As an important tool for nucleic acid detection of variant strains of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2), the mobile air capsule construction laboratory is a key medical resource in the prevention and control of COVID-19. Medical staff, security guards, cleaners, maintenance workers and volunteers in the mobile air capsule construction laboratory have high contact frequency with the samples, so they have a high risk of infection with COVID-19. In order to reduce this risk, this article discusses the infection management measures in the aspects of wearing and taking off personal protective equipment, environmental health management, post use goods management, medical waste management, staff training management and disposal process after occupational exposure, and analyzed the common problems in operation, based on the operation process of Nanchong mobile air capsule construction laboratory. The purpose is to provide a reference for the construction and management of other mobile air capsule construction laboratory.
Cryptococcosis, mainly caused by Cryptococcus neoformans/gattii species complexes, is a lethal infection in both immunosuppressive and immunocompetent populations. With the upgrade of detection methods and the increase of clinical knowledge, the incidence rate of cryptococcosis is increasing, and it has become one of the most important fungi threatening human health. In recent years, great progress has been made in this field, including the taxonomy and nomenclature of Cryptococcus spp., laboratory diagnostic methods and antifungal susceptibility tests, as well as the characteristics and treatments of cryptococcosis. This article reviews the above contents, in order to improve the clinical and laboratory understanding of the Cryptococcus spp., and realize the timely diagnosis and early treatment of cryptococcosis.
Objective To conduct a scoping review on the clinical research evidence for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with traditional Chinese medicine, identify relevant problems in the literature, and provide ideas for the follow-up research. Methods PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Digital Journal Full-text Database, and China Biomedical Literature Database were searched from inception to July 21st, 2022. The clinical research evidence for the treatment of COVID-19 with traditional Chinese medicine was included, the data information was sorted out, and the results were descriptively analyzed. Results A total of 132 studies were included, including 53 randomized controlled trials, 17 non-randomized controlled trials, and 62 retrospective cohort studies, all of which were published between 2020 and 2022. The clinical studies were carried out in 19 provincial level regions, among which Hubei province had the largest number of studies (49.2%, 65/132). The sample sizes of the studies were mostly between 50 and 100 cases (43.2%, 57/132). Most of the studies had a treatment course of 0-14 days (50.0%, 66/132). The most compared intervention measures were traditional Chinese medicine + conventional western medicine treatment vs. conventional western medicine treatment, accounting for 75.0% (99/132) of the studies. The COVID-19 patients included in the studies were mainly mild and moderate. Outcome indicators included changes in symptoms/signs, laboratory indicators, CT indicators, clinical outcomes, safety indicators, functional scales, etc. The main adverse reactions/events in intervention/exposure groups were gastrointestinal reactions. Conclusions There has been a lot of clinical research evidence on the treatment of COVID-19 by traditional Chinese medicine. To provide strong evidence support for the treatment of COVID-19 by traditional Chinese medicine, more clinical trials with large samples and international collaboration are needed in the future.
To prevent and control 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia diseases (COVID-19), hundreds of medical teams and tens of thousands of medical professionals throughout the nation were transferred to Hubei to assist COVID-19 control efforts. Medical professionals were at high risk of novel coronavirus pneumonia infections. To ensure the prevention and control of infection in medical teams and prevent cross-infection among medical staff at the medical station, this management standard includes routine management standards, resident disinfection, personnel entry and exit process, and logistics support management, so as to provide reference for medical teams combating COVID-19 in the future.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of vaccines for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) . Methods The CNKI, VIP, WanFang Data, PubMed, EMbase and Web of Science databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines from their inception to June 30th, 2022. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed using RevMan 5.3 software and Stata 12.0 software. Results A total of 13 RCTs involving 139 015 subjects were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the sero-antibody conversion rate (RR=37.883, 95%CI 8.086 to 177.491, P<0.001) and infection prevention rate (RR=1.011, 95%CI 1.006 to 1.017, P<0.001) of the vaccine group were higher than those of the placebo group. The incidence of adverse reactions in the vaccine group was higher than that in the placebo group (OR=1.839, 95%CI 1.165 to 2.903, P=0.009), which mainly included pain, redness, swelling, fever, headache and itching (P<0.05). However, the incidence of serious adverse reactions was not significantly different from that of the placebo group. Conclusion The current evidence shows that the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines is high. The most prevalent adverse reactions are mild and moderate, and severe adverse reactions are the same as those of the placebo group. Due to the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are required to verify the above conclusion.