ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate the differences in the characteristics, management, and clinical outcomes of patients with and that of those without coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection who had ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).MethodsDatabases including Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched up to July 2021. Observational studies that reported on the characteristics, management, or clinical outcomes and those published as full-text articles were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of all included studies.ResultsA total of 27,742 patients from 13 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Significant delay in symptom onset to first medical contact (SO-to-FMC) time (mean difference = 23.42 min; 95% CI: 5.85–40.99 min; p = 0.009) and door-to-balloon (D2B) time (mean difference = 12.27 min; 95% CI: 5.77–18.78 min; p = 0.0002) was observed in COVID-19 patients. Compared to COVID-19 negative patients, those who are positive patients had significantly higher levels of C-reactive protein, D-dimer, and thrombus grade (p < 0.05) and showed more frequent use of thrombus aspiration and glycoprotein IIbIIIa (Gp2b3a) inhibitor (p < 0.05). COVID-19 positive patients also had higher rates of in-hospital mortality (OR = 5.98, 95% CI: 4.78–7.48, p < 0.0001), cardiogenic shock (OR = 2.75, 95% CI: 2.02–3.76, p < 0.0001), and stent thrombosis (OR = 5.65, 95% CI: 2.41–13.23, p < 0.0001). They were also more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) (OR = 4.26, 95% CI: 2.51–7.22, p < 0.0001) and had a longer length of stay (mean difference = 4.63 days; 95% CI: 2.56–6.69 days; p < 0.0001).ConclusionsThis study revealed that COVID-19 infection had an impact on the time of initial medical intervention for patients with STEMI after symptom onset and showed that COVID-19 patients with STEMI were more likely to have thrombosis and had poorer outcomes.

Objectives This study aimed to characterize distinct patterns of change in health beliefs and their dimensions of COVID-19 vaccination and to evaluate the predictors of various trajectory groups. Methods A total of 1129 participants who completed two doses of COVID-19 vaccines in China were included in this prospective study. Participants’ characteristics and health beliefs regarding COVID-19 vaccination were collected before and after the two doses of COVID-19 vaccination. A group-based trajectory model was used to identify the distinct longitudinal patterns of health beliefs and their dimensions. A multinomial logistic regression model was conducted to determine the predictors of different trajectory groups. Results The group-based trajectory model identified two to four distinct patterns of global health beliefs and their domains, namely, very low-stable (16.1%), low-stable (30.2%), medium-stable (45.6%), and high-stable (8.1%) trajectories for global health beliefs. And the five domains of health beliefs showed two or three trajectory stable progression, which were similar to the global health beliefs trajectories. Sex, occupation post, adverse reactions foreboding, and quality of life were associated with the trajectory of global health beliefs or at least one domain of health beliefs. Conclusions During the study, individuals’ health beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination were stable without the interference of external factors. Based on the impact of sex, occupation post, adverse reactions foreboding, and quality of life on individuals’ health beliefs, personalized interventions can be developed to improve public health beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination and reduce vaccination hesitancy.