A quick scoping review of the first year of vaccination against the COVID-19 pandemic: Do we need more shots or time?

BACKGROUND: The emergence of new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variants, along with the waning of vaccine-induced immunity, has increased breakthrough infections and urged booster jabs and debates. In the short term, the administration of booster doses has been reported to be safe and enhance severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-specific neutralizing antibody levels. However, the effects of these doses on the pandemic trajectory and herd immunity are unclear. There is insufficient evidence that a third booster shot of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine maintains longer immunity and covers new viral variants. The lack of sufficient evidence, combined with the fact that millions of people have not yet received 1 or 2 jabs of the COVID-19 vaccine, has raised concerns regarding the call for booster vaccinations. METHODS: We conducted a quick scoping review to explore the literature on the need for a booster COVID-19 vaccination from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022. RESULTS: Sixty-one relevant publications were identified, of which 17 were related to waning immunity after 2 doses of the vaccine among the general population or healthcare workers, 19 were related to the third or booster dose of vaccination after the second dose among the general population or healthcare workers, and 25 were related to booster dose among immunocompromised patient. CONCLUSIONS: Initially, the need for a booster dose was equivocal; however, several studies demonstrated the benefit of the booster dose over time. Adequate scientific information is required regarding the administration of booster doses to the general population as well as the high-risk individuals.

A quick scoping review of the first year of vaccination against the COVID-19 pandemic: Do we need more shots or time?

Background: The emergence of new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variants, along with the waning of vaccine-induced immunity, has increased breakthrough infections and urged booster jabs and debates. In the short term, the administration of booster doses has been reported to be safe and enhance severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2–specific neutralizing antibody levels. However, the effects of these doses on the pandemic trajectory and herd immunity are unclear. There is insufficient evidence that a third booster shot of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine maintains longer immunity and covers new viral variants. The lack of sufficient evidence, combined with the fact that millions of people have not yet received 1 or 2 jabs of the COVID-19 vaccine, has raised concerns regarding the call for booster vaccinations. Methods: We conducted a quick scoping review to explore the literature on the need for a booster COVID-19 vaccination from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022. Results: Sixty-one relevant publications were identified, of which 17 were related to waning immunity after 2 doses of the vaccine among the general population or healthcare workers, 19 were related to the third or booster dose of vaccination after the second dose among the general population or healthcare workers, and 25 were related to booster dose among immunocompromised patient. Conclusions: Initially, the need for a booster dose was equivocal;however, several studies demonstrated the benefit of the booster dose over time. Adequate scientific information is required regarding the administration of booster doses to the general population as well as the high-risk individuals.

Epidemiologic characteristics, clinical management, and public health implications of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, caused by the pathogenic severe acute respiratory syndrome-2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, is exponentially spreading across the globe. METHODS: The current systematic review was performed utilising the following electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE. We searched for the keywords "COVID-19 AND "pregnancy" between January 1, 2020 until December 31, 2020. RESULTS: Out of 4005 records which were identified, 36 original studies were included in this systematic review. Pooled prevalence of vertical transmission was 10%, 95% CI: 4-17%. Pooled prevalence of neonatal mortality was 7%, 95% CI: 0-21%. CONCLUSION: The contemporary evidence suggests that the incubation period of COVID-19 is 2-14 days, and this infection could be transmitted even from the infected asymptomatic individuals. It is found that the clinical presentation of pregnant women with COVID-19 infection is comparable with the infected non-pregnant females, and the frequent symptoms were fever, cough, myalgia, sore throat and malaise. Some cases have severe maternal morbidity and perinatal deaths secondary to COVID-19 infection. Under these circumstances, pregnant women should focus on maintaining personal hygiene, proper nutrition and extreme social distancing to reduce the risk of COVID-19. Therefore, systematic data reporting for evidence based clinical assessment, management and pregnancy outcomes is essential for preventing of COVID-19 infection among pregnant women.

