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 n...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.展开更多
BACKGROUND Most studies on Guhong injection have involved a single center with a small sample size,and the level of clinical evidence is low.AIM To assess the safety and efficacy of Guhong injection for mild ischemic ...BACKGROUND Most studies on Guhong injection have involved a single center with a small sample size,and the level of clinical evidence is low.AIM To assess the safety and efficacy of Guhong injection for mild ischemic stroke(IS).METHODS A total of 399 IS patients treated at six hospitals from August 2018 to August 2019 were retrospectively analyzed.The patients were given Guhong injection(experimental group)or Butylphthalide injection(control group).Changes in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale(NIHSS)and modified Rankin Scale(mRS)scores were observed before treatment and at 1,2,and 3 wk after treatment in each group.The efficacy and safety of Guhong injection for IS were assessed.Other medications taken by the patients were confounding factors for efficacy assessment.These factors were controlled by propensity score matching,and the results were further analyzed based on the matching.RESULTS The marked response rates at three follow-up visits were 64.64%,74.7%,and 66.7%in the experimental group,and 48.26%,45.4%,and 22.2%in the control group.The marked response rates increased significantly in the experimental group compared with the control group(P<0.05).The overall response rate at the first visit(days 7±2)did not differ significantly between the two groups,but differed significantly at the second(days 14±2)and third visits(days 21±3)(P<0.05).The proportion of patients without any symptoms in the experimental group was significant different at the first visit(P<0.05),but not significantly different at the second visit.The two groups showed no significant difference in the baseline distribution of mRS scores.At the first and second visits,the change in mRS scores was-2 and-1 in the experimental and control groups,respectively,which were significantly different(P<0.05).After propensity score matching,the overall response rate and marked response rate were 97.29%and 100%in the experimental group(P>0.05)and 64.0%and 47.7%in the control group(P<0.05)at the first visit,respectively.The decreased NIHSS scores in the two groups were significant different(P<0.05).The overall response rate and marked response rate differed significantly between the two groups at the second visit(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups.No severe adverse events occurred in either group.CONCLUSION Guhong injection is safe and more effective than Butylphthalide injection for treatment of IS.展开更多
2019新型冠状病毒(2019 novel coronavirus,2019-nCoV)感染的肺炎,因2019年12月发生在武汉的不明原因病毒性肺炎病例而被发现,并于2020年1月12日被世界卫生组织(World Health Organization,WHO)命名。在之后的一个月时间内,2019-nCoV在...2019新型冠状病毒(2019 novel coronavirus,2019-nCoV)感染的肺炎,因2019年12月发生在武汉的不明原因病毒性肺炎病例而被发现,并于2020年1月12日被世界卫生组织(World Health Organization,WHO)命名。在之后的一个月时间内,2019-nCoV在湖北省内外甚至其他国家传播造成了数以千计的病例出现,同时也引起了民众一定程度的恐慌。本指南的制订希望能够从疾病流行病学、病因学、诊断、治疗、护理、医院感染控制等方面给临床医生、社区居民等提供医疗护理及居家照护相关指导。展开更多
基金supported(in part)by the Entrusted Project of National Center for Medical Service Administration,National Health and Family Planning Commission China(No.[2019]099)the First Level Funding of the Second Medical Leading Talent Project in Hubei Provincethe Special Project for Emergency of the Ministry of Science and Technology(2020YFC0841300)。
文摘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.
文摘BACKGROUND Most studies on Guhong injection have involved a single center with a small sample size,and the level of clinical evidence is low.AIM To assess the safety and efficacy of Guhong injection for mild ischemic stroke(IS).METHODS A total of 399 IS patients treated at six hospitals from August 2018 to August 2019 were retrospectively analyzed.The patients were given Guhong injection(experimental group)or Butylphthalide injection(control group).Changes in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale(NIHSS)and modified Rankin Scale(mRS)scores were observed before treatment and at 1,2,and 3 wk after treatment in each group.The efficacy and safety of Guhong injection for IS were assessed.Other medications taken by the patients were confounding factors for efficacy assessment.These factors were controlled by propensity score matching,and the results were further analyzed based on the matching.RESULTS The marked response rates at three follow-up visits were 64.64%,74.7%,and 66.7%in the experimental group,and 48.26%,45.4%,and 22.2%in the control group.The marked response rates increased significantly in the experimental group compared with the control group(P<0.05).The overall response rate at the first visit(days 7±2)did not differ significantly between the two groups,but differed significantly at the second(days 14±2)and third visits(days 21±3)(P<0.05).The proportion of patients without any symptoms in the experimental group was significant different at the first visit(P<0.05),but not significantly different at the second visit.The two groups showed no significant difference in the baseline distribution of mRS scores.At the first and second visits,the change in mRS scores was-2 and-1 in the experimental and control groups,respectively,which were significantly different(P<0.05).After propensity score matching,the overall response rate and marked response rate were 97.29%and 100%in the experimental group(P>0.05)and 64.0%and 47.7%in the control group(P<0.05)at the first visit,respectively.The decreased NIHSS scores in the two groups were significant different(P<0.05).The overall response rate and marked response rate differed significantly between the two groups at the second visit(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups.No severe adverse events occurred in either group.CONCLUSION Guhong injection is safe and more effective than Butylphthalide injection for treatment of IS.
文摘2019新型冠状病毒(2019 novel coronavirus,2019-nCoV)感染的肺炎,因2019年12月发生在武汉的不明原因病毒性肺炎病例而被发现,并于2020年1月12日被世界卫生组织(World Health Organization,WHO)命名。在之后的一个月时间内,2019-nCoV在湖北省内外甚至其他国家传播造成了数以千计的病例出现,同时也引起了民众一定程度的恐慌。本指南的制订希望能够从疾病流行病学、病因学、诊断、治疗、护理、医院感染控制等方面给临床医生、社区居民等提供医疗护理及居家照护相关指导。