Skip header and navigation

130 records – page 1 of 7.

Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC033001 RR
Question Submitted
March 30, 2020
Date Completed
March 30, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC033001 RR
Question Submitted
March 30, 2020
Date Completed
March 30, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Key Findings
· Some countries like Taiwan and Malaysia have created their own intubation hood design as others offered to produce or modify the original design to fit their country’s equipment. · Several countries have also created innovation in airway management such as 3D printed respirator valves for hospitals and 3D printed ventilators. · An Emergency physician in Northern Italy shared that due to influx of patients in the hospitals, “intubation and invasive mechanical ventilators in the ED are reserved for patients not responsive to NIV” although in principle can give a more favorable chance for patients if given before their condition deteriorates.
Category
Infection Prevention and Control
Subject
Intubation
Aerosols
Population
All
Clinical Setting
Ambulatory
Cardiac unit
Priority Level
Level 2 completed within 8 hours
Cite As
Badea, A; Groot, G; Dalidowicz, M. Where and how are they producing and using intubation hoods? 2020 Mar 30; Document no.: EOC033001 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 7 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Similar Reviews
EOC090202 RR
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC040101 RR
Question Submitted
April 1, 2020
Date Completed
April 1, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC040101 RR
Question Submitted
April 1, 2020
Date Completed
April 1, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Key Findings
· There are some recommendations and precautions from WHO, CDC, Canada and the UK that there is transmission of the COVID virus from the administration of nebulizer medication. · Some case studies of SARS found few instances that patients may likely be infected after aerosol generating procedures including nebulized medications, and although there are few evidences that demonstrates low risk of viral transmission from nebulizers, possibility of transmission remains
Category
Epidemiology
Infection Prevention and Control
Subject
Aerosols
Risk
Transmission
Population
All
Clinical Setting
Ambulatory
Priority Level
Level 2 completed within 8 hours
Cite As
Badea, A; Groot, G; Fenton, M; Dalidowicz, M; Young, C. What is the degree of COVID-19 transmission through the administration of nebulizer medication either in clinical practice or in animal experiments? 2020 Apr 1; Document no.: EOC040101 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 10 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC040203 RR
Question Submitted
April 4, 2020
Date Completed
April 4, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC040203 RR
Question Submitted
April 4, 2020
Date Completed
April 4, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Key Findings
One study indicated a significant reduction in mortality in regions with field hospitals
Cited as an important management tool of mild to moderate cases to prevent further transmission and allow rapid referral to higher level hospitals in the case of deterioration
Ability to significantly free up scarce resources for severe to critical cases
Category
Administration
Subject
Facilities
Population
All
Priority Level
Level 2 completed within 8 hours
Cite As
Badea, A; Groot, G; Dalidowicz, M. What is the evidence for early implementation of field hospitals for COVID-19? 2020 Apr 4; Document no.: EOC040203 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 7 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC040601 RR
Question Submitted
April 6, 2020
Date Completed
April 6, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC040601 RR
Question Submitted
April 6, 2020
Date Completed
April 6, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Key Findings
Surgical masks are superior to cloth masks in their ability to block particles
Small scale studies to support reduced transmission in practice
Several mechanical studies indicating meager protection
Evidence supports current national recommendations to combine mask use with proper hand hygiene and above all, proper distancing measures
Category
Infection Prevention and Control
Healthcare Services
Subject
Personal Protective Equipment
Face Masks
Population
All
Clinical Setting
Community
Priority Level
Level 1 completed within 4 hours
Cite As
Badea, A; Groot, G; Dalidowicz, M; Young, C. What is the evidence for the effectiveness of face masks for preventing the spread of COVID-19 in the community? 2020 Apr 6; Document no.: EOC040601 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 8 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC040201 RR
Question Submitted
April 7, 2020
Date Completed
April 7, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC040201 RR
Question Submitted
April 7, 2020
Date Completed
April 7, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Key Findings
Most large scale studies quantifiying the rate of sore throat in COVID cases is under 10%, with some exceptions of small scale studies.
Only one study comparing COVID (7% incidence of sore throat) to non-COVID patients (23% incidence of sore throat)
Category
Clinical Presentation
Subject
Symptoms
Population
All
Priority Level
Level 1 completed within 4 hours
Cite As
Badea, A; Groot, G; Dalidowicz, M; Young, C; Miller, L. What is the prevalence of sore throat as a symptom of COVID-19? 2020 Apr 7; Document no.: EOC040201 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 8 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LAB040803 RR
Question Submitted
April 8, 2020
Date Completed
April 11, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Laboratory
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LAB040803 RR
Question Submitted
April 8, 2020
Date Completed
April 11, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Laboratory
Key Findings
Low grade evidence shows IgG and IgM antibody response correlates with neutralizingantibody titerand viral clearance, which is suggestive of protective humoral immunity inCOVID-19 patients with mild to moderate symptoms.
