Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Biomedicines ; 11(5)2023 Apr 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20237353

ABSTRACT

Vitamin D and its role in the coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been controversially discussed, with inconclusive evidence about vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) supplementation in COVID-19 patients. Vitamin D metabolites play an important role in the initiation of the immune response and can be an easily modifiable risk factor in 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (25(OH)D3)-deficient patients. This is a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind trial to compare the effect of a single high dose of vitamin D3 followed by treatment as usual (TAU) of daily vitamin D3 daily until discharge versus placebo plus TAU in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and 25(OH)D3-deficiency on length hospital stay. We included 40 patients per group and did not observe a significant difference in the median length of hospital stay (6 days in both groups, p = 0.920). We adjusted the length of stay for COVID-19 risk factors (ß = 0.44; 95% CI: -2.17-2.22), and center (ß = 0.74; 95% CI: -1.25-2.73). The subgroup analysis in patients with severe 25(OH)D3-deficiency (<25 nmol/L) showed a non-significant reduction in the median length of hospital stay in the intervention group (5.5 vs. 9 days, p = 0.299). The competing risk model with death did not reveal significant differences between the group in the length of stay (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.62-1.48, p = 0.850). Serum 25(OH)D3 level increased significantly in the intervention group (mean change in nmol/L; intervention: +26.35 vs. control: -2.73, p < 0.001). The intervention with 140,000 IU vitamin D3 + TAU did not significantly shorten the length of hospital stay but was effective and safe for the elevation of serum 25(OH)D3 levels.

2.
Trials ; 23(1): 790, 2022 Sep 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2038854

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite the fast establishment of new therapeutic agents in the management of COVID-19 and large-scale vaccination campaigns since the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in early 2020, severe disease courses still represent a threat, especially to patients with risk factors. This indicates the need for alternative strategies to prevent respiratory complications like acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) associated with COVID-19. Aviptadil, a synthetic form of human vasoactive intestinal peptide, might be beneficial for COVID-19 patients at high risk of developing ARDS because of its ability to influence the regulation of exaggerated pro-inflammatory proteins and orchestrate the lung homeostasis. Aviptadil has recently been shown to considerably improve the prognosis of ARDS in COVID-19 when applied intravenously. An inhaled application of aviptadil has the advantages of achieving a higher concentration in the lung tissue, fast onset of activity, avoiding the hepatic first-pass metabolism, and the reduction of adverse effects. The overall objective of this project is to assess the efficacy and safety of inhaled aviptadil in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 at high risk of developing ARDS. METHODS: This multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, randomized trial with 132 adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and at high risk for ARDS (adapted early acute lung injury score ≥ 2 points) is conducted in five public hospitals in Europe. Key exclusion criteria are mechanical ventilation at baseline, need for intensive care at baseline, and severe hemodynamic instability. Patients are randomly allocated to either inhale 67 µg aviptadil or normal saline (three times a day for 10 days), in addition to standard care, stratified by center. The primary endpoint is time from hospitalization to clinical improvement, defined as either hospital discharge, or improvement of at least two levels on the nine-level scale for clinical status suggested by the World Health Organization. DISCUSSION: Treatment strategies for COVID-19 are still limited. In the context of upcoming new variants of SARS-CoV-2 and possible inefficacy of the available vaccines and antibody therapies, the investigation of alternative therapy options plays a crucial role in decreasing associated mortality and improving prognosis. Due to its unique immunomodulating properties also targeting the SARS-CoV-2 pathways, inhaled aviptadil may have the potential to prevent ARDS in COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04536350 . Registered 02 September 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , Drug Combinations , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Phentolamine , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Saline Solution , Vasoactive Intestinal Peptide
3.
Trials ; 23(1): 114, 2022 Feb 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1690890

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused millions of deaths, and new treatments are urgently needed. Factors associated with a worse COVID-19 prognosis include old age (> 65 years), ethnicity, male sex, obesity, and people with comorbidities. Furthermore, vitamin D deficiency was reported as a predictor of poor prognosis in patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19. According to a recent clinical case series, vitamin D deficiency is a modifiable risk factor, which has the prospect of reducing hospital stay, intensive care, and fatal outcomes. Vitamin D has potent immunomodulatory properties, and its supplementation might improve important outcomes in critically ill and vitamin D-deficient COVID-19 patients. Despite the evidence that supports an association between vitamin D deficiency and COVID-19 severity, there is uncertainty about the direct link. Therefore, the aim of the trial is to assess if high-dose vitamin D supplementation has a therapeutic effect in vitamin D-deficient patients with COVID-19. METHODS: As the trial design, a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multi-center approach was chosen to compare a high single dose of vitamin D (140,000 IU) followed by treatment as usual (TAU) (VitD + TAU) with treatment as usual only (placebo + TAU) in patients with COVID-19 and vitamin D deficiency. DISCUSSION: Vitamin D substitution in patients with COVID-19 and vitamin D deficiency should be investigated for efficacy and safety. The study aim is to test the hypothesis that patients with vitamin D deficiency suffering from COVID-19 treated under standardized conditions in hospital will recover faster when additionally treated with high-dose vitamin D supplementation. Latest studies suggest that vitamin D supplementation in patients with COVID-19 is highly recommended to positively influence the course of the disease. With this randomized controlled trial, a contribution to new treatment guidelines shall be made. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04525820 and SNCTP 2020-01401.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vitamin D Deficiency , Aged , Double-Blind Method , Humans , Male , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Pandemics , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome , Vitamin D/adverse effects , Vitamin D Deficiency/diagnosis , Vitamin D Deficiency/drug therapy , Vitamins/adverse effects
4.
Praxis (Bern 1994) ; 110(1): 14-20, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1604570

ABSTRACT

We estimated the incidence of COVID-19-compatible symptoms, COVID-19 testing, and GP consultations during the first lockdown period in Switzerland (March-April 2020). A representative sample of the adult Swiss population completed an online survey. Of the 1022 respondents, 74 % reported at least one symptom, 5 % were tested for COVID-19, and 8 % contacted their GP regarding COVID-19. Testing was significantly associated with reduced sense of taste/smell, fever, cough with expectoration, and fatigue. Respondents at risk for severe COVID-19 were less likely to be tested but were five times more likely to contact their GP than those not at risk. We highlight the need to involve the appropriate health care setting to reach the vulnerable population when testing capacities are restricted (e.g. GPs).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19 Testing , Communicable Disease Control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Switzerland
5.
BMC Fam Pract ; 22(1): 181, 2021 09 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1403216

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In addition to the threat of the COVID-19 pandemic to physical health, mental health is challenged by the emotional response to the situation and the official measures taken to stop the pandemic. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of impaired mental well-being due to COVID-19 and explore associated factors. METHODS: The study was an observational, population-based, nationwide, cross-sectional online survey of a representative sample of the general Swiss population performed between March and April 2020. Participants reported on mental well-being, self-isolation/quarantine, their risk for developing severe COVID-19, and their work situation. Multivariable logistic regression analyses assessed risk factors for impaired mental well-being due to the pandemic. RESULTS: Data from 1022 individuals were analysed. The median age was 44 years (range 18 to 78) and 49% were women. A third of respondents reported that the COVID-19 pandemic impaired their mental well-being and almost half reported specific mental health concerns. Impaired mental well-being was associated with having health problems (OR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.29-2.74, vs no problems), being or living with someone at risk for severe COVID-19 (OR = 1.38, 95% CI: 1-1.9,), smoking (OR = 1.8, 95% CI: 1.24-2.61), living in urban residential environments (OR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.13-2.32, vs rural), not being able to work due to closed workplace (OR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.04-2.67), aged between 18 and 29 years old (OR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.32-3.01, vs 45 to 59 years old), and living in a single household (living with someone, OR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.44-0.97,vs single household). Overall, the most significant covariates of impaired mental well-being were specific mental health concerns: feeling depressed (OR = 7.21, 95% CI: 4.5-11.55), feeling less pleasure in doing things than before (OR = 6.28, 95% CI: 4.1-9.62), feeling anxious (OR = 6.13, 95% CI: 3.91-9.59) and feeling lonely (OR = 4.08, 95% CI: 2.53-6.58). CONCLUSION: Impaired mental well-being can carry long-term consequences. We encourage policymakers to implement strategies to promote mental health during this pandemic situation. Special attention should be addressed to the youngest, those at risk for severe COVID-19 and those with government-imposed work restrictions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Health , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Switzerland/epidemiology , Young Adult
6.
BMC Public Health ; 21(1): 853, 2021 05 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1215106

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The distribution of health care resources during a pandemic is challenging. The aim of the study was to describe the use of health care in a representative sample of the Swiss population during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in 2020, and to compare it to data from a survey conducted in 2018. METHODS: We conducted an observational, population-based, nationwide, repeated cross-sectional survey of the adult Swiss general population in 2018 and in March and April 2020 during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Recruitment and data acquisition was conducted by the Link Institute in Lucerne in representative samples of Swiss citizens in 2020 and in 2018. Variables of interest were estimates of health problems, health seeking behaviour, medication and health care use in the population. RESULTS: In total, we included data of 1980 individuals (in 2018 N = 958 and in 2020 N = 1022). Across both rounds of data collection the median age was 46 years (range = 18-79 years) and 50% were women. Per 1000 adults, half had at least one symptom and a quarter sought medical advice across both surveys. The most frequently consulted health providers in 2020 were general practitioners (GP) (180/1000), specialist physicians (41/1000), pharmacies (38/1000), the internet (26/1000) and accident and emergency units (25/1000). Compared to 2018, we noted a significant increase in the use of health providers during the pandemic, which was independent of demographic variables for the following health care providers: use of internet (OR = 9.8), pharmacy (OR = 2.64), accident and emergency units (OR = 2.54), and a significant decrease in the number of people who consulted specialist physicians (OR = 0.46). Overall, 76/1000 contacted their GP in relation to COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to 2018, GPs remained the most important source of medical advice for the population during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland. While the self-appraisal of health problems and of the need for medical advice remained constant, individuals seemed to change their provider choice during the pandemic, with an increased utilisation of accident and emergency units and pharmacies, which represent easily accessible and low-threshold medical services.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Delivery of Health Care , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Switzerland/epidemiology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL