Reinfection in COVID-19: A scoping review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Pinto LM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8313064 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Reinfection in COVID-19: A scoping review.
Pinto Lancelot Mark LM Nanda Viral V Sunavala Ayesha A Rodriques Camilla C
Medical journal, Armed Forces India 20210726
Reinfections in COVID-19 are being reported all around the world and are a cause for concern, considering that a lot of our assumptions and modeling (including vaccination) related to the disease have relied on long-term immunity. We were one of the first groups to report a series of 4 healthcare workers to have been reinfected. This review article reports a scoping review of the available literature on reinfections, with a discussion of the implications of reinfections. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundWith the continuation of the COVID-19 pandemic, some COVID-19 patients have become reinfected with the virus. Viral gene sequencing has found that some of these patients were reinfected by the different and others by same strains. This has raised concerns about the effectiveness of immunity after infection and the reliability of vaccines. To this end, we conducted a systematic review to assess the characteristics of patients with reinfection and possible causes.MethodsA systematic search was conducted across eight databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang, VIP and SinoMed from December 1, 2019 to September 1, 2021. The quality of included studies were assessed using JBI critical appraisal tools and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.ResultsThis study included 50 studies from 20 countries. There were 118 cases of reinfection. Twenty-five patients were reported to have at least one complication. The shortest duration between the first infection and reinfection was 19 days and the longest was 293 days. During the first infection and reinfection, cough (51.6% and 43.9%) and fever (50% and 30.3%) were the most common symptoms respectively. Nine patients recovered, seven patients died, and five patients were hospitalized, but 97 patients' prognosis were unknown. B.1 is the most common variant strain at the first infection. B.1.1.7, B.1.128 and B.1.351 were the most common variant strains at reinfection. Thirty-three patients were infected by different strains and 9 patients were reported as being infected with the same strain.ConclusionsOur research shows that it is possible for rehabilitated patients to be reinfected by SARS-COV-2. To date, the causes and risk factors of COVID-19 reinfection are not fully understood. For patients with reinfection, the diagnosis and management should be consistent with the treatment of the first infection. The public, including rehabilitated patients, should be fully vaccinated, wear masks in public places, and pay attention to maintaining social distance to avoid reinfection with the virus.
| S-EPMC9051013 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has spread rapidly in many countries, overburdening health systems and causing numerous economic and social impacts. Most studies on the subject have focused on epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment, however, there remains a scientific gap concerning the possibility of reinfection. The purpose of this bibliographic review is to gather information from studies aimed at this possibility, and to clarify what we know so far. It was found that in many situations cured patients are being released from hospitals, however, in some cases, the discharge criteria are not effective. Patients are presenting positive RT-PCR tests. There are several factors that might interfere so that patients cured of COVID-19 continue to test positive, and this would not necessarily represent a case of recurrence, as the test cannot differentiate the viral RNA from the complete virus, which alone is capable of causing the active infection. This review demonstrates that in order to rule out the possibility of COVID-19 reinfection in cured patients, more robust methods need to be adopted as criteria for both clinical discharge and post-hospital follow-up.
| S-EPMC8056061 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn December 2019, a pneumonia caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in Wuhan, China and has rapidly spread around the world since then.AimThis study aims to understand the research gaps related to COVID-19 and propose recommendations for future research.MethodsWe undertook a scoping review of COVID-19, comprehensively searching databases and other sources to identify literature on COVID-19 between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020. We analysed the sources, publication date, type and topic of the retrieved articles/studies.ResultsWe included 249 articles in this scoping review. More than half (59.0%) were conducted in China. Guidance/guidelines and consensuses statements (n = 56; 22.5%) were the most common. Most (n = 192; 77.1%) articles were published in peer-reviewed journals, 35 (14.1%) on preprint servers and 22 (8.8%) posted online. Ten genetic studies (4.0%) focused on the origin of SARS-CoV-2 while the topics of molecular studies varied. Nine of 22 epidemiological studies focused on estimating the basic reproduction number of COVID-19 infection (R0). Of all identified guidance/guidelines (n = 35), only ten fulfilled the strict principles of evidence-based practice. The number of articles published per day increased rapidly until the end of January.ConclusionThe number of articles on COVID-19 steadily increased before 6 February 2020. However, they lack diversity and are almost non-existent in some study fields, such as clinical research. The findings suggest that evidence for the development of clinical practice guidelines and public health policies will be improved when more results from clinical research becomes available.