Implementation of vascular surgery teleconsultation during the COVID-19 pandemic: Insights from the outpatient vascular clinics in a tertiary care hospital in Qatar.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has sparked a surge in the use of virtual communication tools for delivering clinical services for many non-urgent medical needs allowing telehealth or telemedicine, to become an almost inevitable part of the patient care. However, most of patients with vascular disease may require face-to-face interaction and are at risk of worse outcomes if not managed in timely manner. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe the utilization of telemedicine services in the outpatient vascular surgery clinics in a tertiary hospital. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data on all vascular outpatient encounters during 2019 and 2020 was conducted and compared to reflect the pattern of practice prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The study showed that 61% of the total patient encounters in 2020 were reported through teleconsultation. Females were the majority of patients who sought the virtual vascular care. Consultations for the new cases decreased from 29% to 26% whereas, the follow-up cases increased from 71% to 74% in 2020 (p = 0.001). The number of procedures performed in the vascular outpatient clinics decreased by 46% in 2020 when compared to 2019. This decrease in procedures was more evident in the duration from February 2020 to April 2020 in which the procedures decreased by 97%. The proportion of procedures represented 22.6% of the total encounters in 2019 and 10.5% of the encounters during 2020, (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Teleconsultation, along with supporting practice guidelines, can be used to maximize the efficiency of care in vascular surgery patients during the pandemic and beyond. Adoption of the 'hybrid care' which combines both virtual and in-person services as an ongoing practice requires evidence obtained through audits and studies on patients and healthcare providers levels. It is essential to establish a clear practice that ensures patient's needs.

Publications and retracted articles of COVID-19 pharmacotherapy-related research: A systematic review.

The current COVID-19 pandemic situation has stimulated an unplanned clinical research paradigm which is evident from the surge of clinical trial registrations and the increasing number of COVID-related publications. We aimed to explore the standards for research conduction, publications and retraction of articles related to COVID-19 pharmacotherapy research during the pandemic. We analysed data from the contemporary literatures on studies reporting pharmacological agents for COVID-19 using MEDLINE, PubMed, WHO database and Google Scholar between January 01, 2020 and March 20, 2021. The initial search revealed a total of 61,801 articles. Based on the inclusion criteria, a total of 124 studies related to various pharmacological agents were included in the final analysis. Most of the studies were reported from the United States (n = 30, 24%). Of the 124 studies, 50 (40%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Immunomodulatory drugs-related (n = 17, 34%) and COVID-19 vaccine-related studies (n = 14, 28%) were the main topics in the relevant RCTs. The median days for dissemination of findings in journals were 114 days (IQR 61-189). A comparative analysis revealed that RCTs were disseminated earlier (median 79 days; IQR 52-131) when compared to observational studies (median = 144 days; IQR 69-206) (p = 0.003). Six papers were retracted from high impact journals; in which the average period till publication was 33 days. Retraction of papers occurred within 10-48 days. Expedited reviews, research approval and early publications of COVID-19 related pharmaceutical studies could have an impact on the quality of publications. However, the huge number of publications in short time creates confusion for readers during the early phases of the pandemic. Retraction of papers is alarming but ensures research integrity and correctness of scientific information. These abbreviated processes could affect patient care and public awareness. It is imperative to follow rapid but rigours ethical standards for research approval and peer-review process for publications during health pandemics.

Development and implementation of a potential coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine: A systematic review and meta-analysis of vaccine clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: To date, there is no comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the suitability of COVID-19 vaccines for mass immunization. The current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of novel COVID-19 vaccine candidates under clinical trial evaluation and present a contemporary update on the development and implementation of a potential vaccines. METHODS: For this study PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase electronic databases were used to search for eligible studies on the interface between novel coronavirus and vaccine design until December 31, 2020. RESULTS: We have included fourteen non-randomized and randomized controlled phase I-III trials. Implementation of a universal vaccination program with proven safety and efficacy through robust clinical evaluation is the long-term goal for preventing COVID-19. The immunization program must be cost-effective for mass production and accessibility. Despite pioneering techniques for the fast-track development of the vaccine in the current global emergency, mass production and availability of an effective COVID-19 vaccine could take some more time. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a revisiting of the reported solicited and unsolicited systemic adverse events for COVID-19 candidate vaccines. Hence, it is alarming to judiciously expose thousands of participants to COVID-19 candidate vaccines at Phase-3 trials that have adverse events and insufficient evidence on safety and effectiveness that necessitates further justification.

Impact of COVID-19 on community health: A systematic review of a population of 82 million

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, caused by the pathogenic severe acute respiratory syndrome-2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, is exponentially spreading across the globe. As there is paucity of published literature, the influence of COVID-19 on community health remains unclear. Therefore, we aimed to conduct a systematic review of the literature on the impact of COVID-19 on community health. The current systematic review was performed utilizing electronic databases, i.e., PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. We searched for the keywords "COVID-19" AND "community health" between January 1, 2020, until May 10, 2020. Although, limited evidence is available regarding quarantine to prevent COVID‐19, most studies considered quarantine as an essential public health measure to minimize rate of infection and mortality. Under these circumstances, people should focus on maintaining personal hygiene, proper nutrition, and extreme social distancing to reduce the risk of COVID-19. Besides, that there is a need to provide professional psychological support to reduce mental ill-health. We have highlighted two different public health approaches in South Asian countries, namely Nepal and India.