scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Lin Cai

Bio: Lin Cai is an academic researcher from Wuhan University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Guideline & Public health. The author has an hindex of 3, co-authored 3 publications receiving 1484 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This rapid advice guideline is suitable for the first frontline doctors and nurses, managers of hospitals and healthcare sections, community residents, public health persons, relevant researchers, and all person who are interested in the 2019-nCoV.
Abstract: In December 2019, a new type viral pneumonia cases occurred in Wuhan, Hubei Province; and then named “2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)” by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 12 January 2020. For it is a never been experienced respiratory disease before and with infection ability widely and quickly, it attracted the world’s attention but without treatment and control manual. For the request from frontline clinicians and public health professionals of 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia management, an evidence-based guideline urgently needs to be developed. Therefore, we drafted this guideline according to the rapid advice guidelines methodology and general rules of WHO guideline development; we also added the first-hand management data of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University. This guideline includes the guideline methodology, epidemiological characteristics, disease screening and population prevention, diagnosis, treatment and control (including traditional Chinese Medicine), nosocomial infection prevention and control, and disease nursing of the 2019-nCoV. Moreover, we also provide a whole process of a successful treatment case of the severe 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia and experience and lessons of hospital rescue for 2019-nCoV infections. This rapid advice guideline is suitable for the first frontline doctors and nurses, managers of hospitals and healthcare sections, community residents, public health persons, relevant researchers, and all person who are interested in the 2019-nCoV.

1,783 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A working group of clinical experts and methodologists searched the literature for direct evidence on the management of COVID-19, and assessed its certainty generated recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
Abstract: The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting more than seventeen million people around the world. Diagnosis and treatment guidelines for clinicians caring for patients are needed. In the early stage, we have issued “A rapid advice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infected pneumonia (standard version)”; now there are many direct evidences emerged and may change some of previous recommendations and it is ripe for develop an evidence-based guideline. We formed a working group of clinical experts and methodologists. The steering group members proposed 29 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 covering the following areas: chemoprophylaxis, diagnosis, treatments, and discharge management. We searched the literature for direct evidence on the management of COVID-19, and assessed its certainty generated recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of ungraded consensus-based statement. Finally, we issued 34 statements. Among them, 6 were strong recommendations for, 14 were weak recommendations for, 3 were weak recommendations against and 11 were ungraded consensus-based statement. They covered topics of chemoprophylaxis (including agents and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) agents), diagnosis (including clinical manifestations, reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), respiratory tract specimens, IgM and IgG antibody tests, chest computed tomography, chest x-ray, and CT features of asymptomatic infections), treatments (including lopinavir-ritonavir, umifenovir, favipiravir, interferon, remdesivir, combination of antiviral drugs, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, interleukin-6 inhibitors, interleukin-1 inhibitors, glucocorticoid, qingfei paidu decoction, lianhua qingwen granules/capsules, convalescent plasma, lung transplantation, invasive or noninvasive ventilation, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)), and discharge management (including discharge criteria and management plan in patients whose RT-PCR retesting shows SARS-CoV-2 positive after discharge). We also created two figures of these recommendations for the implementation purpose. We hope these recommendations can help support healthcare workers caring for COVID-19 patients.

87 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Li Sha Luo1, Ying Hui Jin1, Lin Cai1, Zhen Yu Pan1, Xian Tao Zeng1, Xinghuan Wang1 
TL;DR: There was no significant difference in psychological impact among the three groups, but uninfected staff members were fully aware of the seriousness of the epidemic and effective protective measures should be taken for staff members in ALDs.
Abstract: Objective: Our aim was to explore the presumed infection routes and psychological impact of COVID-19 on staff in administrative and logistics departments (ALDs). Methods: We gathered data from all 18 staff members with COVID-19 in ALDs in Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, China. The baseline, job before diagnosis, presumed infection environment, use of protective equipment, and psychological status before and after diagnosis were collected and analyzed. A total of 18 uninfected staff members working alongside them in the same environment and 18 random matched infected doctors and nurses formed two control groups; the psychological impact of these three groups was then compared. Results: Of the 18 members of staff, 88.89% were infected due to the working environment (hospital), and nine had face-to-face conversations with doctors and nurses in their daily work. Many staff members did not take any protective measures in their routine work. Before they were diagnosed, 12 staff members were aware of the seriousness of the epidemic, and most of the staff maintained a neutral attitude to the COVID-19 outbreak. A total of 77.78% of the staff experienced psychological stress or emotional changes after diagnosis, which were mainly caused by family health and disease related issues. Most of them managed their emotions by self-control and video calls with their families. There was no significant difference in psychological impact among the three groups, but uninfected staff members were fully aware of the seriousness of the epidemic. Conclusions: Effective protective measures should be taken for staff members in ALDs. Psychological interventions are very important to help infected staff members in ALDs cope with psychological distress.

10 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Wang et al. as discussed by the authors developed and tested the validity and reliability of the Knowledge, Attitudes, Practise, and Experience regarding Infection Prevention and Control-associated Questionnaire for environmental service workers.
Abstract: Purpose This study aimed to develop and test the validity and reliability of the Knowledge, Attitudes, Practise, and Experience regarding Infection Prevention and Control-associated Questionnaire for environmental service workers. Design This study was a development and validation study of a questionnaire using multiple methods, including literature review, questionnaire survey, and Delphi technique. Methods Phase I of the study entailed the development of items through an extensive literature review and two round Delphi process with 15 experts specialised in infection prevention and control, environmental service worker management, or scale construction to examine the content validity of the questionnaire. Phase II involved administering the questionnaire to a convenience sample of 1,176 environmental service workers from the public hospital from 13 provinces in China to evaluate its construct validity and reliability. Findings In the two rounds of Delphi consultation, the recovery rate were 93.75 and 100%. Moreover, the expert authority coefficient was 0.93, and the coordination coefficients of expert opinions in the first round were as follows: correlation of 0.204 and importance of 0.249 for the first-level index; correlation of 0.128 and importance of 0.142 for the secondary index. In round two, the coordination coefficients of expert opinions were as follows: correlation of 0.221 and importance of 0.221 for the first-level indicators; correlation of 0.096 and importance of 0.101 for the secondary index. The results for the index were P < 0.05 for the two rounds. The pilot survey shows the instrument was excellent content validity (S-CVI/Ave = 0.989). The overall internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.967). The questionnaire ultimately comprised four first-level indices (knowledge, attitudes, practise, and experience) and 49 second-level indices. Conclusion The Questionnaire demonstrated good reliability and validity and is effective in measuring levels of infection prevention and control-related knowledge, attitudes, practise, and experience among environmental service workers. It will provide a tool for future national investigations of the current infection prevention and control situation among environmental service workers. Future research should explore determinants of environmental service workers' knowledge, attitudes, practise, and experience and associations between infection prevention and control knowledge, attitudes, practises, and experience.

Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The symptoms, epidemiology, transmission, pathogenesis, phylogenetic analysis and future directions to control the spread of this fatal disease are highlighted.

4,065 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The latest research progress of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 are summarized, and the current treatment and scientific advancements to combat the epidemic novel coronavirus are discussed.
Abstract: An acute respiratory disease, caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2, previously known as 2019-nCoV), the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread throughout China and received worldwide attention. On 30 January 2020, World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared the COVID-19 epidemic as a public health emergency of international concern. The emergence of SARS-CoV-2, since the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in 2002 and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in 2012, marked the third introduction of a highly pathogenic and large-scale epidemic coronavirus into the human population in the twenty-first century. As of 1 March 2020, a total of 87,137 confirmed cases globally, 79,968 confirmed in China and 7169 outside of China, with 2977 deaths (3.4%) had been reported by WHO. Meanwhile, several independent research groups have identified that SARS-CoV-2 belongs to β-coronavirus, with highly identical genome to bat coronavirus, pointing to bat as the natural host. The novel coronavirus uses the same receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) as that for SARS-CoV, and mainly spreads through the respiratory tract. Importantly, increasingly evidence showed sustained human-to-human transmission, along with many exported cases across the globe. The clinical symptoms of COVID-19 patients include fever, cough, fatigue and a small population of patients appeared gastrointestinal infection symptoms. The elderly and people with underlying diseases are susceptible to infection and prone to serious outcomes, which may be associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and cytokine storm. Currently, there are few specific antiviral strategies, but several potent candidates of antivirals and repurposed drugs are under urgent investigation. In this review, we summarized the latest research progress of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and clinical characteristics of COVID-19, and discussed the current treatment and scientific advancements to combat the epidemic novel coronavirus.

