Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by infection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has been rapidly spreading nationwide and abroad. A serologic test to identify antibody dynamics and response to SARS-CoV-2 was developed. Methods The antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were detected by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay based on the recombinant nucleocapsid protein of SARS-CoV-2 in patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 at 3–40 days after symptom onset. The gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis was nucleic acid testing for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). The serodiagnostic power of the specific immunoglobulin M (IgM) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was investigated in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and consistency rate. Results The seroconversion of specific IgM and IgG antibodies were observed as early as the fourth day after symptom onset. In the patients with confirmed COVID-19, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and consistency rate of IgM were 77.3% (51/66), 100%, 100%, 80.0%, and 88.1%, respectively, and those of IgG were 83.3% (55/66), 95.0%, 94.8%, 83.8%, and 88.9%. In patients with suspected COVID-19, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and consistency rate of IgM were 87.5% (21/24), 100%, 100%, 95.2%, and 96.4%, respectively, and those of IgG were 70.8% (17/24), 96.6%, 85.0%, 89.1%, and 88.1%. Both antibodies performed well in serodiagnosis for COVID-19 and rely on great specificity. Conclusions The antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in the middle and later stages of the illness. Antibody detection may play an important role in the diagnosis of COVID-19 as a complementary approach to viral nucleic acid assays.

Infection with SARS-CoV-2, the cause of coronavirus infectious disease-19 , has caused a pandemic with >850,000 cases worldwide and increasing. Several studies report outcomes of COVID-19 in predominately well persons. There are also some data on COVID-19 in persons with predominately solid cancer but controversy whether these persons have the same outcomes. We conducted a cohort study at two centres in Wuhan, China, of 128 hospitalised subjects with haematological cancers, 13 (10%) of whom developed COVID-19. We also studied 226 health care providers, 16 of whom developed COVID-19 and 11 of whom were hospitalised. Co-variates were compared with the 115 subjects with haematological cancers without COVID-19 and with 11 hospitalised health care providers with COVID-19. There were no significant differences in baseline co-variates between subjects with haematological cancers developing or not developing COVID-19. Case rates for COVID-19 in hospitalised subjects with haematological cancers was 10% (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 6, 17%) compared with 7% (4, 12%; P = 0.322) in health care providers. However, the 13 subjects with haematological cancers had more severe COVID-19 and more deaths compared with hospitalised health care providers with COVID-19. Case fatality rates were 62% (32, 85%) and 0 (0, 32%; P = 0.002). Hospitalised persons with haematological cancers have a similar case rate of COVID-19 compared with normal health care providers but have more severe disease and a higher case fatality rate. Because we were unable to identify specific risk factors for COVID-19 in hospitalised persons with haematological cancers, we suggest increased surveillance and possible protective isolation.

Aims/hypothesis Hyperglycaemia is associated with an elevated risk of mortality in community-acquired pneumonia, stroke, acute myocardial infarction, trauma and surgery, among other conditions. In this study, we examined the relationship between fasting blood glucose (FBG) and 28-day mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients not previously diagnosed as having diabetes. Methods We conducted a retrospective study involving all consecutive COVID-19 patients with a definitive 28-day outcome and FBG measurement at admission from 24 January 2020 to 10 February 2020 in two hospitals based in Wuhan, China. Demographic and clinical data, 28-day outcomes, in-hospital complications and CRB-65 scores of COVID-19 patients in the two hospitals were analysed. CRB-65 is an effective measure for assessing the severity of pneumonia and is based on four indicators, i.e. confusion, respiratory rate (>30/min), systolic blood pressure (≤90 mmHg) or diastolic blood pressure (≤60 mmHg), and age (≥65 years). Results Six hundred and five COVID-19 patients were enrolled, including 114 who died in hospital. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that age (HR 1.02 [95% CI 1.00, 1.04]), male sex (HR 1.75 [95% CI 1.17, 2.60]), CRB-65 score 1-2 (HR 2.68 [95% CI 1.56, 4.59]), CRB-65 score 3-4 (HR 5.25 [95% CI 2.05, 13.43]) and FBG ≥7.0 mmol/l (HR 2.30 [95% CI 1.49, 3.55]) were independent predictors for 28-day mortality. The OR for 28-day in-hospital complications in those with FBG ≥7.0 mmol/l and 6.1-6.9 mmol/l vs <6.1 mmol/l was 3.99 (95% CI 2.71, 5.88) or 2.61 (95% CI 1.64, 4.41), respectively. Conclusions/interpretation FBG ≥7.0 mmol/l at admission is an independent predictor for 28-day mortality in patients with COVID-19 without previous diagnosis of diabetes. Glycaemic testing and control are important to all COVID-19 patients even where they have no pre-existing diabetes, as most COVID-19 patients are prone to glucose metabolic disorders.