There is no available evidence with which to estimate the durability of this protective response. However, if the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 resembles that toward SARS-CoV, this protective humoral immunity may persist for several years.
Higher IgG antibody titersand a robustresponse were noted in severe to criticallyill patients and were associated with lower viral clearance and a worse clinical prognosis.
Low grade evidence suggests that convalescent plasma treatment may improve the clinical status of critically ill COVID-19 patients(one case series with only five patients enrolled).
Category
Clinical Presentation
Subject
Testing
Serology
Immunity
Natural History
Population
All
Priority Level
Level 2 completed within 8 hours
Cite As
Wang, H; Reeder, B; Duncan, V; Is the IgM or IgG immune response protective? 2020 Apr 11; Document no.: LAB040803 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 6 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LTC040801 RR
Question Submitted
April 8, 2020
Date Completed
April 14, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Long Term Care
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LTC040801 RR
Question Submitted
April 8, 2020
Date Completed
April 14, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Long Term Care
Key Findings
Provincial and state policies tend towards disincentivizing removal of residents from LTC during the pandemic due to perceived increased risks in the community.
Planning, risk and resource evaluation, clear communication, and follow-up arerequired to successfully transition a well-selected resident from LTC to the community.
Several tools exist to support communication and decision making around leaving LTC.
Family/informal caregiver fears are heightened by media reports describing abandonmentand lack of proper PPE use.
Fears can be mitigated by frequent, transparent communication that is both push and pull in nature.
Increased oversight of LTC homes by provincial oversight committees during the pandemic can ensure that provision of routine care, infection prevention measures, and effective communicationare in place.
If a resident leaves to community and has to return,appropriate isolation and screening measures would be required.
Category
Healthcare Services
Administration
Subject
Facilities
Decision Making
Family
Population
Aged (80+)
Clinical Setting
Long Term Care
Priority Level
Level 3 completed within 2-3 days
Cite As
Tupper, S; Ward, H; Groot, G; Ellsworth, C; Dalidowicz, M; Boden, C. What decision support or communication materials are available for helping LTC directors discuss care options with residents' family members? 2020 Apr 14; Document no.: LTC040801 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 23 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LAB041402 RR
Question Submitted
April 14, 2020
Date Completed
April 15, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Laboratory
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LAB041402 RR
Question Submitted
April 14, 2020
Date Completed
April 15, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Laboratory
Key Findings
The majority of patients (>50%) appear to seroconvert between 8-14 days following the onset of symptoms.
Nearly all patients (>80%) seroconvert >15 days following the onset of symptoms.
The IgM response is detected earlier (median 12 days) than the IgG response (median 14 days).
Seroconversion appears to follow clinical recovery in most cases.
Category
Clinical Presentation
Subject
Antibodies
Natural History
Serology
Population
All
Priority Level
Level 2 completed within 8 hours
Cite As
Vanstone, J; Reeder, B; Duncan, V. At what time in the disease timeline of COVID-19 do antibodies develop? 2020 Apr 15; Document no.: LAB041402 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 4 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LAB041401 RR
Question Submitted
April 14, 2020
Date Completed
April 15, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Laboratory
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LAB041401 RR
Question Submitted
April 14, 2020
Date Completed
April 15, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Laboratory
Key Findings
Moderate to strong grade evidence show the overall sensitivityrangeof IgM, IgG, and combined IgM/IgG are 48.1% to 94.1%, 64.7% to 100%, 83% to 100%, respectively.
IgM/IgG combined assay, with the posterior probability of 99.15%, has greater accuracyand sensitivity than a single IgM or IgG test.
The sensitivity of antibody tests is extremely low (~ 11.1%) in the first week following the onsetof symptoms but increasesrapidlyduring the second week.
IgG and IgM titers in patients with severe disease arehigher than those in the non-severe patients.
Antibody testsmay detect the presence of COVID-19 in asymptomatic individuals with negative rt-PCRresults.
