Colchicine use might be associated with lower mortality in COVID-19 patients: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Colchicine was recently repurposed for the management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This rapid review and meta-analysis aimed to assess colchicine's impact on mortality outcomes in COVID-19 patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar since their inception till 25/03/2021 for observational or controlled studies that reported mortality as an outcome. The mortality odd ratios were generated with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals utilizing the random-effects model. RESULTS: Nine studies comprising 5522 patients met our inclusion criteria. Our meta-analysis revealed significantly lower mortality in the colchicine group (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.25-0.48, I2 0%) compared with controls. A subgroup analysis limited to hospitalized patients (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.25-0.50, I2 0%) revealed similarly lower mortality in the colchicine group. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests a mortality benefit with colchicine when used in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. The majority of included studies were observational; thus, the findings of this review need to be further supported by the results of ongoing trials.

Asthma knowledge, care, and outcome during pregnancy: The QAKCOP study.

Asthma is the most common chronic medical condition affecting pregnancy. Optimizing asthma management in pregnancy is paramount for the well-being of both the mother and the baby. The primary objectives of this study were to assess patient's knowledge about asthma, the level of asthma care, and fetal and maternal outcomes among pregnant asthmatic women in this wealthy country with tremendous improvement in maternal and fetal health care. The secondary objective was to identify barriers to asthma control. This was a cross-sectional, face-to-face, prospective study of 80 pregnant women with physician-diagnosed asthma. About 56% of patients reported worsening of their asthma control during pregnancy, of which 52.3% felt this worsening in the third trimester. About 65% of patients had uncontrolled asthma during their pregnancy, and inhaler technique was incorrect in 64.4%. Only 38% of patients knew the difference between controller and reliever asthma medications, 12.7% of patients had received written asthma action plan, 17% had a spirometry done in the previous 5 years, and 3.8% had peak expiratory flow meter at home. The main reasons for uncontrolled asthma were lack of knowledge about right asthma medications in 30% and fear of side effects of inhaled corticosteroids in 19% of patients. No financial reason was reported. Significant associations between total number of pregnancies, poor perception of asthma medications, asthma exacerbation during delivery and poor asthma control were observed. Preeclampsia and congenital anomalies occurred at higher rates than previously reported among general population in this country. The tremendous improvements in maternal health care and socioeconomic status do not seem to be a barrier to the globally recognized poor asthma care in pregnancy. Important strategies are much needed.

Perceived Barriers of Incident Reporting Among Internists: Results from Hamad Medical Corporation in Qatar.

Background Adverse events (AE) are responsible for annual deaths that exceed deaths due to motor vehicle accidents, breast cancer, and AIDS. Many AE are considered preventable. Thus, AE needs to be detected and analyzed. Incident reporting systems (IRS) are crucial in identifying AE. Nevertheless, the incident report (IR) process is flawed with underreporting, especially from the physicians' side. This limits its efficiency in detecting AE. Therefore, we aimed to assess the practice and identify the barriers associated with incident reporting among internal medicine physicians in a large tertiary hospital through a survey. Methods A cross-sectional descriptive study. We distributed an online survey to physicians working in the Internal Medicine Department of Qatar's largest tertiary academic institute. The questionnaire was validated and piloted ahead of the start of the trial. The response rate was 53%. Results A total of 115 physicians completed the survey; 59% acknowledged the availability of an institutional IRS. However, only 29% knew how to submit an online IR, and 20% have ever submitted an IR. The survey revealed that participants were less likely to submit an IR when they or a colleague is involved in the incident; 46% and 63%, respectively. The main barriers of reporting incidents were unawareness about the IRS (36%) and the perception that IR will not bring a system change (13%); moreover, there exists the fear of retaliation (13%). When asked about solutions, 57% recommended training and awareness, and 22% recommended sharing learnings and actions from previous IR. Conclusions IRS is underutilized by internal medicine physicians. The main barrier at the time of the survey is the lack of training and awareness. Promoting awareness and sharing previous learning and actions may improve the utilization of the IRS.

