Suchergebnisse

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by coronavirus. Most of the people infected with the COVID-19 virus will experience mild-to-moderate respiratory illness and recover without requiring special treatment. Older people and those with underlying medical problems are more likely to develop serious illness. In December 2019, a novel coronavirus designated as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus 2 emerged in the city of Wuhan, China, and caused an outbreak of unusual viral pneumonia. Being highly transmissible, this novel coronavirus disease, also known as COVID-19, has spread fast all over the world. It has overwhelmingly surpassed SARS and Middle East respiratory syndrome in terms of both the number of infected people and the epidemic areas. Currently, there is no definite treatment for COVID-19 although some drugs are under investigation. Infections caused by these viruses are an enormous global health threat. Hence, the government has established fast-tracking research to develop rapid diagnostic test kits and vaccines at low cost. This review highlights the vaccines available against COVID 19 worldwide and its implications.

Abstract
Governments have proposed various policy responses to contain the spread of coronavirus disease 2019, but there is little available knowledge about how these policies are formulated. Here we quantify the herding effect in the pandemic containment policies issued by governments of different regions during the period of 18 January 2020 to 29 May 2020, using a modified Lakonishok–Shleifer–Vishny approach. The results show that all the policies exhibit some degree of herding, and the policy herding in the USA is significantly stronger than that of China but weaker than that of the rest of the world. Specifically, the overall herding intensity in the policy responses of the Northern China is greater than that of the Southern China. We believe that policy herding is linked with risk aversion, which is triggered by perceived uncertainty associated with significant risk events. This work highlights the significance of resource sufficiency and preparedness.

On December 31, 2019, the Chinese government announced an outbreak of a novel coronavirus, recently named COVID‐19. During the following weeks the international medical community has witnessed with unprecedented coverage the public health response both domestically by the Chinese government, and on an international scale as cases have spread to dozens of countries. While much regarding the virus and the Chinese public health response is still unknown, national and public health institutions globally are preparing for a pandemic. As cases and spread of the virus grow, emergency and other front‐line providers may become more anxious about the possibility of encountering a potential case. This review describes the tenets of a public health response to an infectious outbreak by using recent historical examples and also by characterizing what is known about the ongoing response to the COVID‐19 outbreak. The intent of the review is to empower the practitioner to monitor and evaluate the local, national and global public health response to an emerging infectious disease.

In early December 2019, an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), occurred in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China. On January 30, 2020 the World Health Organization declared the outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. As of February 14, 2020, 49,053 laboratory-confirmed and 1,381 deaths have been reported globally. Perceived risk of acquiring disease has led many governments to institute a variety of control measures. We conducted a literature review of publicly available information to summarize knowledge about the pathogen and the current epidemic. In this literature review, the causative agent, pathogenesis and immune responses, epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment and management of the disease, control and preventions strategies are all reviewed.

"The astounding speed and global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was unforeseen when the first cases of this illness were reported in December 2019 from Wuhan, China. By the end of January 2020, nearly 8000 cases had been reported globally from 19 countries and the World Health Organization declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. It soon became apparent this was not going to be a focal or controllable outbreak. In the 2 years that have followed, the world has truly been turned upside down with countless severe disruptions to life and economies worldwide. The challenges to the healthcare systems in high, middle, and low-income countries alike have been enormous. The strain on individuals and institutions has been dealt with by interventions of varying success. The mental and physical health of workers has been a prime focus in the global response to the pandemic. The scientific community has responded rapidly, if imperfectly at times, to death and disability imposed by SARS-CoV-2. Important and dramatic advances in care of critically ill inpatients have been made, primarily using potent anti-inflammatory interventions such as glucocorticoids and tocilizumab. Multiple effective vaccines have been developed with record speed using multiple different vaccine platforms, and have been disseminated globally. Much work still needs to be done combatting vaccine hesitancy worldwide and providing the vaccines in the developing world"--

In early December 2019, an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), occurred in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China. On January 30, 2020 the World Health Organization declared the outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. As of February 14, 2020, 49,053 laboratory-confirmed and 1,381 deaths have been reported globally. Perceived risk of acquiring disease has led many governments to institute a variety of control measures. We conducted a literature review of publicly available information to summarize knowledge about the pathogen and the current epidemic. In this literature review, the causative agent, pathogenesis and immune responses, epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment and management of the disease, control and preventions strategies are all reviewed. ; Peer Reviewed ; https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/155556/1/Wagner_Literature_Review.pdf ; https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/155556/4/DeepBluepermissions_agreement-CCBYandCCBY-NC_ORCID_Wagner.docx ; 41 ; Description of Wagner_Literature_Review.pdf : Article ; Description of DeepBluepermissions_agreement-CCBYandCCBY-NC_ORCID_Wagner.docx : Deep Blue sharing agreement ; Description of DeepBluepermissions_agreement-CCBYandCCBY-NC_ORCID_Wagner.docx : Deep Blue sharing agreement