Category
Clinical Presentation
Subject
Testing
Serology
Antibodies
Priority Level
Level 2 completed within 8 hours
Cite As
Wang, H; Reeder, B; Howell-Spooner, B. How well does the presence and level of antibodies predict the presence or absence of the disease? 2020 Apr 15; Document no.: LAB041401 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 9 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Similar Reviews
PH042401 RR
EPM051201 RR
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LTC041501 RR
Question Submitted
April 15, 2020
Date Completed
April 16, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Long Term Care
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LTC041501 RR
Question Submitted
April 15, 2020
Date Completed
April 16, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Long Term Care
Key Findings
There is limited information on transferring infected LTC residents to an off-site cohort location such as a purpose-built field hospital. Lessons learned from SARS suggest that transfers to dedicated facilities for cohorting may increase spread.
A greater number of recommendations support on-site cohorting of residents infected with droplet/contact transmitted illnesses. Health Canada’s COVID-19 Interim Guidance for LTC Homes report states that transfers within and between facilities should be avoided except for medically indicated procedures that cannot be provided by the long-term care home e.g. respiratory failure requiring ventilation or hemodynamic compromise.
Family members encourage cohorting a resident in the LTC home if possible. They also recommend following residents’ advanced care directives to determine whether life-sustaining measures are preferred, robust healthcare and psychosocial support for residents who are cohorted, and clear communication with residents and family members.
Cohorting on site includes isolation of residents to their rooms (preferably single occupancy) or dedicated units in the home. Staff and equipment cohorting should also be implemented if possible (i.e.dedicated staff that do not provide care to residents in non-infected units, and resident specific equipment).
Consider cohorting in day program spaces, recreation rooms, palliative care rooms, chapels, or dining rooms in the home that are no longer being used as common spacesas long as call bells or other appropriate communication measures are in place.
Category
Healthcare Services
Infection Prevention and Control
Subject
Facilities
Decision Making
Health Planning
Transmission
Population
Aged (80+)
Clinical Setting
Long Term Care
Priority Level
Level 3 completed within 2-3 days
Cite As
Tupper, S; Ward, H; Ellsworth, C; Dalidowicz, M; Boden, C. What are the best practices for cohorting long-term care residents to reduce transmision of COVID-19? 2020 Apr 16; Document no.: LTC041501 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 10 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
PPE041701 RR
Question Submitted
April 17, 2020
Date Completed
April 17, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Personal Protective Equipment
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
PPE041701 RR
Question Submitted
April 17, 2020
Date Completed
April 17, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Personal Protective Equipment
Key Findings
The most commonly reported symptoms inCOVID-19patientswere: fever (79-89%); cough (58-69%); fatigue/muscle aches (29-36%); dyspnea (22-38%); chest distress (31%); and expectoration (12-29%).
Less common were various GI symptoms (9-18%) including diarrhea (5-7%) and nausea (4%),as well as sore throat (10-12%) and headache (6-12%).
Although the Government of Canada lists runny nose as a potential symptom for a suspect case, it was not reported as such in the meta-analyses examined.
Category
Clinical Presentation
Subject
Natural History
Symptoms
Screening
Priority Level
Level 2 completed within 8 hours
Cite As
McCarron, M; Groot, G; Dalidowicz, M; Miller, L. What distinguishes COVID-19 from influenza-like illnesses? 2020 Apr 17; Document no.: PPE041701 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 5 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LAB041501 RR
Question Submitted
April 15, 2020
Date Completed
April 17, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Laboratory
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LAB041501 RR
Question Submitted
April 15, 2020
Date Completed
April 17, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Laboratory
Key Findings
Seroconversion occurs in majority of COVID-19 patients from the second week following symptomonseton.
Between 7.8 -43.6% of suspect cases and 4.7% of asymptomatic individuals with negative nucleic acid test (rt-PCR) test positive for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2.
An increase in antibody titrescorrelates with a neutralizing antibody response and positive recovery of COVID-19 patients with mild to moderate symptoms.
Although higher antibody titreand more robust antibody response are observed in severe and critically ill patients, those antibodies may not effectively clear virus and higher antibody levels may be associated with a worse clinical progress.