An investigation into the avoidability of drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome.

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a rising morbidity amongst hospitalized patients. Whilst clinical protocols for the management of individual DRESS cases have been well established, determination of potential prevention of these cases by utilizing novel "avoidability" tools has remained unexplored. This retrospective study reviewed records of patients who presented to the emergency department of Weill Cornell Medicine-affiliated Hamad General Hospital, Doha Qatar with suspected DRESS syndrome. These cases were independently adjudicated (utilizing the RegiSCAR, and JSCAR tools) as DRESS-drug pairs by a team of two clinical pharmacists and two General Physicians. They were then rated for potential avoidability with the Liverpool adverse drug reactions avoidability tool (LAAT) by the same team of raters. A total of 16 patients satisfied RegiSCAR criteria for DRESS syndrome. The mean age of the study population was 41.5 years (SD ± 13.3). The study population was predominantly male (n = 12; [75%]). The median latent period from drug ingestion to clinical presentation was 14 days (interquartile range [IQR] 6.5, 29). The median RegiSCAR and J-SCAR scores were 6 (IQR 5, 6.8), 5 (IQR 4, 5.8) respectively. Utilizing the LAAT, about 60% of the DRESS syndrome-drug pairs were rated as "avoidable" ("probable" or "definite"). The overall Krippendorf's alpha with the LAAT was 0.81 (SE 0.10, CI 0.59-1.00); with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.90 (CI 0.77, 0.96.). In a randomly selected cohort of DRESS syndrome-drug pairs, a significant proportion was potentially avoidable ("possibly" and "definitely") utilizing the LAAT. This will need validation by larger sample-sized prospective studies utilizing the updated LAAT proposed by this study.

Postpartum Pulmonary Hypertension Masquerading as Submassive Pulmonary Embolism: A Case Report and a Literature Review.

Postpartum pulmonary hypertension (PPPHT) is an extremely rare disorder, with few reported cases. Late diagnosis and treatment are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We present an 18-year-old female patient who presented four-week postpartum with a typical submissive pulmonary embolism picture subsequently diagnosed as postpartum pulmonary hypertension. The patient had an excellent response to treatment, with a dramatic improvement in her functional status. The authors aim to urge physicians to keep this rare disorder in mind as timely and accurate diagnosis is crucial for management-additionally, the importance of counseling patients about the imminent risks associated with planned future pregnancies.

Frequency of Abnormalities Detected by Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound in Symptomatic COVID-19 Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant morbidity, mortality, and strained healthcare systems worldwide. Thus, a search for modalities that can expedite and improve the diagnosis and management of this entity is underway. Recent data suggested the utility of lung ultrasound (LUS) in the diagnosis of COVID-19 by detecting an interstitial pattern (B-pattern). Hence, we aimed to pool the proportion of various reported lung abnormalities detected by LUS in symptomatic COVID-19 patients. We conducted a systematic review (PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE until April 25, 2020) and a proportion meta-analysis. We included seven studies examining the role of LUS in 122 COVID-19 patients. The pooled proportion (PP) of B-pattern detected by lung ultrasound (US) was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.94-1.00 I 2 0%, Q 4.6). The PP of finding pleural line abnormalities was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.13-1.00 I 2 96%, Q 103.9), of pleural thickening was 0.54 (95% 0.11-0.95 I 2 93%, Q 61.1), of subpleural or pulmonary consolidation was 0.39 (95% CI: 0.21-0.58 I 2 72%, Q 17.8), and of pleural effusion was 0.14 (95% CI: 0.00-0.37 I 2 93%, Q 27.3). Our meta-analysis revealed that almost all SARS-CoV-2-infected patients have abnormal lung US. The most common abnormality is interstitial involvement depicted as B-pattern. The finding from our review highlights the potential role of this modality in the triage, diagnosis, and follow-up of COVID-19 patients. A sizable diagnostic accuracy study comparing LUS, computed tomography scan, and COVID-19-specific tests is warranted to further test this finding and to delineate the diagnostic and prognostic yield of each of these modalities.

