To compare the mental health burden before and during the COVID-19 outbreak and identify the vulnerable groups by sociodemographic factors. We analyzed repeated cross-sectional data from the Hong Kong Family and Health Information Trend Survey (FHInTS) in 2016 (N = 4036) and 2017 (N = 4051) and the COVID-19 Health Information Survey (CoVHInS) in April 9–23, 2020 (N = 1501) using population-based random samples of general adults by landline telephone and online panel. Stress (Perceived Stress Scale 4), anxiety symptoms (General Anxiety Disorders 2), depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-2), subjective happiness (4-point Likert item), and sociodemographic factors were collected. Compared with 2016 and 2017, the stress level increased by 28.3%, prevalence of anxiety increased by 42.3%, and the depression symptoms and unhappiness have doubled (all P for trends <0.001) during the COVID-19 outbreak. The increases in stress levels were significantly larger among older and less educated respondents (P for interactions <0.001). Hong Kong had a mental health emergency even with no lockdown and well-managed outbreaks. Older and under-privileged people will suffer most. Public mental health interventions are urgently needed particularly for the older adults and individuals with primary or lower education attainment.

Introduction: Children are widely recognized as a vulnerable population during disasters and emergencies. The COVID-19 pandemic, like a natural disaster, brought uncertainties and instability to the economic development of the society and social distancing, which might lead to child maltreatment. This study aims to investigate whether job loss, income reduction and parenting affect child maltreatment. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of 600 randomly sampled parents aged 18 years or older who had and lived with a child under 10 years old in Hong Kong between 29 May to 16 June 2020. Participants were recruited from a random list of mobile phone numbers of a panel of parents. Of 779 recruited target parents, 600 parents completed the survey successfully via a web-based system after obtaining their online consent for participating in the survey. Results: Income reduction was found significantly associated with severe (OR = 3.29, 95% CI = 1.06, 10.25) and very severe physical assaults (OR = 7.69, 95% CI = 2.24, 26.41) towards children. Job loss or large income reduction were also significantly associated with severe (OR= 3.68, 95% CI = 1.33, 10.19) and very severe physical assaults (OR = 4.05, 95% CI = 1.17, 14.08) towards children. However, income reduction (OR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.15, 0.53) and job loss (OR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.28, 0.76) were significantly associated with less psychological aggression. Exposure to intimate partner violence between parents is a very strong and significant factor associated with all types of child maltreatment. Having higher levels of difficulty in discussing COVID-19 with children was significantly associated with more corporal punishment (OR = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.05, 1.34), whereas having higher level of confidence in managing preventive COVID-19 behaviors with children was negatively associated with corporal punishment (OR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.76, 0.99) and very severe physical assaults (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.58, 0.93). Conclusions: Income instability such as income reduction and job loss amplified the risk of severe and very severe child physical assaults but protected children from psychological aggression. Also, confidence in teaching COVID-19 and managing preventive COVID-19 behaviors with children was significantly negatively associated with corporal punishment during pandemic.

This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the comorbidities, symptoms, clinical characteristics and treatment of COVID-19 patients. Epidemiological studies published in 2020 (from January–March) on the clinical presentation, laboratory findings and treatments of COVID-19 patients were identified from PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases. Studies published in English by 27th March, 2020 with original data were included. Primary outcomes included comorbidities of COVID-19 patients, their symptoms presented on hospital admission, laboratory results, radiological outcomes, and pharmacological and in-patient treatments. 76 studies were included in this meta-analysis, accounting for a total of 11,028 COVID-19 patients in multiple countries. A random-effects model was used to aggregate estimates across eligible studies and produce meta-analytic estimates. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (18.1%, 95% CI 15.4–20.8%). The most frequently identified symptoms were fever (72.4%, 95% CI 67.2–77.7%) and cough (55.5%, 95% CI 50.7–60.3%). For pharmacological treatment, 63.9% (95% CI 52.5–75.3%), 62.4% (95% CI 47.9–76.8%) and 29.7% (95% CI 21.8–37.6%) of patients were given antibiotics, antiviral, and corticosteroid, respectively. Notably, 62.6% (95% CI 39.9–85.4%) and 20.2% (95% CI 14.6–25.9%) of in-patients received oxygen therapy and non-invasive mechanical ventilation, respectively. This meta-analysis informed healthcare providers about the timely status of characteristics and treatments of COVID-19 patients across different countries.PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42020176589

