Heart Rate Variability Measured from Wearable Devices as a Marker of Disease Severity in Tetanus.

Tetanus is a disease associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Heart rate variability (HRV) is an objective clinical marker with potential value in tetanus. This study aimed to investigate the use of wearable devices to collect HRV data and the relationship between HRV and tetanus severity. Data were collected from 110 patients admitted to the intensive care unit in a tertiary hospital in Vietnam. HRV indices were calculated from 5-minute segments of 24-hour electrocardiogram recordings collected using wearable devices. HRV was found to be inversely related to disease severity. The standard deviation of NN intervals and interquartile range of RR intervals (IRRR) were significantly associated with the presence of muscle spasms; low frequency (LF) and high frequency (HF) indices were significantly associated with severe respiratory compromise; and the standard deviation of differences between adjacent NN intervals, root mean square of successive differences between normal heartbeats, LF to HF ratio, total frequency power, and IRRR, were significantly associated with autonomic nervous system dysfunction. The findings support the potential value of HRV as a marker for tetanus severity, identifying specific indices associated with clinical severity thresholds. Data were recorded using wearable devices, demonstrating this approach in resource-limited settings where most tetanus occurs.

Prognostic indicators and outcomes of hospitalised COVID-19 patients with neurological disease: An individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Neurological COVID-19 disease has been reported widely, but published studies often lack information on neurological outcomes and prognostic risk factors. We aimed to describe the spectrum of neurological disease in hospitalised COVID-19 patients; characterise clinical outcomes; and investigate factors associated with a poor outcome. METHODS: We conducted an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of hospitalised patients with neurological COVID-19 disease, using standard case definitions. We invited authors of studies from the first pandemic wave, plus clinicians in the Global COVID-Neuro Network with unpublished data, to contribute. We analysed features associated with poor outcome (moderate to severe disability or death, 3 to 6 on the modified Rankin Scale) using multivariable models. RESULTS: We included 83 studies (31 unpublished) providing IPD for 1979 patients with COVID-19 and acute new-onset neurological disease. Encephalopathy (978 [49%] patients) and cerebrovascular events (506 [26%]) were the most common diagnoses. Respiratory and systemic symptoms preceded neurological features in 93% of patients; one third developed neurological disease after hospital admission. A poor outcome was more common in patients with cerebrovascular events (76% [95% CI 67-82]), than encephalopathy (54% [42-65]). Intensive care use was high (38% [35-41]) overall, and also greater in the cerebrovascular patients. In the cerebrovascular, but not encephalopathic patients, risk factors for poor outcome included breathlessness on admission and elevated D-dimer. Overall, 30-day mortality was 30% [27-32]. The hazard of death was comparatively lower for patients in the WHO European region. INTERPRETATION: Neurological COVID-19 disease poses a considerable burden in terms of disease outcomes and use of hospital resources from prolonged intensive care and inpatient admission; preliminary data suggest these may differ according to WHO regions and country income levels. The different risk factors for encephalopathy and stroke suggest different disease mechanisms which may be amenable to intervention, especially in those who develop neurological symptoms after hospital admission.

Evaluating clinical characteristics studies produced early in the Covid-19 pandemic: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical characterisation studies have been essential in helping inform research, diagnosis and clinical management efforts, particularly early in a pandemic. This systematic review summarises the early literature on clinical characteristics of patients admitted to hospital, and evaluates the quality of evidence produced during the initial stages of the pandemic. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Global Health databases were searched for studies published from January 1st 2020 to April 28th 2020. Studies which reported on at least 100 hospitalised patients with Covid-19 of any age were included. Data on clinical characteristics were independently extracted by two review authors. Study design specific critical appraisal tools were used to evaluate included studies: the Newcastle Ottawa scale for cohort and cross sectional studies, Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for case series and the Cochrane collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. RESULTS: The search yielded 78 studies presenting data on 77,443 people. Most studies (82%) were conducted in China. No studies included patients from low- and middle-income countries. The overall quality of included studies was low to moderate, and the majority of studies did not include a control group. Fever and cough were the most commonly reported symptoms early in the pandemic. Laboratory and imaging findings were diverse with lymphocytopenia and ground glass opacities the most common findings respectively. Clinical data in children and vulnerable populations were limited. CONCLUSIONS: The early Covid-19 literature had moderate to high risk of bias and presented several methodological issues. Early clinical characterisation studies should aim to include different at-risk populations, including patients in non-hospital settings. Pandemic preparedness requires collection tools to ensure observational studies are methodologically robust and will help produce high-quality data early on in the pandemic to guide clinical practice and public health policy. REVIEW REGISTRATION: Available at https://osf.io/mpafn.

A systematic review of randomised clinical trials for oral antibiotic treatment of acute pyelonephritis.

There is increasing resistance to the oral antibiotics currently recommended for the treatment of pyelonephritis, and increased healthcare costs are associated with the reliance on alternative intravenous agents. We, therefore, performed a systematic review of randomised controlled trials to determine the clinical efficacy and safety of oral antibiotics for the treatment of pyelonephritis in adults. A search of four major medical databases (MEDLINE, Embase+ Embase classic, CENTRAL and Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews) in addition to manual reference searching of relevant reviews was conducted. Clinical cure and adverse event rates were reported, and trial quality and bias were assessed. A total of 277 studies were reviewed; five studies matched all eligibility criteria and were included. Antibiotics included were cefaclor, ciprofloxacin, gatifloxacin, levofloxacin, lomefloxacin, loracarbef, norfloxacin, rufloxacin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. In included studies, the clinical success of the outpatient treatment of pyelonephritis by cefaclor, ciprofloxacin and norfloxacin at 4 to 6 weeks was comparable at between 83 to 95%. Relatively high rates of adverse events were noted in a trial of ciprofloxacin (24%) and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (33%). Significant heterogeneity between all aspects of the trial designs was identified, with all studies having a potential for bias. This review demonstrates a need for high-quality clinical trials into the oral antibiotic treatment of pyelonephritis, with more consistent designs and reporting of outcomes. There are data to support further research into oral norfloxacin and cefaclor for the outpatient treatment of pyelonephritis in adults.