Background: COVID-19, a disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, has now spread to most countries and regions of the world. As patients potentially infected by SARS-CoV-2 need to visit hospitals, the incidence of nosocomial infection can be expected to be high. Therefore, a comprehensive and objective understanding of nosocomial infection is needed to guide the prevention and control of the epidemic. Methods: We searched major international and Chinese databases: Medicine, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, CBM (China Biology Medicine disc), CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) and Wanfang database for case series or case reports on nosocomial infections of COVID-19, SARS (severe acute respiratory syndromes) and MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome) from their inception to March 31st, 2020. We conducted a meta-analysis of the proportion of nosocomial infection patients in the diagnosed patients, occupational distribution of nosocomial infection medical staff. Results: We included 40 studies. Among the confirmed patients, the proportions of nosocomial infections with early outbreaks of COVID-19, SARS, and MERS were 44.0%, 36.0%, and 56.0%, respectively. Of the confirmed patients, the medical staff and other hospital-acquired infections accounted for 33.0% and 2.0% of COVID-19 cases, 37.0% and 24.0% of SARS cases, and 19.0% and 36.0% of MERS cases, respectively. Nurses and doctors were the most affected among the infected medical staff. The mean numbers of secondary cases caused by one index patient were 29.3 and 6.3 for SARS and MERS, respectively. Conclusions: The proportion of nosocomial infection in patients with COVID-19 was 44% in the early outbreak. Patients attending hospitals should take personal protection. Medical staff should be awareness of the disease to protect themselves and the patients.

Background: It is well-known that public health education plays a crucial role in the prevention and control of emerging infectious diseases, but how health providers should advise families and parents to obtain health education information is a challenging question. With coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spreading around the world, this rapid review aims to answer that question and thus to promote evidence-based decision making in health education policy and practice. Methods: We systematically searched the literature on health education during COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and middle east respiratory syndrome (MERS) epidemics in Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, China Biology Medicine disc (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Data from their inception until March 31, 2020. The potential bias of the studies was assessed by Joanna Briggs Institute Prevalence Critical Appraisal Tool. Results: Of 1,067 papers found, 24 cross-sectional studies with a total of 35,967 participants were included in this review. The general public lacked good knowledge of SARS and MERS at the early stage of epidemics. Some people’s knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) of COVID-19 had been improved, but the health behaviors of some special groups including children and their parents need to be strengthened. Negative emotions including fear and stigmatization occurred during the outbreaks. Reliable health information was needed to improve public awareness and mental health for infectious diseases. Health information from nonprofit, government and academic websites was more accurate than privately owned commercial websites and media websites. Conclusions: For educating and cultivating children, parents should obtain information from the official websites of authorities such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and national Centers for Disease Control, or from other sources endorsed by these authorities, rather than from a general search of the internet or social media.

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effects of vitamin D (VitD) supplementation on children with allergic diseases. MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane library, and three Chinese databases were searched up to 15 August 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a VitD supplementation versus a placebo for children with allergic diseases were included. Thirty-two RCTs with 2347 participants were included. VitD supplementation did not reduce the risk of asthma exacerbations in children compared with placebo overall (risk ratio (RR) = 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.65 to 1.08, p = 0.18), but reduced the risk of asthma exacerbation in children with baseline serum 25(OH)D of <10 ng/mL compared with placebo (RR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.83, p = 0.009). VitD supplementation significantly reduced Scoring Atopic Dermatitis or the Eczema Area and Severity Index scores in children with atopic dermatitis compared with placebo (standard mean difference = −0.5, 95% CI: −0.87 to −0.12, p = 0.009). VitD supplementation also reduced the symptom-medication score in children with allergic rhinitis compared with placebo (mean (standard deviation): 43.7 (3.3) vs. 57.8 (4.4), p = 0.001). In conclusion, VitD supplementation did not reduce asthma exacerbation risk in children overall but may reduce asthma exacerbation risk in children with serum 25(OH)D concentration < 10 ng/mL. VitD supplementation reduces the severity of atopic dermatitis and symptoms of allergic rhinitis in children.