Purpose This study was conducted to evaluate the status of depression and anxiety of healthcare workers and to explore the risk factors during the outbreak of COVID-19 in China. Methods A cross-sectional study was designed using convenience sampling to obtain a sample of healthcare workers. A structured questionnaire was designed to collect the information of the basic characteristics, workload, and the health condition. Burnout, coping style, anxiety, and depression were measured by specific scales. Multiple logistic regression model was performed to explore the risk factors of anxiety or depression. Results There were 902 questionnaires received between February 9, 2020 and February 11, 2020. The proportion of healthcare workers with symptoms of moderate/severe anxiety and moderate/severe depression were 16.63% and 18.29%, respectively. There were 24.50% healthcare workers experiencing moderate/severe anxiety and depression at the same time. The increased workload, respiratory symptoms, digestive symptoms, having done specific test(s) related to COVID-19, having family member needs to be taken care of, negative coping style, and job burnout were the independent risk factors of anxiety. Furthermore, the increased workload, respiratory symptoms, digestive symptoms, having done specific test(s) related to COVID-19, negative coping style, and job burnout were the independent risk factors of depression. Conclusion More attention should be paid to the mental health of frontline healthcare workers at the outbreak of COVID-19 in China. Taking steps to reduce the intensity of the work and burnout will be effective to stabilize the mental state of them.

Background: The outbreak of COVID-19 in China was a sudden bio-disaster, which may bring a negative impact on the job burnout of health care professionals (HCPs).Objective: We aim to find out the association factors, especially those closely related to this outbreak, of job burnout in Chinese HCPs.Method: The cross-sectional survey about HCPs' job burnout based on a network platform was conducted in high and low infection regions during the COVID-19 outbreak in China. The demographic characteristics, medical-work-related factors, risk of getting infected due to occupational exposure, and family factors were collected by the self-reported questionnaire. The Chinese version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (CMBI) and the Trait Coping Style Questionnaire (TCSQ) were employed in this study to evaluate the job burnout and coping style, respectively. Furthermore, statistical analysis was done to find out the associated factors of job burnout.Results: We collected 880 complete questionnaires from doctors and nurses from February 9, 2020 to February 11, 2020. In this study, the positive rates of three dimensions of burnout (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment) and overall burnout were 9.09, 50.57, 56.59, and 73.98%, respectively. After the statistical analysis, we found that several factors can independently affect the dimensions. Working in the high infection region and negative coping styles can affect all three dimensions at once. More night shift quantity and having symptoms could increase emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, while higher work intensity and senior title could increase emotional exhaustion and reduce personal accomplishment, respectively.Conclusion: The rate of moderate and severe burnout had increased due to the outbreak. More attention should be paid to burnout in HCPs, especially those with negative coping. There were some potential ways to reduce burnout, such as reducing their workload and providing better protection from the virus.

Βεσιδεσ χοντινυινγ εφφορτ ιν δεϖελοπινγ ΜΕΜΣ−βασεδ mανυφαχτυρινγ τεχηνιθυεσ, λατεστ εφφορτ ιν Μιχρο−mανυφαχτυρινγ ισ αλσο ιν Νον−ΜΕΜΣ−βασεδ mανυφαχτυρινγ. Ρεσεαρχη ανδ τεχηνολογιχαλ δεϖελοπmεντ (ΡΤD) ιν τηισ φιελδ ισ ενχουραγεδ βψ τηε ινχρεασεδ δεmανδ ον mιχρο−χοmπονεντσ ασ ωελλ ασ προmισεδ δεϖελοπmεντ ιν τηε σχαλινγ δοων οφ τηε τραδιτιοναλ mαχρο−mανυφαχτυρινγ προχεσσεσ φορ mιχρο−λενγτη−σχαλε mανυφαχτυρινγ. Τηισ παπερ ηιγηλιγητσ σοmε ΕΥ φυνδεδ ρεσεαρχη αχτιϖιτιεσ ιν mιχρο/νανο−mανυφαχτυρινγ, ανδ γιϖεσ εξαmπλεσ οφ τηε λατεστ δεϖελοπmεντ ιν mιχρο−mανυφαχτυρινγ mετηοδσ/τεχηνιθυεσ, προχεσσ χηαινσ, ηψβριδ− προχεσσεσ, mανυφαχτυρινγ εθυιπmεντ ανδ συππορτινγ τεχηνολογιεσ/δεϖιχε, ετχ., ωηιχη ισ φολλοωεδ βψ α συmmαρψ οφ τηε αχηιεϖεmεντσ οφ τηε ΕΥ ΜΑΣΜΙΧΡΟ προϕεχτ. Φιναλλψ, χονχλυδινγ ρεmαρκσ αρε γιϖεν, ωηιχη ραισε σεϖεραλ ισσυεσ χονχερνινγ φυρτηερ δεϖελοπmεντ ιν mιχρο−mανυφαχτυρινγ.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a public health emergency of global concern. We aimed to explore the risk factors of 14-day and 28-day mortality and develop a model for predicting 14-day and 28day survival probability among adult hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Methods: In this multicenter, retrospective, cohort study, we examined 828 hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 hospitalized in Wuhan Union Hospital and Central Hospital of Wuhan between January 12 and February 9, 2020. Among the 828 patients, 516 and 186 consecutive patients admitted in Wuhan Union Hospital were enrolled in the training cohort and the validation cohort, respectively. A total of 126 patients hospitalized in Central Hospital of Wuhan were enrolled in a second external validation cohort. Demographic, clinical, radiographic, and laboratory measures; treatment; proximate causes of death; and 14-day and 28-day mortality are described. Patients' data were collected by reviewing the medical records, and their 14-day and 28-day outcomes were followed up.

No abstract