Background Chronic respiratory diseases are risk factors for severe disease in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Respiratory tract infection is one of the commonest causes of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). There has not been evidence suggesting the link between COVID-19 and AECOPD, especially in places with dramatic responses in infection control with universal masking and aggressive social distancing. Methods This is a retrospective study to assess the number of admissions of AECOPD in the first three months of 2020 in Queen Mary Hospital with reference to the admissions in past five years. Log-linear model was used for statistical inference of covariates, including percentage of masking, air quality health index and air temperature. Results The number of admissions for AECOPD significantly decreased by 44.0% (95% CI 36.4%–52.8%, p < 0.001) in the first three months of 2020 compared with the monthly average admission in 2015–2019. Compare to same period of previous years, AECOPD decreased by 1.0% with each percent of increased masking (p < 0.001) and decreased by 3.0% with increase in 1 °C in temperature (p = 0.045). The numbers of admissions for control diagnoses (heart failure, intestinal obstruction and iron deficiency anaemia) in the same period in 2020 were not reduced. Conclusions The number of admissions for AECOPD decreased in first three months of 2020, compared with previous years. This was observed with increased masking percentage and social distancing in Hong Kong. We postulated universal masking and social distancing during COVID-19 pandemics both contributed in preventing respiratory tract infections hence AECOPD.

were involved in critical revision of manuscript for important intellectual content and final approval of the manuscript. Pak-Leung Ho was involved in study concept and design; analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content; study supervision; and approval of the final version of the manuscript.

ObjectivesTo compare the incidence and severity of invasive pneumococcal diseases (IPDs), pneumococcal pneumonia and all-cause pneumonia during the COVID-19 pandemic period with universal masking and social distancing with that of previous 5 years.DesignRetrospective observational study on incidence of IPDs, pneumococcal pneumonia and all-cause pneumonia between January 2015–December 2019 and March 2020–March 2021. January–February 2020 was excluded from analysis as it was treated as a transitional period between normal time and pandemic.SettingEpisode-based data by retrieval of hospitalisation records from the Hospital Authority’s territory-wide electronic medical record database in Hong Kong.ParticipantsHospitalised patients with IPD (n=742), pneumococcal pneumonia (n=2163) and all-cause pneumonia (including COVID-19 pneumonia, n=453 999) aged 18 years or above. Control diagnoses were included to assess confounding from health-seeking behaviours.Primary and secondary outcomesPrimary outcome is the incidence of diseases between two periods. Secondary outcomes include disease severity surrogated by length of stay and mortality.ResultsMonthly average number of IPD, pneumococcal pneumonia and all-cause pneumonia hospitalisation significantly decreased by 88.9% (95% CI 79.8% to 98.0%, p<0.0005), 72.5% (95% CI 65.9% to 79.1%, p<0.0005) and 17.5% (95% CI 16.8% to 18.2%, p<0.0005), respectively. Changes in trend from January 2015–December 2019 to March 2020–March 2021 were −70% (95% CI −87% to −35%, p=0.0025), –43% (95% CI −59% to −19%, p=0.0014) and −11% (95% CI −13% to −10%, p<0.0005), respectively. Length of stay for IPD and pneumococcal pneumonia episodes were insignificantly different in the two periods. No reductions in hospitalisations for control diagnoses were observed.ConclusionsIncidence of IPD, pneumococcal pneumonia and all-cause pneumonia decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was observed with universal masking and social distancing. We postulated this is related to reduced transmission of respiratory viruses and bacteria.

Background Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) led to pandemic that affected almost all countries in the world. Many countries have implemented border restriction as a public health measure to limit local outbreak. However, there is inadequate scientific data to support such a practice, especially in the presence of an established local transmission of the disease. Objective To apply a metapopulation Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Recovered (SEIR) model with inspected migration to investigate the effect of border restriction as a public health measure to limit outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019. Methods We apply a modified metapopulation SEIR model with inspected migration with simulating population migration, and incorporating parameters such as efficiency of custom inspection in blocking infected travelers in the model. The population sizes were retrieved from government reports, while the number of COVID-19 patients were retrieved from Hong Kong Department of Health and China Centre for Disease Control (CDC) data. The R0 was obtained from previous clinical studies. Results Complete border closure can help to reduce the cumulative COVID-19 case number and mortality in Hong Kong by 13.99% and 13.98% respectively. To prevent full occupancy of isolation facilities in Hong Kong; effective public health measures to reduce local R0 to below 1.6 was necessary, apart from having complete border closure. Conclusions Early complete travel restriction is effective in reducing cumulative cases and mortality. However, additional anti-COVID-19 measures to reduce local R0 to below 1.6 are necessary to prevent COVID-19 cases from overwhelming hospital isolation facilities.

Background While there are postulations that asthma is potentially associated with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), there has been conflicting results from studies on the impact mild-to-moderate COVID-19 on asthma control after recovery. Methods A case control study on the association between mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and asthma control post infection was conducted. The primary outcome was a reduction in Asthma Control Test (ACT) score by ≥ 3 points post-COVID infection. The secondary outcomes included the change in ACT score, the proportion of patient with ACT score who dropped to ≤ 15 on enrolment visit and the need for escalation of asthma maintenance therapy. Results Out of the total of 221 adult patients with asthma recruited, 111 had mild-to-moderate COVID-19 within 30 to 270 days prior to study enrolment. The adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for a reduction in ACT score by ≥ 3 points after COVID-19 was 3.105 (95% CI = 1.385–6.959, p = 0.006). The odds of escalation of asthma maintenance therapy by at least 1 Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) step was 4.733 (95% CI = 1.151–19.467, p = 0.031) and asthma patient are more likely to become uncontrolled after COVID-19 [aOR = 5.509 (95% CI = 1.061–28.600, p = 0.042)]. Conclusion Mild-to-moderate COVID-19 among asthma patients, upon recovery, was associated with worsening of asthma symptom, lower ACT score, a higher need for escalation of asthma maintenance therapy and more uncontrolled asthma.

Background Chronic illnesses were reported to be poor prognostic factors associated with severe illness and mortality in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) infection. The association with asthma, however, is limited and controversial, especially for mild asthma. Methods A territory wide retrospective study was conducted to investigate the association between asthma and the prognosis of COVID‐19. All patients with laboratory confirmed in Hong Kong for COVID‐19 from the 23 January to 30 September 2020 were included in the study. Severe diseases were defined as those who develop respiratory complications, systemic complications, and death. Results Among the 4498 patients included in the analysis, 165 had asthma, with 141 having mild asthma. Patients with asthma were significantly more likely to require invasive mechanical ventilation (incidence = 17.0% odds ratio [OR] = 4.765, p < 0.001), oxygen therapy (incidence = 39.4%, OR = 3.291, p < 0.001), intensive care unit admission (incidence = 21.2%, OR = 3.625, p < 0.001), and systemic steroid treatment (incidence = 34.5%, OR = 4.178, p < 0.001) and develop shock (incidence = 16.4%, OR = 4.061, p < 0.001), acute kidney injury (incidence = 6.1%, OR = 3.281, p = 0.033), and secondary bacterial infection (incidence = 56.4%, OR = 2.256, p < 0.001). They also had significantly longer length of stay. Similar findings were also found in patients with asthma of the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) steps 1 and 2 upon subgroup analysis. Conclusions Asthma, regardless of severity, is an independent prognostic factor for COVID‐19 and is associated with more severe disease with respiratory and systemic complications.

Objectives: Recent meta-analyses have noted that »70% of transient ischemic attack (TIA)/stroke patients have sleep apnea. However, the heterogeneity between studies was high and did not appear to be accounted by the phase of stroke. We conducted an updated meta-analysis and aimed to determine whether the prevalence of sleep apnea amongst stroke patients differs by the subtype, etiology, severity and location of stroke and hence could account for some of the unexplained heterogeneity observed in previous studies. Materials and Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library (from their commencements to July 2020) for studies which reported the prevalence of sleep apnea by using polysomnography in TIA/stroke patients. We used random-effects model to calculate the pooled prevalence of sleep apnea and explored whether the prevalence differed by stroke characteristics. Results: Seventy-five studies describing 8670 stroke patients were included in this meta-analysis. The overall prevalence of sleep apnea was numerically higher in patients with hemorrhagic vs. ischemic stroke [82.7% (64.4À92.7%) vs. 67.5% (63.2À71.5%), p=0.098], supratentorial vs. infratentorial stroke [64.4% (56.7À71.4%) vs. 56.5% (42.2À60.0%), p=0.171], and cardioembolic [74.3% (59.6À85.0%)] vs. other ischemic stroke subtypes [large artery atherosclerosis: 68.3% (52.5À80.7%), small vessel occlusion: 56.1% (38.2À72.6%), others/ undetermined: 47.9% (31.6À64.6%), p=0.089]. The heterogeneity in sleep apnea prevalence was partially accounted by the subtype (1.9%), phase (5.0%) and location of stroke (14.0%) among reported studies. Conclusions: The prevalence of sleep apnea in the stroke population appears to differ by the subtype, location, etiology and phase of stroke.

Healthcare-seeking behavior changed during the COVID-19 pandemic and might alter the epidemiology of pleural empyema. In this study, the incidence, etiology and outcomes of patients admitted for pleural empyema in Hong Kong in the pre-COVID-19 (January 2015–December 2019) and post-COVID-19 (January 2020–June 2022) periods were compared. Overall, Streptococcus pneumoniae was the predominant organism in <18-year-old patients, while Streptococcus anginosus, anaerobes and polymicrobial infections were more frequent in adults. In the post-COVID-19 period, a marked decline in the incidence of pleural empyema in children was observed (pre-COVID-19, 18.4 ± 4.8 vs. post-COVID-19, 2.0 ± 2.9 cases per year, p = 0.036), while the incidence in adults remained similar (pre-COVID-19, 189.0 ± 17.2 vs. post-COVID-19, 198.4 ± 5.0 cases per year; p = 0.23). In the post-COVID-19 period, polymicrobial etiology increased (OR 11.37, p < 0.0001), while S. pneumoniae etiology decreased (OR 0.073, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, clinical outcomes (length of stay, ICU admission, use of intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy, surgical intervention, death) were not significantly different in pre- and post-COVID-19 periods. In conclusion, an increase in polymicrobial pleural empyema was observed during the pandemic. We postulate that this is related to the delayed presentation of pneumonia to hospitals.