We examined and compared the RP prediction models developed in these studies with the radiomics features employed in RP models.
METHODS
We systematically searched Google Scholar, Embase, PubMed, and MEDLINE for studies published up to April 19, 2024. Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. We compared the RP prediction models developed in these studies and the radiomics features employed.
RESULTS
Radiomics, as a single-factor evaluation, achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.73, accuracy of 0.69, sensitivity of 0.64, and specificity of 0.74. Dosiomics achieved an AUROC of 0.70. Clinical and dosimetric factors showed lower performance, with AUROCs of 0.59 and 0.58. Combining clinical and radiomic factors yielded an AUROC of 0.78, while combining dosiomic and radiomics factors produced an AUROC of 0.81. Triple combinations, including clinical, dosimetric, and radiomics factors, achieved an AUROC of 0.81. The study identifies key radiomics features, such as the Gray Level Co-occurrence Matrix (GLCM) and Gray Level Size Zone Matrix (GLSZM), which enhance the predictive accuracy of RP models.
CONCLUSIONS
Radiomics-based hybrid models are highly effective in predicting RP. These models, combining traditional predictive factors with radiomic features, particularly GLCM and GLSZM, offer a clinically feasible approach for identifying patients at higher RP risk. This approach enhances clinical outcomes and improves patient quality of life.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
The protocol of this study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023426565).
PubMed: 38906047
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2024.103414 -
PloS One 2024COVID-19 and its prevention measures have had a significant impact on patients with non-communicable diseases (NCDs) by disrupting routine healthcare service and...
BACKGROUND
COVID-19 and its prevention measures have had a significant impact on patients with non-communicable diseases (NCDs) by disrupting routine healthcare service and increasing risk factors. These challenges were expected to be more severe in sub-Saharan Africa due to the lack of physical infrastructure and inadequate resources. The quantity of studies conducted was limited, and there was a lack of published systematic reviews in the specified region. This systematic review aimed to assess the indirect impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdown measures on individuals with non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in sub-Saharan African countries.
METHOD
This systematic review adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines and is registered with PROSPERO (ID CRD42023387755). Extensive searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases in December 2023, supplemented by a manual search of references, grey literature, and the WHO COVID-19 database. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies that reported on the impact of COVID-19 on NCD patients in sub-Saharan African countries, focusing on access to care, health outcomes, and factors related to NCDs. Critical appraisal of study quality was performed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) analytical cross-sectional studies critical appraisal tool. Data were extracted and synthesized, highlighting the main findings and relevant limitations.
FINDINGS
This review included 30 primary studies with a cumulative sample size of 25634 participants, conducted in seven sub-Saharan African countries. These studies demonstrated that the COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted regular NCD patient care provision, with regional variations. The studies also identified a reduction in patient health-seeking behavior and reduced medication adherence, leading to poor treatment outcome. Furthermore, the pandemic and related lockdowns have been implicated in the increased prevalence of substance use, decreased physical exercise, and increased mental health problems.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review identified the complex challenges faced by NCD patients in sub-Saharan Africa during the COVID-19 pandemic. It also underlines the need to consider the indirect impact on vulnerable populations while developing pandemic prevention and control strategies for the future. The current NCD management strategies should prioritize the restoration of access to essential healthcare services while considering the multifaceted risks posed by decreased physical activity, poor dietary practices, and increased substance use. The main limitation of this review was the study design and setting. All of the studies included in this review employed a cross-sectional design, which may result in a low quality of evidence. This study identified research conducted in only seven countries among the 46 UN-classified sub-Saharan nations, which may impair the generalizability of the result.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Africa South of the Sahara; Noncommunicable Diseases; SARS-CoV-2; Pandemics
PubMed: 38905254
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293376 -
Systematic Reviews Jun 2024Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) appear to be effective for improving the mental health of healthcare professionals (HCPs). However, the effectiveness of MBIs on...
BACKGROUND
Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) appear to be effective for improving the mental health of healthcare professionals (HCPs). However, the effectiveness of MBIs on extreme psychological trauma caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is largely unknown. The aim of this paper was to systematically review empirical studies of MBIs for HCPs carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic, to evaluate them and their effectiveness in different areas of mental health.
METHODS
The electronic databases searched were Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and PsycINFO. The date when each database was last searched was September 15, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs), and non-randomized non-controlled trials (NRNCTs) focused on MBIs for health care staff who were working in healthcare centers during the COVID-19 pandemic were included. All of them employed standardized measures of mental health. The review followed the best practices and reported using PRISMA guidelines. A data collection form, adapted from the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, was used to extract and synthesize the results. The methods used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies were the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the ROBINS-I Tool.
RESULTS
Twenty-eight studies were included in the systematic review. Overall, the methodological quality of the studies was moderate. The results showed the effectiveness of MBIs in improving levels of stress, mindfulness, and mental well-being. However, no conclusive results were found regarding the effectiveness of MBIs in improving the levels of burnout, anxiety, depression, sleep quality, and resilience of HCPs.
CONCLUSIONS
The MBIs for HCPs carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic have mainly contributed to improving stress, mindfulness, and mental well-being at a time of serious health emergency. However, more robust studies at a methodological level would have been desirable.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42021267621.
Topics: Humans; Mindfulness; COVID-19; Health Personnel; Mental Health; SARS-CoV-2; Burnout, Professional; Pandemics
PubMed: 38902795
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-024-02574-5 -
BMC Public Health Jun 2024Although the COVID-19 pandemic claimed a great deal of lives, it is still unclear how it affected mortality in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs). This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Although the COVID-19 pandemic claimed a great deal of lives, it is still unclear how it affected mortality in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs). This review summarized the available literature on excess mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic in LLMICs, including methods, sources of data, and potential contributing factors that might have influenced excess mortality.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on excess mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic in LLMICs in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and Scopus. We included studies published from 2019 onwards with a non-COVID-19 period of at least one year as a comparator. The meta-analysis included studies reporting data on population size, as well as observed and expected deaths. We used the Mantel-Haenszel method to estimate the pooled risk ratio with 95% confidence intervals. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42022378267).
RESULTS
The review covered 29 countries, with 10 countries included in the meta-analysis. The pooled meta-analysis included 1,405,128,717 individuals, for which 2,152,474 deaths were expected, and 3,555,880 deaths were reported. Calculated excess mortality was 100.3 deaths per 100,000 population per year, with an excess risk of death of 1.65 (95% CI: 1.649, 1.655, p < 0.001). The data sources used in the studies included civil registration systems, surveys, public cemeteries, funeral counts, obituary notifications, burial site imaging, and demographic surveillance systems. The primary techniques used to estimate excess mortality were statistical forecast modelling and geospatial analysis. One out of the 24 studies found higher excess mortality in urban settings.
CONCLUSION
Our findings demonstrate that excess mortality in LLMICs during the pandemic was substantial. However, estimates of excess mortality are uncertain due to relatively poor data. Understanding the drivers of excess mortality, will require more research using various techniques and data sources.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Developing Countries; Mortality; Pandemics; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 38902661
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-024-19154-w -
The Journal of Arthroplasty Jun 2024Sarcopenia is a progressive loss of skeletal muscle mass and function. It is associated with adverse outcomes after several orthopaedic procedures. However, its role in...
BACKGROUND
Sarcopenia is a progressive loss of skeletal muscle mass and function. It is associated with adverse outcomes after several orthopaedic procedures. However, its role in total joint arthroplasty(TJA) is not fully explored. Therefore, we wanted to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to answer the following questions:(1) What is the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients undergoing TJA?;(2) What factors are associated with the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients undergoing TJA?;What is the impact of sarcopenia on medical outcomes following TJA?;and (4) What is the impact of sarcopenia on surgical outcomes following TJA?
METHODS
Electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Google Scholar were searched. The data was pooled using the random-effects model and graphically represented by a forest plot. We included a total of thirteen studies, evaluating 399,097 patients.