Bronchiolitis is infection of the bronchial and bronchiolar epithelium, which is mainly caused by respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). The primary treatment remains largely supportive, with mechanical ventilatory support as needed [ 1 x 1 American Academy of Pediatrics Subcommittee on Diagnosis and Management of Bronchiolitis. Diagnosis and management of bronchiolitis. Pediatrics. 2006; 118: 1774–1793 Crossref | PubMed | Scopus (699) | Google Scholar See all References 1 ]. Other types of treatment remain controversial [ 1 x 1 American Academy of Pediatrics Subcommittee on Diagnosis and Management of Bronchiolitis. Diagnosis and management of bronchiolitis. Pediatrics. 2006; 118: 1774–1793 Crossref | PubMed | Scopus (699) | Google Scholar See all References , 2 x 2 Wright, RB, Pomerantz, WJ, and Luria, JW. New approaches to respiratory infections in children: bronchiolitis and croup. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2002; 20: 93–114 Abstract | Full Text | Full Text PDF | PubMed | Scopus (30) | Google Scholar See all References ]. It has been shown that nebulized hypertonic saline (HS) decreases the hospital length of stay (LOS) as compared with normal saline (NS) among infants hospitalized with viral bronchiolitis [ 3 x 3 Kuzik, BA, Al‐Qadhi, SA, Kent, S et al. Nebulized hypertonic saline in the treatment of viral bronchiolitis in infants. J Pediatr. 2007; 151: 266–270 Abstract | Full Text | Full Text PDF | PubMed | Scopus (114) | Google Scholar See all References , 4 x 4 Zhang, LJ, Mendoza‐Sassi, RA, Wainwright, C et al. Nebulized hypertonic saline solution for acute bronchiolitis in infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008; 8 (CD006458) Google Scholar See all References ]. We and other researchers demonstrated that nebulized HS and bronchodilators decreased symptoms and LOS for infants with mild to moderate viral bronchiolitis [ 5 x 5 Mandelberg, A, Tal, G, Witzling, M et al. Nebulized 3% hypertonic saline solution treatment in hospitalized infants with viral bronchiolitis. Chest. 2003; 123: 481–487 Crossref | PubMed | Scopus (121) | Google Scholar See all References , 6 x 6 Tal, G, Cesar, K, Oron, A et al. Hypertonic saline/epinephrine treatment in hospitalized infants with viral bronchiolitis reduces hospitalization stay: 2 years experience. Isr Med Assoc J. 2006; 8: 169–173 PubMed | Google Scholar See all References , 7 x 7 Luo, Z, Liu, E, Luo, J et al. Nebulized hypertonic saline/salbutamol solution treatment in hospitalized children with mild to moderate bronchiolitis. Pediatr Int. 2010; 52: 199–202 Crossref | PubMed | Scopus (52) | Google Scholar See all References ]. Both of the aforementioned studies used three times per day dosing, which is significantly less than the three to six times per hour regimens often used to children in respiratory distress [ 8 x 8 Wainright, C, Altamirano, L, Cheney, M et al. A multicentre, randomized, double‐blind, controlled trial of nebulized epinephrine in infants with acute bronchiolitis. N Engl J Med. 2003; 349: 27–35 Crossref | PubMed | Scopus (178) | Google Scholar See all References , 9 x 9 Patel, H, Platt, RW, Pekeles, GS et al. A randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of nebulized therapy with epinephrine compared with albuteral and saline in infants hospitalized for acute viral bronchiolitis. J Pediatr. 2002; 141: 818–824 Abstract | Full Text | Full Text PDF | PubMed | Scopus (69) | Google Scholar See all References , 10 x 10 Ray, MS. Comparison of nebulized adrenaline versus salbutamol in wheeze associated with respiratory tract infection in infants. Indian Pediatr. 2002; 39: 12–22 PubMed | Google Scholar See all References ]. Children with moderate to severe bronchiolitis have difficulty in breathing. Frequently inhaled nebulized HS reduced the LOS for infants with moderately severe bronchiolitis [ 3 x 3 Kuzik, BA, Al‐Qadhi, SA, Kent, S et al. Nebulized hypertonic saline in the treatment of viral bronchiolitis in infants. J Pediatr. 2007; 151: 266–270 Abstract | Full Text | Full Text PDF | PubMed | Scopus (114) | Google Scholar See all References 3 ]. The present study was performed to investigate frequently inhaled nebulized HS for moderate to severe bronchiolitis in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled fashion. The primary objective was to compare the symptoms, signs, clinical severity scores and the LOS of these infants with those of a control group of infants receiving frequently inhaled nebulized NS.