| S-EPMC7175649 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recurrent positivity in a patient with COVID-19 may be due to various reasons, not necessarily reinfection. There is concern about the occurrence frequency of reinfection. Five databases and a preprint/preprint repository were searched. All case reports, case series, and observational studies were included. Bias was assessed for each study with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale tool and reported according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA-2020). After eligibility, 77 studies were included for qualitative synthesis (52 case reports, 21 case series, and four case-controls; 1131 patients included). Of these, 16 studies described a second contact with the SARS-CoV-2 positive case, five studies described healthcare profession-related infection, ten studies described that the source of reinfection was likely to be from the community, one study described travel-related infection, nine studies described vulnerability-related infection due to comorbidity. The mean number of days from discharge or negative test to reinfection ranged from 23.3 to 57.6 days across the different included studies. The risk of bias for all case report/series studies was moderate/high. For observational studies, the risk of bias was low. Reinfection of patients with COVID-19 occurs between the first and second month after the first infection, but beyond, and 90 days have been proposed as a point to begin to consider it. The main factor for reinfection is contact with COVID-19 positive cases.
| S-EPMC9420201 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is growing evidence of fungal infections associated with COVID-19. The development of cryptococcosis in these patients has been infrequently reported. However, it can be life-threatening.ObjectiveTo identify cases of COVID-19 patients who developed cryptococcosis and to compare baseline characteristics and management between those who survived and those who died.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase to identify studies that reported patients with COVID-19 and cryptococcosis. No language restriction was applied. Single case reports, case series, and original articles were included. It is important to note that 'n' refers to the total number of individuals with the specified variable.ResultsA total of 58 studies were included. Among these studies, 51 included individual patient data, detailing information on a total of 65 patients, whereas eight studies reported the proportion of cryptococcosis in COVID-19 patients. One study provided both individual and aggregate case information. From individual patient data, the majority were male (73.9%; n = 48) with a median age of 60 years (range: 53-70). Severe COVID-19 and multiple comorbidities, led by arterial hypertension and diabetes mellitus, were frequently reported, but few had classic immunosuppression factors. On the other hand, HIV status, either negative or positive, was reported in just over half of the patients (61.5%; n = 40). Most were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) (58.5%; n = 31), received mechanical ventilation (MV) (50.0%; n = 26), and developed disseminated cryptococcosis (55.4%; n = 36). Secondary infection, mainly bacterial, was reported in 19 patients (29.2%). Mortality was 47.7% (n = 31). Of the studies that reported the proportion of cryptococcosis in COVID-19 cases, the majority were descriptive studies published as conference abstracts.ConclusionCryptococcosis in COVID-19 patients has been reported more frequently. However, it is still not as common as other fungal infections associated with COVID-19. Few patients have some classic immunosuppression factors. The factors associated with mortality were male sex, age, ICU admission, MV, secondary infections, and lymphopenia.
| S-EPMC10868154 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic impacted profoundly on the wellbeing and social interactions of the world population, and all dimensions of sexual health were potentially affected by globally implemented preventive measures.ObjectivesThe scoping review aimed to compile existing research investigating possible effects of COVID-19 lockdowns on adult sexual health, that is, sexual behavior, functioning, and satisfaction. Further, studies on the interplay between mental health and sexual well-being during the pandemic were reviewed.MethodsThe review was conducted in accordance with guidelines established by the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist. On October 11-12, 2021, PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, Cinahl, Cochrane, Sociological Abstracts and Scopus were systematically searched for relevant peer-reviewed papers employing quantitative methodology. Additionally, unpublished ("grey") research studies on the subject were retrieved. The screening, data extraction, and analysis of evidence were conducted by 4 independent reviewers using an iterative approach.ResultsBased on 107 studies included, the scoping review showed that the pandemic had had a wide impact on all dimensions of sexual health. Except for solo sex activities, mainly negative COVID-19 implications were identified, although findings were, in sum, characterized by complexity and unpredictability. Thus, sexual behavior, functioning, and satisfaction during the pandemic appeared to be mitigated by a broad range of sociodemographic and contextual factors. Finally, sexual health seemed deeply entwined with overall mental health.ConclusionThe scoping review revealed a broad range of COVID-19-related effects on sexual health, including an overall decline in partnered sex and a concurrent increase in solo sex activities. It also emphasized a need for future research to shed light on possible long-term consequences of the pandemic in various population groups and on all aspects of sexual health. Toldam NE, Graugaard C, Meyer R, et al. Sexual Health During COVID-19: A Scoping Review. Sex Med Rev 2022;10:714-753.