Background: Engaging students in interprofessional education for higher order thinking and collaborative problem-solving skills is challenging. This study reports the development of Virtual ER, a serious game played on a virtual platform, and how it can be an innovative way for delivering interprofessional education to medical and nursing undergraduates. Objective: We report the development of a serious online game, Virtual ER, and evaluate its effect on teamwork enhancement and clinical competence. We also explore if Virtual ER can be an effective pedagogical tool to engage medical and nursing students with different learning styles. Methods: Virtual ER is a custom-made, learning outcome–driven, case-based web app. We developed a game performance scoring system with specific mechanisms to enhance serious gaming elements. Sixty-two students were recruited from our medical and nursing programs. They played the games in teams of 4 or 5, followed by an instructor-led debriefing for concept consolidation. Teamwork attitudes, as measured by the Human Factors Attitude Survey, were compared before and after the game. Learning style was measured with a modified Honey and Mumford learning style questionnaire. Results: Students were satisfied with Virtual ER (mean satisfaction score 5.44, SD 0.95, of a possible 7). Overall, Virtual ER enhanced teamwork attitude by 3.02 points (95% CI 1.15-4.88, P=.002). Students with higher scores as activists (estimate 9.09, 95% CI 5.17-13.02, P<.001) and pragmatists (estimate 5.69, 95% CI 1.18-10.20, P=.01) had a significantly higher degree of teamwork attitude enhancement, while students with higher scores as theorists and reflectors did not demonstrate significant changes. However, there was no difference in game performance scores between students with different learning styles. Conclusions: There was considerable teamwork enhancement after playing Virtual ER for interprofessional education, in particular for students who had activist or pragmatist learning styles. Serious online games have potential in interprofessional education for the development of 21st century life skills. Our findings also suggest that Virtual ER for interprofessional education delivery could be expanded locally and globally.

Background: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a worldwide epidemic, and various countries have responded with different containment measures to reduce disease transmission, including stay-at-home orders, curfews, and lockdowns. Comparative studies have not yet been conducted to investigate the impact of these containment measures; these studies are needed to facilitate public health policy-making across countries. Objective: The aim of this study was to describe and evaluate the impact of national containment measures and policies (stay-at-home orders, curfews, and lockdowns) on decelerating the increase in daily new cases of COVID-19 in 54 countries and 4 epicenters of the pandemic in different jurisdictions worldwide. Methods: We reviewed the effective dates of the national containment measures (stay-at-home order, curfew, or lockdown) of 54 countries and 4 epicenters of the COVID-19 pandemic (Wuhan, New York State, Lombardy, and Madrid), and we searched cumulative numbers of confirmed COVID-19 cases and daily new cases provided by health authorities. Data were drawn from an open, crowdsourced, daily-updated COVID-19 data set provided by Our World in Data. We examined the trends in the percent increase in daily new cases from 7 days before to 30 days after the dates on which containment measures went into effect by continent, World Bank income classification, type of containment measures, effective date of containment measures, and number of confirmed cases on the effective date of the containment measures. Results: We included 122,366 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection from 54 countries and 24,071 patients from 4 epicenters on the effective dates on which stay-at-home orders, curfews, or lockdowns were implemented between January 23 and April 11, 2020. Stay-at-home, curfew, and lockdown measures commonly commenced in countries with approximately 30%, 20%, or 10% increases in daily new cases. All three measures were found to lower the percent increase in daily new cases to <5 within one month. Among the countries studied, 20% had an average percent increase in daily new cases of 30-49 over the seven days prior to the commencement of containment measures; the percent increase in daily new cases in these countries was curbed to 10 and 5 a maximum of 15 days and 23 days after the implementation of containment measures, respectively. Conclusions: Different national containment measures were associated with a decrease in daily new cases of confirmed COVID-19 infection. Stay-at-home orders, curfews, and lockdowns curbed the percent increase in daily new cases to <5 within a month. Resurgence in cases within one month was observed in some South American countries.

Background: Commonly prescribed diabetic medications such as metformin and sulfonylurea may be associated with different arrhythmogenic risks. This study compared the risk of ventricular arrhythmia or sudden cardiac death between metformin and sulfonylurea users in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods and Results: Patients aged ≥40 years who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes or prescribed antidiabetic agents in Hong Kong between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2009, were included and followed up until December 31, 2019. Patients prescribed with both metformin and sulfonylurea or had prior myocardial infarction were excluded. The study outcome was a composite of ventricular arrhythmia or sudden cardiac death. Metformin users and sulfonylurea users were matched at a 1:1 ratio by propensity score matching. The matched cohort consisted of 16 596 metformin users (47.70% men; age, 68±11 years; mean follow‐up, 4.92±2.55 years) and 16 596 sulfonylurea users (49.80% men; age, 70±11 years; mean follow‐up, 4.93±2.55 years). Sulfonylurea was associated with higher risk of ventricular arrhythmia or sudden cardiac death than metformin hazard ratio (HR, 1.90 [95% CI, 1.73–2.08]). Such difference was consistently observed in subgroup analyses stratifying for insulin usage or known coronary heart disease. Conclusions: Sulfonylurea use is associated with higher risk of ventricular arrhythmia or sudden cardiac death than metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes.