Studies have found increased rates of dysosmia in patients with Novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the mechanism that causes olfactory loss is unknown. The primary objective of this study was to explore local proinflammatory cytokine levels in the olfactory epithelium in patients with COVID-19. Biopsies of the olfactory epithelium were taken from patients with confirmed COVID-19 as well as uninfected controls. Levels of tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) and interleukin-1-beta (IL-1β) were assessed using ELISA and compared between groups. Average TNF-α levels were significantly increased in the olfactory epithelium of the COVID-19 group compared to the control group (P < 0.05). However, no differences in IL-1β were seen between groups. Elevated levels of the proinflammatory cytokine TNF-α were seen in the olfactory epithelium in patients with COVID-19. This suggests that direct inflammation of the olfactory epithelium could play a role in the acute olfactory loss described in many patients with COVID-19.

As the largest study of its kind, these findings support those found in various European, North, and South American studies. Efforts to decrease workplace stress of ICU nurses by focusing on facilitating peer collaboration, improving resource availability, and staffing ratios are likely to show the greatest impact on stress levels.

Background and objectives With the increase in the number of COVID-19 infections, the global health apparatus is facing insufficient resources. The main objective of the current study is to provide additional data regarding the clinical characteristics of the patients diagnosed with COVID-19, and in particular to analyze the factors associated with disease severity, lack of improvement, and mortality. Methods 102 studies were included in the present meta-analysis, all of which were published before September 24, 2020. The studies were found by searching a number of databases, including Scopus, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Embase. We performed a thorough search from early February until September 24. The selected papers were evaluated and analyzed using Stata software application version 14. Results Ultimately, 102 papers were selected for this meta- analysis, covering 121,437 infected patients. The mean age of the patients was 58.42 years. The results indicate a prevalence of 79.26% for fever (95% CI: 74.98–83.26; I2 = 97.35%), 60.70% for cough (95% CI: 56.91–64.43; I2 = 94.98%), 33.21% for fatigue or myalgia (95% CI: 28.86–37.70; I2 = 96.12%), 31.30% for dyspnea (95% CI: 26.14–36.69; I2 = 97.67%), and 10.65% for diarrhea (95% CI: 8.26–13.27; I2 = 94.20%). The prevalence for the most common comorbidities was 28.30% for hypertension (95% CI: 23.66–33.18; I2 = 99.58%), 14.29% for diabetes (95% CI: 11.88–16.87; I2 = 99.10%), 12.30% for cardiovascular diseases (95% CI: 9.59–15.27; I2 = 99.33%), and 5.19% for chronic kidney disease (95% CI: 3.95–6.58; I2 = 96.42%). Conclusions We evaluated the prevalence of some of the most important comorbidities in COVID-19 patients, indicating that some underlying disorders, including hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and chronic kidney disease, can be considered as risk factors for patients with COVID-19 infection. Furthermore, the results show that an elderly male with underlying diseases is more likely to have severe COVID-19.

BackgroundA number of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) adjunct devices have been developed to improve the consistency and quality of manual chest compressions. We investigated whether a CPR feedback device would improve CPR quality and consistency, as well as patient survival.MethodsWe conducted a randomized controlled study of patients undergoing CPR for cardiac arrest in the mixed medical-surgical intensive care units of four academic teaching hospitals. Patients were randomized to receive either standard manual CPR or CPR using the Cardio First Angel™ CPR feedback device. Recorded variables included guideline adherence, CPR quality, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) rates, and CPR-associated morbidity.ResultsA total of 229 subjects were randomized; 149 were excluded; and 80 were included. Patient demographics were similar. Adherence to published CPR guidelines and CPR quality was significantly improved in the intervention group (p < 0.0001), as were ROSC rates (72 % vs. 35 %; p = 0.001). A significant decrease was observed in rib fractures (57 % vs. 85 %; p = 0.02), but not sternum fractures (5 % vs. 17 %; p = 0.15).ConclusionsUse of the Cardio First Angel™ CPR feedback device improved adherence to published CPR guidelines and CPR quality, and it was associated with increased rates of ROSC. A decrease in rib but not sternum fractures was observed with device use. Further independent prospective validation is warranted to determine if these results are reproducible in other acute care settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02394977. Registered on 5 Mar 2015.

Type 1 Interferons (IFNs) have been associated with positive effects on Coronaviruses. Previous studies point towards the superior potency of IFNβ compared to IFNα against viral infections. We conducted a three-armed, individually-randomized, open-label, controlled trial of IFNβ1a and IFNβ1b, comparing them against each other and a control group. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to IFNβ1a (subcutaneous injections of 12,000 IU on days 1, 3, 6), IFNβ1b (subcutaneous injections of 8,000,000 IU on days 1, 3, 6), or the control group. All three arms orally received Lopinavir/Ritonavir (400 mg/100 mg twice a day for ten days) and a single dose of Hydroxychloroquine 400 mg on the first day. Our utilized primary outcome measure was Time To Clinical Improvement (TTCI) defined as the time from enrollment to discharge or a decline of two steps on the clinical seven-step ordinal scale, whichsoever came first. A total of 60 severely ill patients with positive RT-PCR and Chest CT scans underwent randomization (20 patients to each arm). In the Intention-To-Treat population, IFNβ1a was associated with a significant difference against the control group, in the TTCI; (HR; 2.36, 95% CI 1.10–5.17, P-value = 0.031) while the IFNβ1b indicated no significant difference compared with the control; HR; 1.42, (95% CI 0.63–3.16, P-value = 0.395). The median TTCI for both of the intervention groups was five days vs. seven days for the control group. The mortality was numerically lower in both of the intervention groups (20% in the IFNβ1a group and 30% in the IFNβ1b group vs. 45% in the control group). There were no significant differences between the three arms regarding the adverse events. In patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, as compared with the base therapeutic regiment, the benefit of a significant reduction in TTCI was observed in the IFNβ1a arm. This finding needs further confirmation in larger studies.Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04343768. (Submitted: 08/04/2020; First Online: 13/04/2020) (Registration Number: NCT04343768).