Category
Clinical Presentation
Subject
Antibodies
Natural History
Serology
Priority Level
Level 2 completed within 8 hours
Cite As
Wang, H; Reeder, B; Howell-Spooner, B. How well does the presence and level of antibodies predict the clinical course of disease? 2020 Apr 17; Document no.: LAB041501 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 5 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
VPL041601 RR
Question Submitted
April 18, 2020
Date Completed
April 19, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Vulnerable Populations
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
VPL041601 RR
Question Submitted
April 18, 2020
Date Completed
April 19, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Vulnerable Populations
Key Findings
Across also sources reviewed, the ideal scenario is provision of safe self-isolating spacesin private accommodation(ideally own room and bathroom) through negotiations with hotels/hostels/community centers
Where self-isolation in private accommodation is not possible, consider risk stratification and cohorting of residentsin congregate sheltersalong a continuum of(cases/suspected)to (asymptomatic/medically vulnerable); recognizing the resulting impact of reduced bed density on bed capacity
Ideally designate shelters by cohort with testing and transfer protocols in place·Ensure infection control measures are in place, both at the institutional and personal infection control level –including education and visual cues.
Designate staff to specific cohortswith no transfer of staff between sites/cohorts·For those remainingon the streets/ sheltering outside, distribute supplies (water, hand sanitizer, food), information (symptomsphysical distancing, and access to health care), and provide access to public washrooms/ portable toilets & handwashing facilities
Working with established tent cities or establishing tent cities may be important to consider
Category
Infection Prevention and Control
Subject
Vulnerable Populations
Self-Isolation
Priority Level
Level 2 completed within 8 hours
Cite As
Badea, A; Abonyi, S; Hanson, L; Bourassa, C; Dalidowicz, M; Young, C; Howell-Spooner, B. What are the best practices for self-isolation for transient populations? 2020 Apr 19; Document no.: VPL041601 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 11 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
VPL041602 RR
Question Submitted
April 19, 2020
Date Completed
April 19, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Vulnerable Populations
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
VPL041602 RR
Question Submitted
April 19, 2020
Date Completed
April 19, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Vulnerable Populations
Key Findings
Reassessing procedures ofopioid agonist therapy(OAT)–reducing requirements to allow more to access OAT
Considerations of reducing contact by increasing duration of OAT carries for those previously ineligible, and ensuring closing of provision gaps due to weekends/stat holidays/etc.
Increased provision ofsuppliesfor patients
Changes to controlled substance regulations allow for phamacists to extend prescriptions, transfer prescriptions to other pharmacists, accept refills/prescriptions from providers by phone, and allowing the delivery of controlled substances; Recommendations around the prescription of “safe supply” of stimulants and illicit benzodiazepines include the prescription of low-dose medications under (virtual) supervision to reduce the potential for withdrawal
Deferring medical withdrawal management and dose reductions, considerations of transitioning to lower risk OAT
Ensuring access to culturally relevant psychosocial support, and allowing for pharmacological treatment without a requirement of abstinence or psychosocial therapy
Category
Infection Prevention and Control
Subject
Vulnerable Populations
Self-Isolation
Harm Reduction
Priority Level
Level 3 completed within 2-3 days
Cite As
Badea, A; Fornssler, B; Dalidowicz, M; Young, C; Howell-Spooner, B. What are the best practices for delivery of harm reduction services to people who are self-isolating 2020 Apr 20; Document no.: VPL041602 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 10 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LAB042201 RR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
April 23, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Laboratory
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LAB042201 RR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
April 23, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Laboratory
Key Findings
For COVID-19 there are no published data to identify optimal population sampling methods, however, a population-based sample in which testing is performed for both rt-PCR and serology might be recommended. There are also opportunities to examine innovative sampling strategies being used in pilot studies underway in other jurisdictions.
Category
Diagnostics
Epidemiology
Subject
Testing
Public Health
Population
All
Clinical Setting
Community
Priority Level
Level 3 completed within 2-3 days
Cite As
Vanstone, J; Reeder, B; Duncan, V. What sampling method is most appropriate for population testing? 2020 Apr 23; Document no.: LAB042201 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 5 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LAB042202 RR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
April 25, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Laboratory
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
LAB042202 RR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
April 25, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Laboratory
Key Findings
Low grade evidence suggests that SARS-CoV-2 may persist within a population and lead to recrudescent outbreaks in winter months which may include the re-infection of previously infected individuals. · Population monitoring by means of repeated cross-sectional surveys and/or longitudinal cohort studies is strongly advised by WHO
Category
Diagnostics
Epidemiology
Subject
Testing
Public Health
Population
All
Clinical Setting
Community
Priority Level
Level 3 completed within 2-3 days
Cite As
Wang, H; Reeder, B; Howell-Spooner, B. What frequency of repeat population screening will be required? 2020 Apr 25; Document no.: LAB042202 RR. In: COVID19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 4 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
INF042401 RR
Question Submitted
24-Apr-2020
Date Completed
April 27, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Infectious Disease
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
INF042401 RR
Question Submitted
24-Apr-2020
Date Completed
April 27, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Infectious Disease
Key Findings
The period of communicability of symptomatic SARS CoV-2 infections remains unclear.