The new type of Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly contagious pathogen that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome and can be transmitted from human to human. COVID-19, which has been declared as a pandemic by the world health organization and is infected with more than 50 million people, is also responsible for the death of more than 1 million people. There is no sufficient data from randomized clinical trials that any potential treatment improves outcomes in COVID-19 patients. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, antivirals such as favipiravir, lopinavir/ritonavir, immunomodulatory agents tocilizumab, siltuximab, and sarilumab, and anti-inflammatory drugs such as steroids are used for the treatment of COVID-19. Repurposing drugs can provide new treatment options faster than discovering new drugs due to the known safety profiles of existing drugs. On the other hand, there are new drug and vaccine trials for COVID-19. Many researchers, governmental or non-governmental institutions having clinical trials for COVID-19 drugs and vaccines. In this comprehensive review, we investigate the clinical features, management, and treatment of COVID-19 and possible adverse effects and important information related to drugs used for COVID-19. For future preparedness and readiness, new laws and legislations should be constituted. Besides, emergency teams and budgets should be prepared as well. .

In order to find out and predict the impact on the spread of infectious diseases, we established a class of kinetic models, gave formulas for calculating numbers, analyzed inflection points and predicted the development trend of new coronaviruses, and used C0VID-19 as an example for numerical simulation . Background: In December 2019, China's first unexplained pneumonia patient was admitted to Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital, Hubei, China. Since then, COVID-19 has expanded rapidly in Wuhan, Hubei, China. Within a few months, COVID-19 soon It spread to 34 provincial administrative regions and neighboring countries across China, and Hubei Province immediately became the hardest hit by the new coronavirus. New coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19) As of April 17, 2020, the cumulative number of confirmed cases in China was 83,824, the cumulative number of deaths was 3352, the cumulative number of foreign diagnoses was 2,090000, and the cumulative deaths were 141,601. The outbreak and spread of COVID-19 have seriously affected people's Good health has caused huge economic losses in our country. It is of far-reaching significance to explore effective prevention and control of infectious diseases and minimize the harm caused by infectious diseases. In an emergency situation, we strive to establish an accurate infectious disease dynamic model to predict the development and spread of COVID-19, and make some effective short-term predictions on this basis. The construction of this model is relevant to all aspects of mainland China. It is helpful for the department to carry out the prevention and monitoring of the new coronavirus. It also strives for more time for the clinical trials of Chinese researchers and the research of vaccines against the virus to eliminate the new coronavirus as soon as possible. Methods: Collect and compare and integrate the spread of COVID-19 in Hong Kong, record the spread of the virus in the population and the protest measures of relevant government departments, and establish a dynamic model of infectious diseases based on the original data changes. Interpretation: In the early stage of the epidemic, due to inadequate anti-epidemic measures, the epidemic in Hong Kong quickly spread. However, with the gradual understanding of COVID-19, the epidemic began to be gradually controlled, and then the growth was blocked.

Background: The current ongoing pandemic outbreak of COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019) has globally affected 213 countries and territories with more than 2.5 million confirmed cases and thousands of casualties. The unpredictable and uncertain COVID-19 outbreak has the potential of adversely affecting the psychological health on individual and community level. Currently all efforts are focused on the understanding of epidemiology, clinical features, mode of transmission, counteract the spread of the virus, and challenges of global health, while crucially significant mental health has been overlooked in this endeavor. Method: This review is to evaluate past outbreaks to understand the extent of adverse effects on psychological health, psychological crisis intervention, and mental health management plans. Published previous and current articles on PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Elsevier about psychological impact of infectious diseases outbreaks and COVID-19 has been considered and reviewed. Comments: COVID-19 is leading to intense psychosocial issues and comprising mental health marking a secondary health concern all around the world. Globally implementing preventive and controlling measures, and cultivating coping and resilience are challenging factors; modified lifestyle (lockdown curfew, self-isolation, social distancing and quarantine); conspiracy theories, misinformation and disinformation about the origin, scale, signs, symptoms, transmission, prevention and treatment; global socioeconomic crisis; travel restrictions; workplace hazard control; postponement and cancellation of religious, sports, cultural and entertainment events; panic buying and hoarding; incidents of racism, xenophobia, discrimination, stigma, psychological pressure of productivity, marginalization and violence; overwhelmed medical centers and health organizations, and general impact on education, politics, socioeconomic, culture, environment and climate – are some of the risk factors to aggravate further problems.

