COVID-19 is a global health emergency. People living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) have concerns about whether they have a higher risk of getting the infection and suffer worse COVID-19 outcomes. Findings from studies on these questions have largely been inconsistent. We aimed to determine the epidemiological characteristics, clinical signs and symptoms, blood parameters, and clinical outcomes among PLHIV who contracted COVID-19. Relevant studies were identified through Medline, Cinahl, and PubMed databases. A random-effects model was used in meta-analyses with a 95% confidence interval. Eighty-two studies were included in the systematic review and sixty-seven studies for the meta-analysis. The pooled incidence proportion of COVID-19 among PLHIV was 0.9% (95% CI 0.6%, 1.1%) based on the data from seven cohort studies. Overall, 28.4% were hospitalised, of whom, 2.5% was severe-critical cases and 3.5% needed intensive care. The overall mortality rate was 5.3%. Hypertension was the most commonly reported comorbidity (24.0%). Fever (71.1%) was the most common symptom. Chest imaging demonstrated a wide range of abnormal findings encompassing common changes such as ground glass opacities and consolidation as well as a spectrum of less common abnormalities. Laboratory testing of inflammation markers showed that C-reactive protein, ferritin, and interleukin-6 were frequently elevated, albeit to different extents. Clinical features as well as the results of chest imaging and laboratory testing were similar in highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART)-treated and non-treated patients. PLHIV were not found to be at higher risk for adverse outcomes of COVID-19. Hence, in COVID-19 management, it appears that they can be treated the same way as HIV negative individuals. Nevertheless, as the pandemic situation is rapidly evolving, more evidence may be needed to arrive at definitive recommendations.

Vaccination is a key public health strategy that is known to be effective in mitigating the risk of infection and severe disease. However, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the percentage (<50%) of Malaysians who have received a booster for the COVID-19 vaccine has remained stagnant over a year. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of and the factors associated with hesitancy toward the second dose of booster for the COVID-19 vaccine. A web-based cross-sectional study was conducted from August to November 2022. The Oxford Vaccine Hesitancy Scale was used to assess the hesitancy toward the second dose of booster for the COVID-19 vaccine. Simple and multiple factors logistic regressions were used to determine the predictors of hesitancy. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Data from 798 respondents were included in the analysis. The prevalence of hesitancy toward the second booster of the COVID-19 vaccine was 26.7%. The predictors of second-booster hesitancy were older age (AOR = 1.040, 95 CI = 1.022, 1.058), having received the third dose (first booster) because of instruction by the government (AOR = 2.125, 95% CI = 1.380, 3.274), concern about serious long term side effects of the vaccine (AOR = 4.010, 95% CI = 2.218, 7.250), and opinions of close friends and immediate family members that the booster is harmful (AOR = 2.201, 95% CI = 1.280, 3.785). Conversely, factors that appear to reduce vaccine booster hesitancy were acceptance of the third dose due to the high number of cases and the increasing rate of infection (AOR = 0.548, 95% CI = 0.317, 0.947), the belief that the vaccine will decrease the risk of getting the infection (AOR = 0.491, 95% CI = 0.277, 0.870), and opinions of close friends and immediate family members that the booster is helpful (AOR = 0.479, 95% CI = 0.273, 0.840). In conclusion, more than one-fifth of Malaysians were hesitant to take the second booster of the COVID-19 vaccine. This suggests that appropriate steps that increase vaccine acceptance, taking into consideration the findings of the present study, are needed to address this issue and to foster more positive attitudes toward vaccination. The survey was available in three main languages but limited to people with internet access; hence, it would likely be biased toward younger adults and social media users and exclude those with limited or no internet access, in particular older people. Therefore, the results are not representative of the Malaysian population at large and caution should be exercised when interpreting the findings.

Aim: We examined the anxiety levels and coping strategies among staff and students of a tertiary educational institution during the COVID-19 pandemic and determined the association between anxiety level and coping strategies.Method: Through an online survey, we used Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS) to measure the level of anxiety associated with the COVID-19 crisis and Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) to assess the coping responses adopted to handle stressful life events. Coping strategies were classified as adaptive and maladaptive, for which the aggregate sores were calculated. Multiple linear regression was used to determine the predictors of anxiety adjusted for potentially confounding variables. Results from 434 participants were available for analysis.Results: The mean score (SD) of the CAS was 1.1 (1.8). The mean scores of adaptive and maladaptive coping strategies were 35.69 and 19.28, respectively. Multiple linear regression revealed that maladaptive coping [Adjusted B coefficient = 4.106, p-value < 0.001] and presence of comorbidities [Adjusted B coefficient = 1.376, p-value = 0.025] significantly predicted anxiety.Conclusion: Maladaptive coping and presence of comorbidities were the predictors of coronavirus anxiety. The apparent lack of anxiety in relation to COVID-19 and movement restriction is reflective of the reported high level of satisfaction with the support and services provided during the COVID-19 outbreak in Malaysia. Adaptive coping strategies were adopted more frequently than maladaptive. Nevertheless, public education on positive coping strategies and anxiety management may be still be relevant to provide mental health support to address the needs of the general population.

