暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic underscored the need for pandemic preparedness, with respiratory-transmitted viruses considered as a substantial risk. In pandemics, long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are a high-risk setting with severe outbreaks and burden of disease. Non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) constitute the primary defence mechanism when pharmacological interventions are not available. However, evidence on the effectiveness of NPIs implemented in LTCFs remains unclear.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review assessing the effectiveness of NPIs implemented in LTCFs to protect residents and staff from viral respiratory pathogens with pandemic potential. We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and two COVID-19 registries in 09/2022. Screening and data extraction was conducted independently by two experienced researchers. We included randomized controlled trials and non-randomized observational studies of intervention effects. Quality appraisal was conducted using ROBINS-I and RoB2. Primary outcomes encompassed number of outbreaks, infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. We synthesized findings narratively, focusing on the direction of effect. Certainty of evidence (CoE) was assessed using GRADE.
RESULTS: We analysed 13 observational studies and three (cluster) randomized controlled trials. All studies were conducted in high-income countries, all but three focused on SARS-CoV-2 with the rest focusing on influenza or upper-respiratory tract infections. The evidence indicates that a combination of different measures and hand hygiene interventions can be effective in protecting residents and staff from infection-related outcomes (moderate CoE). Self-confinement of staff with residents, compartmentalization of staff in the LTCF, and the routine testing of residents and/or staff in LTCFs, among others, may be effective (low CoE). Other measures, such as restricting shared spaces, serving meals in room, cohorting infected and non-infected residents may be effective (very low CoE). An evidence gap map highlights the lack of evidence on important interventions, encompassing visiting restrictions, pre-entry testing, and air filtration systems.
CONCLUSIONS: Although CoE of interventions was low or very low for most outcomes, the implementation of NPIs identified as potentially effective in this review often constitutes the sole viable option, particularly prior to the availability of vaccinations. Our evidence-gap map underscores the imperative for further research on several interventions. These gaps need to be addressed to prepare LTCFs for future pandemics.
BACKGROUND: CRD42022344149.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were implemented in order to control the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, potentially affecting the prevalence of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). This review evaluated the impact of NPIs on RSV-related hospitalizations in children during the lockdown (2020-2021) compared to the pre-pandemic (2015-2020) and post-lockdown (2021-2022) periods. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched through PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies published in English between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2022. Additionally, we conducted hand searches of other records published between 1 January 2023 and 22 January 2024. Our target population was hospitalized children aged 0-18 years with RSV-related lower respiratory tract infections confirmed through immunofluorescence, antigen testing, or molecular assays. We focused on peer-reviewed observational studies, analyzing the primary outcome of pooled RSV prevalence. A generalized linear mixed model with a random-effects model was utilized to pool each RSV prevalence. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran\'s Q and I2 statistics, while publication bias was evaluated through funnel plots and Egger\'s tests. We identified and analyzed 5815 publications and included 112 studies with 308,985 participants. Notably, RSV prevalence was significantly lower during the lockdown period (5.03% [95% CI: 2.67; 9.28]) than during the pre-pandemic period (25.60% [95% CI: 22.57; 28.88], p < 0.0001). However, RSV prevalence increased notably in the post-lockdown period after the relaxation of COVID-19 prevention measures (42.02% [95% CI: 31.49; 53.33] vs. 5.03% [95% CI: 2.67; 9.28], p < 0.0001). Most pooled effect estimates exhibited significant heterogeneity (I2: 91.2% to 99.3%). Our findings emphasize the effectiveness of NPIs in reducing RSV transmission. NPIs should be considered significant public health measures to address RSV outbreaks.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic review aimed to evaluate the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions within non-healthcare workplaces and community-level workplace closures and lockdowns on COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, selected mental disorders, and employment outcomes in workers or the general population.
METHODS: The inclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials and non-randomized studies of interventions. The exclusion criteria included modeling studies. Electronic searches were conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, and other databases from January 1, 2020, through May 11, 2021. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Meta-analysis and sign tests were performed.
RESULTS: A total of 60 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. There were 40 studies on COVID-19 outcomes, 15 on anxiety and depression symptoms, and five on unemployment and labor force participation. There was a paucity of studies on physical distancing, physical barriers, and symptom and temperature screening within workplaces. The sign test indicated that lockdown reduced COVID-19 incidence or case growth rate (23 studies, p < 0.001), reproduction number (11 studies, p < 0.001), and COVID-19 mortality or death growth rate (seven studies, p < 0.05) in the general population. Lockdown did not have any effect on anxiety symptoms (pooled standardized mean difference = -0.02, 95% CI: -0.06, 0.02). Lockdown had a small effect on increasing depression symptoms (pooled standardized mean difference = 0.16, 95% CI: 0.10, 0.21), but publication bias could account for the observed effect. Lockdown increased unemployment (pooled mean difference = 4.48 percentage points, 95% CI: 1.79, 7.17) and decreased labor force participation (pooled mean difference = -2.46 percentage points, 95% CI: -3.16, -1.77). The risk of bias for most of the studies on COVID-19 or employment outcomes was moderate or serious. The risk of bias for the studies on anxiety or depression symptoms was serious or critical.
CONCLUSIONS: Empiric studies indicated that lockdown reduced the impact of COVID-19, but that it had notable unwanted effects. There is a pronounced paucity of studies on the effect of interventions within still-open workplaces. It is important for countries that implement lockdown in future pandemics to consider strategies to mitigate these unintended consequences.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO registration # CRD42020182660.