RESULTS
The pooled prevalence of sarcopenia was 20.1%(95% CI[confidence interval] 13.6 to 28.8%; P<0.00001;I=94.7%) in total knee arthroplasty(TKA) and 5.2%(95% CI 0.1 to 69.7%;P=0.128;I=99.6%) in total hip arthroplasty(THA). Meta-regression found no links between age, sex, body mass index(BMI), diabetes, obesity, arthroplasty type, and sarcopenia prevalence in TJA. Sarcopenia increased risk of blood transfusion (OR [odds ratio] 4.68[95% CI 3.51 to 6.25];P<0.00001), pneumonia (OR 1.94[95% CI 1.14 to 3.30];P=0.01),Urinary Tract Infection UTI (OR 1.64 [95% CI 1.31 to 2.05];P<0.001), prosthetic fracture (OR 2.12[95% CI 1.51 to 2.98];P<0.0001), prosthetic dislocation (OR 1.99[95% CI 1.62 to 2.44];P<0.00001), and mechanical loosening (OR 1.78[95% CI 1.43 to 2.22];P<0.00001) in TKA. Sarcopenic patients were at an increased the risk of UTI (OR 1.79 [95% CI 1.32 to 2.43];P=0.0002) and prosthetic loosening (OR 1.97[95% CI 1.10 to 3.53];P=0.02) post-THA.
CONCLUSION
Baseline sarcopenia was prevalent in patients undergoing TJA. It was associated with an increased risk of UTI and prosthetic loosening following TKA and THA. Increased risk of blood transfusion, pneumonia, prosthetic fractures, and mechanical loosening following TKA.
PubMed: 38901711
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2024.06.021 -
Respiratory Research Jun 2024The term "post-COVID-19 condition" refers to the symptomatology that appears between four to twelve weeks after Covid-19 infection. These symptoms can persist for weeks... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The term "post-COVID-19 condition" refers to the symptomatology that appears between four to twelve weeks after Covid-19 infection. These symptoms can persist for weeks or even months, significantly diminishing the quality of life for affected individuals. The primary objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation programs and/or respiratory muscle training on respiratory sequelae in patients with post-COVID condition.
METHODS
The literature search was conducted in the following databases: PubMed, PEDro, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science. Randomized clinical trials were included in which participants were aged 18 years or older. Articles were excluded if at least one of the therapies did not involve pulmonary rehabilitation or respiratory muscle training, if the participants were COVID positive, if studies lacked results, and finally, if interventions were conducted without supervision or at home. This review only encompasses supervised non-virtual interventions. This study adheres to the PRISMA statement and has been registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023433843).
RESULTS
The outcomes obtained in the included studies are assessed across the following variables: Exercise capacity using the 6-minute walk test, Dyspnea, fatigue, Pulmonary function, Maximum inspiratory pressure, and Quality of life.
CONCLUSION
Despite the absence of a specific treatment at present, it was evident from this review that a well-structured pulmonary rehabilitation program that incorporates both aerobic and muscular strength exercises along with techniques and inspiratory muscle exercises was the most effective form of treatment.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Breathing Exercises; Treatment Outcome; Respiratory Muscles; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Exercise Tolerance; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
PubMed: 38890699
DOI: 10.1186/s12931-024-02857-4 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2024The rate and prognosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in patients with solid cancer tumors actively treated with immune... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
UNLABELLED
The rate and prognosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in patients with solid cancer tumors actively treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have not been fully determined. The goal of this meta-analysis was to explore this issue, which can be helpful to clinicians in their decision-making concerning patient treatment. We conducted a thorough search for relevant cohort studies in the databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Mortality and infection rate were the primary endpoints, and the incidence of severe or critical disease was the secondary result. A total of 6,267 cases (individual patients) were represented in 15 studies. Prior exposure to ICIs was not correlated with an elevated risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (relative risk (RR) 1.04, 95% CI 0.57-1.88, z = 0.12, = 0.905) or mortality (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.99-1.50, z = 1.90, = 0.057). However, the results of the meta-analysis revealed that taking ICIs before SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis increased the chance of developing severe or critical disease (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.09-2.10, z = 2.46, = 0.014). No significant inter-study heterogeneity was observed. The infection and mortality rates of SARS-CoV-2 in patients with solid tumors who previously received ICIs or other antitumor therapies did not differ significantly. However, secondary outcomes showed that ICIs treatment before the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection was significantly associated with the probability of severe or critical illness.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails PROSPERO, identifier CRD42023393511.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Neoplasms; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; SARS-CoV-2; Prognosis
PubMed: 38887296
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1259112