Background: In Malaysia the COVID-19 disease (COVID-19) has continued to escalate since its first detection in late January 2020, despite widespread implementation of control measures. This study aims to determine the knowledge, perception and behaviors with respect to COVID-19 in the midst of the third wave of the infection.Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out among staffs and students of Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR). The survey consists of basic sociodemographic information, 22 items on knowledge on COVID-19, 3 items on perceived self-risk, 2 items on preparedness & perceived self-efficacy, 10 items on preventive (own) measures, 9 items assessing unwanted and desirable behaviors during the pandemic. Simple and multiple linear regression were performed to determine the factors associated with knowledge, preventive measures adopted, self-risk perception, preparedness & perceived self-efficacy, and behaviors.Results: A total of 434 responded to the survey of whom the majority (85.1%) had high scores for knowledge (mean score of 18.72 out of 22). A significant positive association was found between knowledge and older age (adjusted B coefficient (SE) = 0.046 (0.022), p = 0.039), those from medical faculty (adjusted B coefficient (SE) = 0.870 (0.420), p = 0.039) and residence in high-risk areas (adjusted B coefficient (SE) = 0.831 (0.295), p = 0.005). Predictors for higher perception of COVID-19 risk included presence of COVID-19 cases among social contacts (adjusted B coefficient (SE) = 0.751 (0.308), p = 0.015) and living with elderly (adjusted B coefficient (SE) = 1.137 (0.296), p < 0.001), while that for perception of preparedness and self-efficacy were living with children (adjusted Beta coefficient (SE) = 0.440 (0.173), p = 0.011) and absence of positive cases among social contacts (adjusted B coefficient (SE) = 0.418 (0.183), p = 0.023). Good preventive measures among the respondents were positively associated with knowledge (adjusted B coefficient (SE) = 0.116 (0.025), p < 0.001), as well as with female gender (adjusted B coefficient (SE) = 0.348 (0.142), p = 0.014). Unwanted behavior was significantly associated with male gender (adjusted B coefficient (SE) = 0.664 (0.321), p = 0.039) and COVID-19 positive status (adjusted B coefficient (SE) = 9.736 (3.297), p = 0.003). Knowledge of COVID-19 (adjusted B coefficient (SE) = 0.069 (0.035), p = 0.048) and being married (adjusted B coefficient (SE) = 0.917 (0.462), p = 0.048) were the predictors of desirable behavior.Conclusion: Overall, the UTAR community had demonstrated a good level of knowledge and preventive behaviors, albeit with some areas for improvement.

The elderly are considered a high-risk group for severe outcomes and death from COVID-19 infection. Given the emergence of new COVID variants and the immunity provided by vaccines waning over time, booster doses of the vaccine have been advocated for those at risk to stay protected. This study aimed to determine the factors associated with hesitancy toward the second booster of the COVID-19 vaccine among the elderly residing in residential care homes. A cross-sectional study was conducted in 24 residential care homes in the Klang Valley using a face-to-face interview questionnaire. The study population included individuals aged 60 and above who had been fully vaccinated against COVID-19 up to the first booster dose. Second-booster hesitancy was assessed using the Oxford Vaccine Hesitancy Scale with seven items, the aggregate score of which ranges from seven to thirty-five; the higher the score, the greater the level of hesitancy. Multivariate linear regression was employed to determine factors associated with second-booster hesitancy, and a p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Data from 401 elderly individuals were included for analysis. The mean score of the Oxford Vaccine Hesitancy Scale was 21.6 ± 7.2. Predictors of second booster hesitancy were identified. Age, Indian ethnicity, being a recipient of the Sinovac vaccine as the first COVID-19 booster, experiencing the death of close friends or immediate family members following COVID-19 vaccination, and negative messages (indicating that taking a booster dose is harmful) from caregivers, friends, or family members were found to be associated with an increased second-booster-hesitancy score. Conversely, positive messages (indicating that taking a booster is helpful) from the government and caregivers, friends, or family members were identified as predictors associated with a reduction in the second-booster-hesitancy score. While vaccines effectively combat severe COVID-19, the majority of the elderly hesitate before taking the second booster. Their hesitancy, rooted in the perception of a low self risk and reliance on protection from the initial doses, emphasizes the need for intervention by relevant bodies. Taking into consideration the risk, albeit relatively low, of potentially serious side effects following COVID-19 vaccinations, it is imperative that transparent, appropriate, and positive messaging regarding booster vaccines, particularly in the context of the elderly from residential care homes, be available. Encouraging this high-risk group to embrace the second booster aligns with the goal of maximizing protection within the vulnerable elderly population.

Following mass vaccinations for the control of the COVID-19 epidemic, a spectrum of cardiac and neurological disorders was reported among vaccinated individuals. This study examined the range of complications documented and factors related to their occurrence. Three electronic databases were searched for case reports and case series with descriptions of cardiac and/or neurological complications in COVID-19 vaccine recipients. A total of 698 vaccinees were included in this review, of which 259 (37.1%) had cardiac and 439 (62.9%) had neurological complications. Inflammatory conditions were the commonest among the cardiac complications; while polyneuropathy, demyelinating diseases and cerebrovascular disorders were the more common neurological complications. The mean age of those with cardiac complications (33.8 years) was much younger than those with neurological complications (49.7 years). There was no notable difference in the gender distribution between these two groups of vaccine recipients. mRNA vaccines (all brands) were associated with almost 90.0% of the cardiac complications, whereas viral vector vaccines were associated with slightly over half (52.6%) of the neurological complications. With regard to the dose, cardiac complications were more common after the second (69.1%), whereas neurological complications were more common after the first dose (63.6%). The majority of the cases had an uncomplicated clinical course. Nevertheless, 5.9% of cases with neurological complications and 2.5% of those with cardiac complications were fatal, underscoring the significance of the consistent surveillance and vigilant monitoring of vaccinated individuals to mitigate these occurrences.