BACKGROUND: Highlighted by the rise of COVID-19, climate change, and conflict, socially vulnerable populations are least resilient to disaster. In infectious disease management, mathematical models are a commonly used tool. Researchers should include social vulnerability in models to strengthen their utility in reflecting real-world dynamics. We conducted a scoping review to evaluate how researchers have incorporated social vulnerability into infectious disease mathematical models.
METHODS: The methodology followed the Joanna Briggs Institute and updated Arksey and O\'Malley frameworks, verified by the PRISMA-ScR checklist. PubMed, Clarivate Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO Africa Wide Information, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for peer-reviewed published articles. Screening and extracting data were done by two independent researchers.
RESULTS: Of 4075 results, 89 articles were identified. Two-thirds of articles used a compartmental model (n = 58, 65.2%), with a quarter using agent-based models (n = 24, 27.0%). Overall, routine indicators, namely age and sex, were among the most frequently used measures (n = 42, 12.3%; n = 22, 6.4%, respectively). Only one measure related to culture and social behaviour (0.3%). For compartmental models, researchers commonly constructed distinct models for each level of a social vulnerability measure and included new parameters or influenced standard parameters in model equations (n = 30, 51.7%). For all agent-based models, characteristics were assigned to hosts (n = 24, 100.0%), with most models including age, contact behaviour, and/or sex (n = 18, 75.0%; n = 14, 53.3%; n = 10, 41.7%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Given the importance of equitable and effective infectious disease management, there is potential to further the field. Our findings demonstrate that social vulnerability is not considered holistically. There is a focus on incorporating routine demographic indicators but important cultural and social behaviours that impact health outcomes are excluded. It is crucial to develop models that foreground social vulnerability to not only design more equitable interventions, but also to develop more effective infectious disease control and elimination strategies. Furthermore, this study revealed the lack of transparency around data sources, inconsistent reporting, lack of collaboration with local experts, and limited studies focused on modelling cultural indicators. These challenges are priorities for future research.

Individuals with cerebral palsy (CP) have limited mobility and are unable to actively participate in tasks that are part of their daily living. Thus, continuous therapeutic sessions are required to keep such individuals active and engaged in the environment. Due to the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) lockdowns, rehabilitation for children with CP was inhibited which consequently put them at risk of losing their functional gains which were obtained through previous in-person therapies. In order to avoid this, an alternate to conventional therapy was required and this rendered it necessary to review the role of telerehabilitation (TR) and its various modes for the rehabilitation of children with CP. This study aimed to explore the effectiveness of TR for children with CP during COVID-19 through the present literature and to determine if TR is an alternate to conventional physical therapy in children with CP during the coronavirus outbreak. This scoping review was conducted by searching different databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Collaboration, Medline, and Google Scholar on the basis of inclusion criteria. Screening was performed from January 2019 to June 2022 and the initial screening attempt returned 469 studies. After applying the aforementioned criteria, all impertinent studies were excluded which resulted in 28 studies being included for this review as they contained information about the effectiveness of TR on children with CP during COVID-19. These 28 articles included randomised controlled trials, surveys, reviews, clinical trials, case reports, prospective studies, editorials, and longitudinal studies. Three out of the 7 randomised controlled trial studies revealed that action observation treatment can be a useful approach for TR in child with CP during similar pandemics. The other 3 studies supported the use of computer-based games, robots, nonimmersive virtual reality, and wearable haptic devices as a significant means of TR in child with CP as an alternate to routine therapy during COVID-19. TR is an affable mode of rehabilitation specifically for the pediatric population. In the future, it can be an alternate to routine therapy for those who are unlikely to get daily access to in-person therapeutic sessions due to various reasons or circumstances.

