Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)–related critical illness and acute illness are associated with a risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis for patients with COVID-19–related critical illness and acute illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. Methods: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel and applied strict management strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The panel included 3 patient representatives. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline-development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (up to 19 August 2020). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. Results: The panel agreed on 2 recommendations. The panel issued conditional recommendations in favor of prophylactic-intensity anticoagulation over intermediate-intensity or therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation for patients with COVID-19–related critical illness or acute illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. Conclusions: These recommendations were based on very low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for high-quality, randomized controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation. They will be updated using a living recommendation approach as new evidence becomes available.

Several studies have reported the characteristics of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet there is a gap in our understanding of the ocular manifestations of COVID-19. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we investigated the prevalence of ocular manifestations in COVID-19 patients. We searched Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and medRxiv from December 1, 2019 to August 11, 2020. Two independent reviewers screened the articles, abstracted the data, and assessed the quality of included studies in duplicate. Thirty-eight studies were eligible after screening of 895 unique articles, with a total of 8,219 COVID-19 patients (55.3% female; n = 3,486 out of 6,308 patients). Using data extracted from cross-sectional studies, we performed randomeffects meta-analyses to estimate the pooled prevalence of ocular symptoms along with 95% confidence interval (CI). The prevalence of ocular manifestations was estimated to be 11.03% (95% CI: 5.71–17.72). In the studies that reported the details of observed ocular symptoms, the most common ocular manifestations were dry eye or foreign body sensation (n = 138, 16%), redness (n = 114, 13.3%), tearing (n = 111, 12.8%), itching (n = 109, 12.6%), eye pain (n = 83, 9.6%) and discharge (n = 76, 8.8%). Moreover, conjunctivitis had the highest rate among reported ocular diseases in COVID-19 patients (79 out of 89, 88.8%). The results suggest that approximately one out of ten COVID-19 patients show at least one ocular symptom. Attention to ocular manifestations, especially conjunctivitis, can increase the sensitivity of COVID-19 detection among patients.

No abstract

In 2011, over 10.1 million people were held in prisons around the world. HIV prevalence is elevated in prison and this is due to the over representation of people who inject drugs (PWID). Yet HIV prevention programs for PWID are scarce in the prison setting. With a high proportion of drug users and few prevention programs, HIV transmission occurs and sometimes at an alarming rate. This commentary focuses primarily on drug users in prison; their risk behaviours and levels of infection. It also comments on the transmission of HIV including outbreaks and the efforts to prevent transmission within the prison setting. The spread of HIV in prison has substantial public health implications as virtually all prisoners return to the community. HIV prevention and treatment strategies known to be effective in community settings, such as methadone maintenance treatment, needle and syringe programs, condoms and antiretroviral therapy should be provided to prisoners as a matter of urgency.

Background: COVID-19 related acute illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians and other health care professionals in decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19 who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. Methods: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel, including three patient representatives, and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (up to March 2021). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. Results: The panel agreed on one additional recommendation. The panel issued a conditional recommendation against the use of outpatient anticoagulant prophylaxis in patients with COVID-19 being discharged from the hospital who do not have suspected or confirmed VTE or another indication for anticoagulation. Conclusions: This recommendation was based on very low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for high-quality, randomized controlled trials assessing the role of post-discharge thromboprophylaxis. Other key research priorities include better evidence on assessing risk of thrombosis and bleeding outcomes in patients with COVID-19 after hospital discharge.

Background: COVID-19 related critical illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians and other health care professionals in decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19-related critical illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. Methods: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel, including three patient representatives, and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (up to March 5, 2021). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. This is an update on guidelines published in February 2021. Results: The panel agreed on one additional recommendation. The panel issued a conditional recommendation in favor of prophylactic-intensity over intermediate-intensity anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19 related-critical illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. Conclusions: This recommendation was based on low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for further high-quality, randomized controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation in critically ill patients. Other key research priorities include better evidence on predictors of thrombosis and bleeding risk in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and the impact of non-anticoagulant therapies (e.g., antiviral agents, corticosteroids) on thrombotic risk.

We estimated the prevalence of recent HIV testing (i.e., having an HIV test during the last 12 months and knew the results) among 1,295 HIV-negative Iranian female sex workers (FSW) in 2015. Overall, 70.4% (95% confidence intervals: 59.6, 79.3) of the participants reported a recent HIV testing. Concerns about their HIV status (83.2%) was reported as the most common reason for HIV testing. Incarceration history, having >5 paying partners, having >1 non-paying partner, receiving harm reduction services, utilizing healthcare services, and knowing an HIV testing site were significantly associated with recent HIV testing. In contrast, outreach participants, having one non-paying sexual partner, and self-reported inconsistent condom use reduced the likelihood of recent HIV testing. HIV testing uptake showed a ~2.5 times increase among FSW since 2010. While these findings are promising and show improvement over a short period, HIV testing programs should be expanded particularly through mobile and outreach efforts.

ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and harms of adding medical cannabis to prescription opioids among people living with chronic pain.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesCENTRAL, EMBASE and MEDLINE.Main outcomes and measuresOpioid dose reduction, pain relief, sleep disturbance, physical and emotional functioning and adverse events.Study selection criteria and methodsWe included studies that enrolled patients with chronic pain receiving prescription opioids and explored the impact of adding medical cannabis. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.ResultsEligible studies included five randomised trials (all enrolling chronic cancer-pain patients) and 12 observational studies. All randomised trials instructed participants to maintain their opioid dose, which resulted in a very low certainty evidence that adding cannabis has little or no impact on opioid use (weighted mean difference (WMD) −3.4 milligram morphine equivalent (MME); 95% CI (CI) −12.7 to 5.8). Randomised trials provided high certainty evidence that cannabis addition had little or no effect on pain relief (WMD −0.18 cm; 95% CI −0.38 to 0.02; on a 10 cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain) or sleep disturbance (WMD −0.22 cm; 95% CI −0.4 to −0.06; on a 10 cm VAS for sleep disturbance; minimally important difference is 1 cm) among chronic cancer pain patients. Addition of cannabis likely increases nausea (relative risk (RR) 1.43; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.96; risk difference (RD) 4%, 95% CI 0% to 7%) and vomiting (RR 1.5; 95% CI 1.01 to 2.24; RD 3%; 95% CI 0% to 6%) (both moderate certainty) and may have no effect on constipation (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.54 to 1.35; RD −1%; 95% CI −4% to 2%) (low certainty). Eight observational studies provided very low certainty evidence that adding cannabis reduced opioid use (WMD −22.5 MME; 95% CI −43.06 to −1.97).ConclusionOpioid-sparing effects of medical cannabis for chronic pain remain uncertain due to very low certainty evidence.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018091098.