COVID-19 Reinfection Rate and Related Risk Factors in Fars Province, Iran: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background: Reinfection with Coronavirus Diseases 2019 (COVID-19) has raised remarkable public health concerns globally. Therefore, the present retrospective cohort study intended to investigate COVID-19 reinfection in registered patients of Fars province in Iran from February 2020 to April 2021. Methods: The patients' data, including the COVID-19 infection, symptoms, comorbidities, and demographics, were collected using the Health Information Systems (HISs). The patients were divided into three groups in terms of the duration between the initial infection and reinfection, including 28-44, 45-89, and more than 90 days. Following the univariate analysis, logistic regression was used to investigate the factors effective on COVID-19 reinfection. Results: A total of 213768 patients had a positive Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test. The reinfection rate was 0.97% (2079 patients). Of these re-infected individuals, 14.9%, 18.5%, and 66.6% had their second positive test 28-45, 45-89, and ≥90 days later, respectively. The mean duration between the initial infection and reinfection was 130.56 days (29-370 days). The chance of reinfection was significantly higher in the youths (Odds Ratio (OR)=2.055; P<0.001), men (OR=1.283; P<0.001), urban population (OR=1.313; P<0.001), and healthcare providers (OR=4.453; P<0.001). The patients with chronic pulmonary diseases, chronic kidney diseases, and malignancy were 1.421 (P=0.036), 2.239 (P<0.001), and 3.437 (P<0.001) times, respectively, more likely prone to reinfection. Conclusion: The results of this study showed that there is a higher risk of reinfection in several vulnerable groups including healthcare providers, young individuals, residents of urban areas, men, and individuals with underlying diseases.

Global socioeconomic inequality in the burden of communicable and non-communicable diseases and injuries: an analysis on global burden of disease study 2019.

BACKGROUND: Examining the distribution of the burden of different communicable and non-communicable diseases and injuries worldwide can present proper evidence to global policymakers to deal with health inequality. The present study aimed to determine socioeconomic inequality in the burden of 25 groups of diseases between countries around the world in 2019. METHODS: In the current study data according to 204 countries in the world was gathered from the Human Development Report and the Global Burden of Diseases study. Variables referring to incidence, prevalence, years of life lost (YLL), years lived with disability (YLD) and disability adjusted life years (DALY) resulting by 25 groups of diseases and injuries also human development index was applied for the analysis. For measurement of socioeconomic inequality, concentration index (CI) and curve was applied. CI is considered as one of the popular measures for inequality measurement. It ranges from - 1 to + 1. A positive value implies that a variable is concentrated among the higher socioeconomic status population and vice versa. RESULTS: The findings showed that CI of the incidence, prevalence, YLL, YLD and DALY for all causes were - 0.0255, - 0.0035, - 0.1773, 0.0718 and - 0.0973, respectively. CI for total Communicable, Maternal, Neonatal, and Nutritional Diseases (CMNNDs) incidence, prevalence, YLL, YLD and DALY were estimated as - 0.0495, - 0.1355, - 0.5585, - 0.2801 and - 0.5203, respectively. Moreover, estimates indicated that CIs of incidence, prevalence, YLL, YLD and DALY for Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) were 0.1488, 0.1218, 0.1552, 0.1847 and 0.1669, respectively. Regarding injuries, the CIs of incidence, prevalence, YLL, YLD and DALY were determined as 0.0212, 0.1364, - 0.1605, 0.1146 and 0.3316, respectively. In the CMNNDs group, highest and lowest CI of DALY were related to the respiratory infections and tuberculosis (- 0.4291) and neglected tropical diseases and malaria (- 0.6872). Regarding NCDs, the highest and lowest CI for DALY is determined for neoplasms (0.3192) and other NCDs (- 0.0784). Moreover, the maximum and minimum of CI of DALY for injuries group were related to the transport injuries (0.0421) and unintentional injuries (- 0.0297). CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of all-causes and CMNNDs burden were more concentrated in low-HDI countries and there are pro-poor inequality. However, there is a pro-rich inequality for NCDs' burden i.e. it was concentrated in high-HDI countries. On the other hand, the concentration of DALY, YLD, prevalence, and incidence in injuries was observed in the countries with higher HDI, while YLL was concentrated in low-HDI countries.

Economic Viability and Efficacy of Day Case Versus Inpatient Tonsillectomy in Southern Iran.

OBJECTIVES: Day case tonsillectomy compared with inpatient tonsillectomy has increasingly become a trend for many patients undergoing elective surgeries. Unjustified stays of tonsillectomy can be avoided by day case surgery, which consequently reduces treatment costs. The aim of this study was therefore to determine the cost and effectiveness of day case tonsillectomy compared with inpatient tonsillectomy. METHODS: This cost-effectiveness study was performed on 300 patients from May 2017 to April 2018. Patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: day case (n = 150) and inpatient (n = 150). Consequences used in model included incidence of bleeding, blood transfusion, and reoperation frequency within 2 weeks after surgery and also the patients' pain during 24 hours after surgery. Costs were collected from societal perspective, so the costs included direct medical and nonmedical costs as well as indirect costs. One-way sensitivity analysis was conducted to measure the uncertainty effects of the parameters. The collected data were analyzed using software TreeAge and Excel 2016. RESULTS: Day case tonsillectomy was more cost-effective than inpatient. Mean total costs in day case and inpatient were $915.1 and $1227.9, respectively. Besides, the mean effectiveness was 0.921 and 0.914 percent, respectively. Also, 1-way sensitivity analysis proved the robustness of the results of study. CONCLUSIONS: Day case tonsillectomy is a cost-effective strategy and can be suggested as a good alternative for a wide range of patients after tonsillectomy. Supporting day case surgery for tonsillectomy cases can significantly reduce the financial burden.