BACKGROUND: Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were crucial in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, although uncertainties about their effectiveness remain. This work aimed to better understand the evidence generated during the pandemic on the effectiveness of NPIs implemented in the UK.
METHODS: We conducted a rapid mapping review (search date: 1 March 2023) to identify primary studies reporting on the effectiveness of NPIs to reduce COVID-19 transmission. Included studies were displayed in an interactive evidence gap map.
RESULTS: After removal of duplicates, 11 752 records were screened. Of these, 151 were included, including 100 modelling studies but only 2 randomized controlled trials and 10 longitudinal observational studies.Most studies reported on NPIs to identify and isolate those who are or may become infectious, and on NPIs to reduce the number of contacts. There was an evidence gap for hand and respiratory hygiene, ventilation and cleaning.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that despite the large number of studies published, there is still a lack of robust evaluations of the NPIs implemented in the UK. There is a need to build evaluation into the design and implementation of public health interventions and policies from the start of any future pandemic or other public health emergency.

The COVID-19 pandemic has wrought a profound impact on mental health in Sub- Saharan Africa, exacerbating existing disparities and rendering individuals undergoing treatment particularly susceptible. This comprehensive critical review delves into the scope, nature, and extent of COVID-19 impact on mental health services in Sub- Saharan Africa, while concurrently elucidating pivotal lessons and exemplary practices learnt from periods of lockdown.
The methodology was guided by Jesson & Laccy\'s guide on how to conduct critical literature reviews. Articles were comprehensively sought through two academic databases (PubMed and Google Scholar), complemented by targeted searches on the WHO website and official public health websites of relevant Sub-Saharan African countries.
The investigation reveals a surge in mental health challenges, notably marked by a significant escalation in anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Disruptions to care services, financial hardships, and the pervasive effects of social isolation further compound this escalation. The pre-existing inequalities in access to and quality of care were accentuated during this crisis, with marginalized groups encountering heightened impediments to essential services. In navigating this unprecedented challenge, communities emerged as integral agents in establishing supportive networks and implementing culturally sensitive interventions. Technology, such as telemedicine and online resources, played a pivotal role in bridging access gaps, particularly in remote areas. The synthesis of best practices for supporting mental health patients during lockdowns encompasses targeted interventions for vulnerable groups, including adolescents and pregnant women. Empowering communities through economic support and mental health literacy programs was identified as crucial. The integration of technology, such as the development of robust telemedicine frameworks, virtual training in curricula, and the utilization of digital platforms for interventions and public messaging, emerged as a cornerstone in addressing access disparities. Community engagement and resilience-building strategies gained prominence, emphasizing the necessity of collaboration between healthcare providers and communities. Promotion of peer support groups, home-based care, and the preservation of traditional healing practices were underscored as essential components.
The study underscores the need to adapt and optimize mental health services during emergencies. This entails prioritizing mental health within emergency response frameworks, exploring alternative service delivery methods, and fortifying data collection and research efforts.

Coronavirus disease 2019 popularly known as COVID-19 is the current pandemic ravaging the world. It has disrupted so many aspects of humans\' life including the healthcare systems of all countries. While governments have instituted preventive measures such as social distancing, self-isolation and lockdown in a bid to control the spread of the virus, the absence of vaccine can lead to poor management of key risk factors (including unhealthy diets and physical inactivity) associated with NCDs and limited access to preventive health services can further contribute to development and progression of NCDs. This study provides a review of available evidences from PubMed, google scholar, online databases, and papers from other sources on the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on NCDs in Africa and emphasizes lessons from past pandemics that can be adopted to reduce the burden of the disease.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of a COVID-19 mandated lockdown on the type and frequency of dental services accessed at an undergraduate dental clinic in southwestern Ontario.
METHODS: We retrieved anonymized sociodemographic (n = 4791) and billing data (n = 11616) of patients for 2 periods of 199 days, before (T1) and after (T2) lockdown. We applied descriptive statistics and used Student\'s t test to compare the type and frequency of dental services provided between the 2 periods. We mapped forward sortation area (FSA) codes of each patient.
RESULTS: Of the 4791 patients seen collectively in T1 and T2, most (67%) sought care before the lockdown. In both periods, most patients were ≥ 60 years of age (51.8%), female (33.9%) and residing in an urban area (88.6%). Compared with T1, there was a significant increase in middle-aged adults (p = 0.002) and significantly fewer patients earning over CAD 100 000 (p = 0.021) in T2. A total of 11616 billable procedures were carried out during T1 and T2: in T1, most procedures were preventative, whereas in T2, most were related to urgent care. Significantly fewer males than females sought urgent care, regardless of time. Finally, mapping showed a decrease in patients from Toronto, central and northern Ontario and clustering of patients in southwestern Ontario.
CONCLUSIONS: We noted an overall reduction in billed services following the COVID-19 lockdown. The decrease in both billed services and patients seen during T2 demonstrates the impact of COVID-19 on access to timely and definitive dental care during the first 2 years of the pandemic.