Viral RNA shedding measured from the onset of illness is a common proxy used to estimate the period of communicability; however, confirmation of the viability of viral remnants in secretions through culture or other methods seldom occurs in practice.
Several factors including age, male sex and clinical severity influence individual variation in viral shedding and suggest the need for tailored control efforts.
Temporal patterns in viral shedding across different types of bodily secretions has implications for transmissibility and criteria for discontinuation of control measures during convalescence.
Category
Infection Prevention and Control
Epidemiology
Subject
Transmission
Symptoms
Symptomatic
Natural History
Asymptomatic
Population
All
Priority Level
Level 3 completed within 2-3 days
Cite As
Williams-Roberts, H; Lee, S; Young, C; Dalidowicz, M; Mueller, M. What is the period of communicability of symptomatic SARS CoV-2? 2020 Apr 27; Document no.: INF042401 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 24 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC042202 RR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
April 27, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC042202 RR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
April 27, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Key Findings
There are no published or grey literature that directly address the review questions · A number of principle based guidelines/recommendations/criteria are available and reviewed. It appears that the WHO interim guidance "Considerations in adjusting public health and social measures in the context of COVID-19" is the best piece of evidence available right now. It is included in the reference list below.
Notes
INTERIM Rapid Review
Category
Administration
Subject
Closures
Reopening
Health Planning
Outcome Assessment
Risk
Population
All
Priority Level
Level 4 completed within 1 week
Cite As
Badea, A; Reeder, B; Groot, G; Miller, L; Young, C. What is the best evidence to guide the sequence or priority of re-opening each type of healthcare service and how have the closures impacted patients? 2020 Apr 24; Document no.: EOC042202 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 11 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC042201 RR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
April 27, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC042201 RR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
April 27, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Key Findings
Mild to moderate disease that it to be managed at home is not as well defined as severe to critical, requiring hospitalization
General consensus that the appearance of severe respiratory systems or altered consciousness are the threshold for requiring hospitalization
Most guidance for assisted monitoring is limited to LTC or other care facilities vs. home care for abled individuals
Category
Clinical Presentation
Clinical Management
Subject
Risk
Treatment
Priority Level
Level 4 completed within 1 week
Cite As
Badea, A; Groot, G; Fox, L; Miller, M. What are the classification levels for disease severity of COVID-19 and how should each level be treated? 2020 Apr 27; Document no.: EOC042201 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 10 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
PH042401 RR
Question Submitted
24-Apr-2020
Date Completed
April 28, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Public Health
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
PH042401 RR
Question Submitted
24-Apr-2020
Date Completed
April 28, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Public Health
Key Findings
Screening tools commonly include fever, respiratory symptoms (cough, shortness of breath), and epidemiological risk factors. · The sensitivity and specificity of screening questionnaires depends considerably on the items used in the questionnaire. The limited published literature demonstrates great variability in the performance of different screening tools: sensitivity ranges from 0 – 48.6 – 84.3 – 100%; specificity ranges from 64.8 – 71.3 – 89.6 – 96%). · The standard WHO symptom checklist performs poorly, with a sensitivity of 48.6%, and specificity of 89.6%. As such, half of individuals who have SARS-CoV-2 present at the time of testing will be missed by the symptom questionnaire (being either asymptomatic or presymptomatic). Depending on the population being screened the prevalence of the virus may vary widely. Given the sensitivity and specificity of the WHO symptom checklist in a population with prevalence ranging from 0.1% to 1% to 10% the positive predictive value (PPV) will be poor, range from 0.4% to 4.8% to 35%, respectively. Furthermore, the performance characteristics of the screening questionnaire may be poorer than reported if used in a setting or time of year when other respiratory viruses with similar symptoms are circulating.
Category
Diagnostics
Epidemiology
Subject
Screening
Population
All
Neonates
Infants
All Pediatrics
Clinical Setting
Ambulatory
Emergency
Long Term Care
Other
OR
Priority Level
Level 4 completed within 1 week
Cite As
Fick, F; Neudorf, C; Reeder, B; Dalidowicz, M; Mueller, M. What is the sensitivity and specificity of screening checklists and temperature checks for detecting the presence of COVID-19 in individuals? 2020 Apr 28; Document no.: PH042401 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 20 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Similar Reviews
LAB041401 RR
EPM051201 RR
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail

130 records – page 1 of 7.