A Quantitative Estimate of the Expected Shortening of the Median Isolation Period of Patients With COVID-19 After the Adoption of a Symptom-Based Strategy

Abstract

A long period of isolation was observed in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in Milan over March-September 2020 (45; IQR: 37–54 days). A significantly shorter period would have been observed by the application of May-WHO (22, IQR: 17–30 days, P < 0.001) and October-Italian (26, IQR: 21–34 days, P < 0.001) Guidelines. The adoption of the new symptom-based criteria is likely to lead to a significant reduction in the length of the isolation period with potential social, economic and psychological benefits, particularly in the younger population with mild/moderate disease and no comorbidities. In our opinion, the release from isolation after 21 days from symptoms onset, even without a PCR diagnostic test, in most cases seems the most adequate strategy that could balance precautions to prevent SARS CoV-2 transmission and unnecessary prolonged isolation or overuse of diagnostic testing.

The impact of COVID-19 post-infection on the cognition of adults from Peru

“…For example, a nationally representative sample also found females more likely to develop long COVID than their male counterparts (Jacobs et al, 2023). This report is like previous findings that have identified being female as a risk factor for developing long-term COVID controlling for the severity of the disease (Bai et al, 2022), probably explained by immune response differences. While males tend to be more susceptible to viral infections than females, due to females' higher response to viral infections, they tend to have worse disease outcomes (Kopel et al, 2020).…”

Sex differences and immune correlates of Long COVID development, persistence, and resolution

“…In summary, this study utilizes multiple modalities to uncover patterns of immune dysregulation that correlate with LC development, persistence, and resolution. Our discovery of sex-specific differences in immune response suggests that future mechanistic and therapeutic studies should consider stratification by sex, as supported by disproportionate impacts of severe acute disease in males (80)(81)(82)(83)(84)(85)(86) and LC in females (17,(87)(88)(89)(90)(91)(92)(93)(94). We have also found several potential targets for intervention, most notably downregulation of ETS1 transcription factor and increased expression of Th2 cytokines in those with LC.…”

“…Within the first year of the pandemic, males were observed to have higher rates of critical illness and death compared to females from acute COVID-19 (80)(81)(82)(83)(84)(85)(86). Conversely, female sex has been epidemiologically associated with increased risk of developing LC (17,(87)(88)(89)(90)(91)(92)(93)(94). While the exact mechanisms underlying these sex differences remain to be fully elucidated, several innate and adaptive immunologic differences have been noted between the sexes (95,96).…”