BACKGROUND: The current ongoing pandemic outbreak of COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019) has globally affected 213 countries and territories with more than 2.5 million confirmed cases and thousands of casualties. The unpredictable and uncertain COVID-19 outbreak has the potential of adversely affecting the psychological health on individual and community level. Currently all efforts are focused on the understanding of epidemiology, clinical features, mode of transmission, counteract the spread of the virus, and challenges of global health, while crucially significant mental health has been overlooked in this endeavor. METHOD: This review is to evaluate past outbreaks to understand the extent of adverse effects on psychological health, psychological crisis intervention, and mental health management plans. Published previous and current articles on PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Elsevier about psychological impact of infectious diseases outbreaks and COVID-19 has been considered and reviewed. COMMENTS: COVID-19 is leading to intense psychosocial issues and comprising mental health marking a secondary health concern all around the world. Globally implementing preventive and controlling measures, and cultivating coping and resilience are challenging factors; modified lifestyle (lockdown curfew, self-isolation, social distancing and quarantine); conspiracy theories, misinformation and disinformation about the origin, scale, signs, symptoms, transmission, prevention and treatment; global socioeconomic crisis; travel restrictions; workplace hazard control; postponement and cancellation of religious, sports, cultural and entertainment events; panic buying and hoarding; incidents of racism, xenophobia, discrimination, stigma, psychological pressure of productivity, marginalization and violence; overwhelmed medical centers and health organizations, and general impact on education, politics, socioeconomic, culture, environment and climate – are some of the risk factors to aggravate further problems.

The impact of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced the governments worldwide to deal with an unprecedented health crisis. The aim of this review is to summarize what happened to cardiac surgery worldwide during the first wave of this pandemic. A literature search was performed to extrapolate key concepts regarding guidelines and reorganization of cardiac surgery wards during COVID-19. Supporting literature was also included to discuss the hot topics related to COVID-19 and cardiac surgery. Hence, both official documents from national scientific societies and single- or multiple-center experiences during the pandemics are reviewed and discussed. In Italy, the first western country hit by the pandemic, two different models were proposed to cope with the need for ICU/ward beds and to reallocate cardiac surgical services: Hub-and-Spoke system ('Hubs', dedicated to perform urgent and nondeferrable surgery, and 'Spokes', turned into COVID centers) and/or a progressive reduction in surgical activity. Worldwide, several guidelines/consensus statements were published, suggesting how to deal with the outbreak. Two different approaches for stratifying surgical indications were proposed: dynamic, based on the number of hospitalized COVID-19 patients; static, based only on the severity of the cardiovascular disease. Moreover, the importance of personal protective equipment was stressed. Several measures should have been adopted to deal with an unprecedented need for healthcare resources allocation to care for COVID-19 patients, putting the healthcare systems under serious stress. Cardiac surgery has, as have most surgical activities, been asked to reduce its own activity, giving priority to emergency and nondeferrable cases.

The ongoing 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) crisis has led governments to impose measures including mask wearing, physical distancing, and increased hygiene and disinfection, combined with home confinement and economic shutdown. Such measures have heavy negative consequences both on public health and the economy. However, these same measures have positive outcomes as "side effects" that are worth mentioning since they contribute to the improvement of some aspects of the population health. For instance, mask wearing helps to reduce allergies as well as the transmission of other airborne disease-causing pathogens. Physical distancing and social contact limitation help limit the spread of communicable diseases, and economic shutdown can reduce pollution and the health problems related to it. Decision makers could get inspired by these positive "side effects" to tackle and prevent diseases like allergies, infectious diseases and noncommunicable diseases, and improve health care and pathology management. Indeed, the effectiveness of such measures in tackling certain health problems encourages inspiration from COVID-19 measures towards managing selected health problems. However, with the massive damage COVID-19-related measures have caused to countries' economies and people's lives, the question of how to balance the advantages and disadvantages of these measures in order to further optimize them needs to be debated among health care professionals and decision makers.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) tremendously impacts the physical and mental health of humans worldwide. Consequently, studies on COVID-19 remain extensive. However, most of them were mainly focused on the pathological mechanisms and treatment methods from medical perspectives. Various reports have indicated that COVID-19 is closely related to stigma and discrimination, but little statistical information has been integrated quantitatively to describe the situation in China. Thus, this study investigated the COVID-19-related stigma of individuals. We collected the online survey data from 1,920 Chinese participants from October to December 2020. Findings showed that 306 (15.94%), 285 (14.84%), 265 (13.80%), and 100 (5.21%) participants endorsed stigma toward individuals in high-risk areas, recovered patients with COVID-19, families of recovered patients with COVID-19, and frontline healthcare providers, respectively. To understand the possible factors that could impact the COVID-19-related stigma, knowledge about COVID-19 was investigated. Generally, knowledge about COVID-19 was negatively associated with COVID-19-related stigma in general, while no significant relationship existed between the knowledge about COVID-19 and the COVID-19-related stigma in the groups who had held COVID-19-related stigma. Ultimately, individuals showed COVID-19-related stigma toward recovered patients and their families, individuals in high-risk areas, and frontline healthcare providers to some extent. The results of this study can provide reference to nations, governments, and organizations in addressing the stigma issues raised by the COVID-19 pandemic.