3,277 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The disease is mild in most people; in some (usually the elderly and those with comorbidities), it may progress to pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and multi organ dysfunction and many people are asymptomatic.
Abstract: There is a new public health crises threatening the world with the emergence and spread of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) or the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The virus originated in bats and was transmitted to humans through yet unknown intermediary animals in Wuhan, Hubei province, China in December 2019. There have been around 96,000 reported cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) and 3300 reported deaths to date (05/03/2020). The disease is transmitted by inhalation or contact with infected droplets and the incubation period ranges from 2 to 14 d. The symptoms are usually fever, cough, sore throat, breathlessness, fatigue, malaise among others. The disease is mild in most people; in some (usually the elderly and those with comorbidities), it may progress to pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and multi organ dysfunction. Many people are asymptomatic. The case fatality rate is estimated to range from 2 to 3%. Diagnosis is by demonstration of the virus in respiratory secretions by special molecular tests. Common laboratory findings include normal/ low white cell counts with elevated C-reactive protein (CRP). The computerized tomographic chest scan is usually abnormal even in those with no symptoms or mild disease. Treatment is essentially supportive; role of antiviral agents is yet to be established. Prevention entails home isolation of suspected cases and those with mild illnesses and strict infection control measures at hospitals that include contact and droplet precautions. The virus spreads faster than its two ancestors the SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), but has lower fatality. The global impact of this new epidemic is yet uncertain.

2,594 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A rapid and simple point‐of‐care lateral flow immunoassay that can detect immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG antibodies simultaneously against SARS‐CoV‐2 virus in human blood within 15 minutes which can detect patients at different infection stages is developed.
Abstract: The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) quickly spread all over China and to more than 20 other countries. Although the virus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus [SARS-Cov-2]) nucleic acid real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test has become the standard method for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, these real-time PCR test kits have many limitations. In addition, high false-negative rates were reported. There is an urgent need for an accurate and rapid test method to quickly identify a large number of infected patients and asymptomatic carriers to prevent virus transmission and assure timely treatment of patients. We have developed a rapid and simple point-of-care lateral flow immunoassay that can detect immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG antibodies simultaneously against SARS-CoV-2 virus in human blood within 15 minutes which can detect patients at different infection stages. With this test kit, we carried out clinical studies to validate its clinical efficacy uses. The clinical detection sensitivity and specificity of this test were measured using blood samples collected from 397 PCR confirmed COVID-19 patients and 128 negative patients at eight different clinical sites. The overall testing sensitivity was 88.66% and specificity was 90.63%. In addition, we evaluated clinical diagnosis results obtained from different types of venous and fingerstick blood samples. The results indicated great detection consistency among samples from fingerstick blood, serum and plasma of venous blood. The IgM-IgG combined assay has better utility and sensitivity compared with a single IgM or IgG test. It can be used for the rapid screening of SARS-CoV-2 carriers, symptomatic or asymptomatic, in hospitals, clinics, and test laboratories.

1,430 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A systematic review of current literature on COVID-19 provides insight into the initial and follow-up CT characteristics of the disease.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE. Available information on CT features of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is scattered in different publications, and a cohesive literature review has yet to be compiled. MAT...

1,216 citations