Background: The COVID-19 pandemic posed significant psychological challenges to frontline healthcare workers (HCWs), including anxiety, stress, and emotional strain. Aim: This study investigates the psychological impact on HCWs during the pandemic and explores coping strategies employed to manage distress. Methods: An integrative review was conducted using 24 studies published between January and December 2020. These studies were analyzed to identify common psychological outcomes and coping mechanisms among HCWs. Results: Healthcare workers experienced significant psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic, including anxiety, stress, insomnia, and depression. Anxiety was the most commonly reported issue, particularly among women, younger healthcare workers, and frontline staff. Stress levels were heightened by high workloads, exposure to COVID-19 patients, and inadequate protective measures. Coping strategies and self-care behaviors, such as seeking social support and utilizing institutional resources, varied in effectiveness across populations. Conclusion: The findings highlight the urgent need for targeted mental health support and resilience programs for HCWs, ensuring they are better equipped to face future health crises.

Respiratory virus co-infections have been suggested to happen frequently and exacerbate patients’ conditions, but little is known about the detailed rates and the combinations of viruses during the COVID-19 pandemic period. A total of 255 symptomatic patients who underwent multiplex PCR tests were analyzed, and it was found that 6 (6/255=2.4%) patients were infected with multiple viruses. The patients ranged in age from 1 to 38 years, and one female patient was pregnant. Of the 6 patients, 4 had fever, and 5 had human rhinovirus/enterovirus and another virus. These data suggested that the rate of respiratory virus co-infection was low, and the combination of SAS-CoV-2 and other viruses was rare even during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a newly emerging human disease caused by a novel coronavirus, causing a global pandemic crisis. Probiotics and/or colchicine may be considered as options for treatment since they have anti-viral, anti-inflammatory, and immunomodulatory effects. The aim of the current review was to assess the effectiveness of probiotic supplements and colchicine on symptoms, duration, and progression of mild and moderate cases of COVID-19 infection. Review: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in the United States with 182 participants who were randomly assigned to receive daily oral probiotic (Lactobacillus rhamnosus) LGG or placebo for 28 days. The study indicated that LGG is well-tolerated and is associated with a delay in the onset of COVID-19 infection, a reduction in the incidence of symptoms, and alterations in the structure of the gut microbiome when administered as post-exposure prophylaxis within seven days of exposure. Colchicine may lessen mortality and the need for mechanical ventilation in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients, according to a systematic review and meta-analysis. Conclusion: Probiotics and/or colchicine may be viable treatment options for COVID-19 patients. To examine the efficacy of probiotics and colchicine in the treatment of COVID-19, it is necessary to conduct additional clinical trials and provide clinicians with evidence, as there are currently insufficient studies to support this conclusion.

Background: There is paucity of data on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among Health Information Managers/Health Record Officers (HROs) in the Nigeria health system. Hence, this study investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health-related quality of life (QoL) among HROs in Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospital Complex (OAUTHC), Ile-Ife, Nigeria. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the University Hospital, where a total of 52 health record officers were purposively sampled. Relevant data were collected using the Short Form survey (SF-36v2) questionnaire. One-way ANOVA was used to determine mean group differences across the nine and the two QoL (physical and mental) summary domains based on respondents’ socio-demographics, while level of significance was set at 0.05. Results: All the QoL sections of the instrument used yielded an α-Cronbach’s score of > 0.70. Analysis of some QoL physical component dimensions showed that; Bodily pain (BP) was found to be significantly (P=0.032) associated with marital status, Physical functioning (PF) with gender (P=0.023), and general health (GH) with age group (P=00.025) and highest level of education (P=0.023). On the other hand, mental health component analysis revealed that Social Functioning (SF) was associated with age group (P=014), Role limitation (RE) with marital status (P=0.048), highest level of education (P=0.048) and years of service (P=0.015) etc. Conclusion: The QoL among HROs studied was generally above average, and demographic characteristics such as age, gender and marital status significantly influence QoL. Health managers and stakeholders should consider some of the factors identified in managing HROs.