Prevalence of Venous Thromboembolism in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Recent studies revealed a high prevalence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) events in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, especially in those who are critically ill. Available studies report varying prevalence rates. Hence, the exact prevalence remains uncertain. Moreover, there is an ongoing debate regarding the appropriate dosage of thromboprophylaxis. Methods: We performed a systematic review and proportion meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched PubMed and EMBASE for studies exploring the prevalence of VTE in critically ill COVID-19 patients till 25/07/2020. We pooled the proportion of VTE. Additionally, in a subgroup analysis, we pooled VTE events detected by systematic screening. Finally, in an exploratory analysis, we compared the odds of VTE in patients on prophylactic compared with therapeutic anticoagulation. Results: The review comprised 24 studies and over 2,500 patients. The pooled proportion of VTE prevalence was 0.31 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24, 0.39; I 2 94%], of VTE utilizing systematic screening was 0.48 (95% CI 0.33, 0.63; I 2 91%), of deep venous thrombosis was 0.23 (95% CI 0.14, 0.32; I 2 96%), and of pulmonary embolism was 0.14 (95% CI 0.09, 0.20; I 2 90%). Exploratory analysis of few studies, utilizing systematic screening, VTE risk increased significantly with prophylactic, compared with therapeutic anticoagulation [odds ratio (OR) 5.45; 95% CI 1.90, 15.57; I 2 0%]. Discussion: Our review revealed a high prevalence of VTE in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Almost 50% of patients had VTE detected by systematic screening. Higher thromboprophylaxis dosages may reduce VTE burden in this patient's cohort compared with standard prophylactic anticoagulation; however, this is to be ascertained by ongoing randomized controlled trials.

An investigation into the avoidability of adverse drug reactions using the LAAT and modified Hallas tools.

An adverse drug reactions avoidability tool called the Liverpool ADR avoidability assessment tool (LAAT) was recently developed (for research purposes), and subsequently validated with mixed interrater reliability (IRR). We investigated the comparative IRR of this tool in an inpatient cohort to ascertain its practical application in this setting.The patient population was comprised of 44 ADR drug pairs drawn from an observational prospective cohort of patents with ADR attending a Weill Cornell Medicine-affiliated tertiary medical Centre in Doha Qatar (Hamad General Hospital). Using the LAAT, and modified Hallas tools, 4 independent raters (2 Clinical Pharmacologists, and 2 General Physicians) assessed and scored the 44 ADR-drug pairs. Agreement proportions between the rating pairs were evaluated as well individual/overall kappa statistics and intraclass correlation coefficients. We evaluated the weight of each of the 7 questions on the LAAT tool to ascertain its determinative role.Across 44 ADR-drug pairs, the overall median Fleiss kappa using the LAAT, and modified Hallas tools were 0.67 (interquartile range (IQR) 0.55, 0.76), 0.36 (IQR, 0.23-0.71) respectively. The overall percentage pairwise agreement with the LAAT and modified Hallas tools were 78.5%, and 62.2% respectively. Exact pairwise agreement occurred in 37 out of 44 (range 0.71-1), and 27 of 44 (0.53-0.77) ADR-drug pairs using the LAAT and modified Hallas tools respectively. Using the LAAT tool, the overall intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.68 (CI 0.55, 0.79), and 0.37 (CI 0.22, 0.53) with the modified Hallas tool.We report a higher proportion of "possible" and "definite" avoidability outcomes of adverse drug reactions compared with the modified Hallas, or that reported by developers of the LAAT tool. Although initially developed for research purposes, our report has suggested for the first time a potential applicability of this tool in clinical environment as well.