| S-EPMC9242892 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has had global impacts and caused some health systems to experience substantial pressure. The need for accurate health information has been felt widely. Chatbots have great potential to reach people with authoritative information, and a number of chatbots have been quickly developed to disseminate information about COVID-19. However, little is known about user experiences of and perspectives on these tools.ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe what is known about the user experience and user uptake of COVID-19 chatbots.MethodsA scoping review was carried out in June 2021 using keywords to cover the literature concerning chatbots, user engagement, and COVID-19. The search strategy included databases covering health, communication, marketing, and the COVID-19 pandemic specifically, including MEDLINE Ovid, Embase, CINAHL, ACM Digital Library, Emerald, and EBSCO. Studies that assessed the design, marketing, and user features of COVID-19 chatbots or those that explored user perspectives and experience were included. We excluded papers that were not related to COVID-19; did not include any reporting on user perspectives, experience, or the general use of chatbot features or marketing; or where a version was not available in English. The authors independently screened results for inclusion, using both backward and forward citation checking of the included papers. A thematic analysis was carried out with the included papers.ResultsA total of 517 papers were sourced from the literature, and 10 were included in the final review. Our scoping review identified a number of factors impacting adoption and engagement including content, trust, digital ability, and acceptability. The papers included discussions about chatbots developed for COVID-19 screening and general COVID-19 information, as well as studies investigating user perceptions and opinions on COVID-19 chatbots.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic presented a unique and specific challenge for digital health interventions. Design and implementation were required at a rapid speed as digital health service adoption accelerated globally. Chatbots for COVID-19 have been developed quickly as the pandemic has challenged health systems. There is a need for more comprehensive and routine reporting of factors impacting adoption and engagement. This paper has shown both the potential of chatbots to reach users in an emergency and the need to better understand how users engage and what they want.
| S-EPMC9822175 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Older people have paid a huge toll in terms of mortality during the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. Frailty may have contributed to the vulnerability of older people to more severe clinical presentation. We aimed at reviewing available evidence about frailty and COVID-19. We searched PUBMED, Web of Science, and EMBASE from 1 December 2019 to 29 May 2020. Study selection and data extraction were performed by three independent reviewers. Qualitative synthesis was conducted and quantitative data extracted when available. Forty papers were included: 13 editorials, 15 recommendations/guidelines, 3 reviews, 1 clinical trial, 6 observational studies, 2 case reports. Editorials and reviews underlined the potential clinical relevance of assessing frailty among older patients with COVID-19. However, frailty was only investigated in regards to its association with overall mortality, hospital contagion, intensive care unit admission rates, and disease phenotypes in the few observational studies retrieved. Specific interventions in relation to frailty or its impact on COVID-19 treatments have not been evaluated yet. Even with such limited evidence, clinical recommendations on the use of frailty tools have been proposed to support decision making about escalation plan. Ongoing initiatives are expected to improve knowledge of COVID-19 interaction with frailty and to promote patient-centered approaches.
| S-EPMC7408623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SARS-CoV-2 reinfection rate is low. The relative severity of the first and second episodes of infection remains poorly studied. In this study, we aimed at assessing the frequency of SARS-CoV-2 reinfections and comparing the severity of the first and second episodes of infection. We retrospectively included patients with SARS-CoV-2 positive RT-PCR at least 90 days after clinical recovery from a COVID-19 episode and with at least one negative RT-PCR after the first infection. Whole genome sequencing and variant-specific RT-PCR were performed and clinical symptoms and severity of infection were retrospectively documented from medical files. A total of 209 COVID-19 reinfected patients were identified, accounting for 0.4% of positive cases diagnosed from 19 March 2020 to 24 August 2021. Serology was performed in 64 patients, of whom 39 (60.1%) had antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 when sampled at the early stage of their second infection. Only seven patients (3.4%) were infected twice with the same variant. We observed no differences in clinical presentation, hospitalization rate, and transfer to ICU when comparing the two episodes of infections. Our results suggest that the severity of the second episode of COVID-19 is in the same range as that of the first infection, including patients with antibodies.
| S-EPMC8942490 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-cov-2), first described in December 2019, has now infected more than 28 million cases with almost one million deaths. Reinfection is not definitely established however disease recurrence is increasingly reported.Cases presentationFour patients presented with a second episode of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) occurring 27-85 following their first illness. The initial episode was mild or asymptomatic while the second attack was severe requiring hospital admission. All four patients had a SARS-CoV-2 PCR test positive in the second episode. The chest-X-ray and/or computerized tomography (CT) scan showed bilateral alveolar shadows. Furthermore, the inflammatory markers were raised in the four patients. Three patients recovered following treatment with favipravir in addition tocilizumab and/or dexamethasone.ConclusionCovid19 reinfection Recurrent COVID-19 is increasingly reported. However; other etiologies including superadded infection or pulmonary embolism should be ruled out, particularly if recurrence occurs less than 3 weeks.
| S-EPMC7834000 | biostudies-literature