Impact of the Use of Oral Antiviral Agents on the Risk of Hospitalization in Community Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients (COVID-19).

BACKGROUND: We examined the effectiveness of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in reducing hospitalization and deaths in a real-world cohort of nonhospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This was a territory-wide retrospective cohort study in Hong Kong. Nonhospitalized COVID-19 patients who attended designated outpatient clinics between 16 February and 31 March 2022 were identified. Patients hospitalized on the day of the first clinic appointment or used both oral antivirals were excluded. The primary endpoint was hospitalization. The secondary endpoint was a composite of intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation use, and/or death. RESULTS: Of 93 883 patients, 83 154 (88.6%), 5808 (6.2%), and 4921 (5.2%) were oral antiviral nonusers, molnupiravir users, and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir users, respectively. Compared with nonusers, oral antiviral users were older and had more comorbidities, lower complete vaccination rate, and more hospitalizations in the previous year. Molnupiravir users were older and had more comorbidities, lower complete vaccination rate, and more hospitalizations in the previous year than nirmatrelvir/ritonavir users. At a median follow-up of 30 days, 1931 (2.1%) patients were hospitalized and 225 (0.2%) patients developed the secondary endpoint. After propensity score weighting, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir use (weighted hazard ratio 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-0.95; P = .011) but not molnupiravir use (weighted hazard ratio 1.17; 95% CI, 0.99-1.39; P = .062) was associated with a reduced risk of hospitalization than nonusers. The use of molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was not associated with a lower risk of the secondary endpoint as compared with nonusers. CONCLUSION: Use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir but not molnupiravir was associated with a reduced risk of hospitalization in real-world nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Combined nicotine patch with gum versus nicotine patch alone in smoking cessation in Hong Kong primary care clinics: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of daily cigarette smoking has dropped to 10% in Hong Kong (HK) in 2017, however, smoking still kills 5700 persons per year. Studies suggest that abstinence rates are higher with combined NRT than single NRT, although local data on safety and benefits of combined NRT are lacking. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of combined NRT with single NRT among HK Chinese. METHODS: This is a one-year, two-arm, parallel randomised trial. Five hundred sixty smokers, who smoked ≥10 cigarettes/day for ≥1 year, were randomized to combined and single NRT. Combined NRT group received counseling and nicotine patch & gum. Single NRT group received counselling and nicotine patch. Primary outcome was abstinence rate measured as self-reported 7-day point prevalence with CO validated at 52 weeks. Secondary outcomes included smoking abstinence rates at 4, 12, & 26 weeks. Crude odds ratio and p-value were reported from logistic regression without adjustment; for trend analysis, adjusted odds ratio (AOR) and p-value were reported from Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) (controlling for time). All AORs were adjusted for age, sex, baseline CO and clusters. RESULTS: Abstinence rates at 4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks were all higher in the combined NRT group (35.8, 21.9, 16.8, 20.1%) compared with the single NRT group (28, 16.8, 11.2, 14.3%). At 4 weeks, combined NRT group was more likely to quit smoking (OR 1.43, 95% CI, 1.00 to 2.05) than the single NRT group. From GEE analysis, combined NRT group had a significantly higher abstinence rate (23.6%) than the single NRT group (17.6%) across repeated measures at all-time points. Combined NRT group was more likely to quit smoking (OR 1.43, 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.77). No significant difference in the side effect profile was detected between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Smokers given 8 weeks of combined NRT were more likely to quit smoking at 4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks compared with single NRT. Combined NRT was as well tolerated as single NRT and it should be further promoted in our community. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03836560 from ClinicalTrial.gov , 9 Feb 2019.

Treating Subthreshold Depression in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Behavioral Activation With Mindfulness.

PURPOSE: We undertook a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy of group-based behavioral activation with mindfulness (BAM) for treating subthreshold depression in primary care in Hong Kong. METHODS: We recruited adult patients aged 18 years or older with subthreshold depression from public primary care clinics and randomly assigned them to a BAM intervention group or a usual care group. The BAM group was provided with eight 2-hour weekly BAM sessions by trained allied health care workers. Patients in the usual care group received usual medical care with no additional psychological interventions. The primary outcome was depressive symptoms measured by the Beck Depression Inventory-II at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included incidence of major depressive disorder at 12 months. We assessed quality of life, activity and circumstances change, functional impairment, and anxiety at baseline, end of intervention, 5 months, and 12 months. RESULTS: We randomly allocated 115 patients to the BAM intervention and 116 patients to usual care. At 12 months, compared with usual care peers, BAM patients had a slightly more favorable change in levels of depressive symptoms on the Beck Depression Inventory-II (between-group mean difference in score = -3.85; 95% CI, -6.36 to -1.34; Cohen d = -0.46, 95% CI, -0.76 to -0.16). Incidence of major depressive disorder was lower with BAM (10.8% vs 26.8%, P = .01), whereas groups did not differ significantly on other secondary outcomes at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Group BAM appears to be efficacious for decreasing depressive symptoms and reducing the incidence of major depression among patients with subthreshold depression in primary care, although generalizability of our findings may be limited.