BackgroundStudies of influenza, and human coronaviruses provide evidence that the use of a medical mask can prevent the spread of infectious droplets from an infected person to someone else. After global public health emergency of coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 causing illness of COVID-19 was changing frequency of wearing a mask. Therefore, study was undertaken to assess whether the use of protective masks affects the level of oxygen saturation during rest and during exercise.Material and MethodsThe test consisted of a non-invasive measurement of oxygen saturation by percutaneous determination of arterial oxygen saturation with the use of the pulse oximeter. Oxygen saturation was measured during rest and after physical exertion performed without a protective mask (2 types of masks were used: surgical and FFP2), as well as during rest and after physical exertion performed with the use of a protective mask. The analysis of the oxygen saturation, heart rate, blood pressure and respiratory rate included data on 48 subjects.ResultsComparing the post-exercise and pre-exercise values showed a significant difference between all of them. There were no differences found in any variables according to the mask/no-mask status.ConclusionsA short-term physical exercise performed in a group of healthy young people using protective masks did not affect oxygen saturation, heart rate, blood pressure and respiratory rate.
BackgroundDuring the course of COVID-19 pandemic, a wide range of scientific projects was implemented worldwide, including studies focusing on infection fatality rate (IFR). The value of IFR depends on the number of COVID-19 deaths in a population in a given period and the number of infected people in this population, usually provided by seropepidemiological studies (anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG in the case of COVID-19). The objective of our study was to estimate IFR in the course of COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, in the general population of Upper Silesia Metropolitan Area (USMA).Material and MethodsThe seroepidemiological study was conducted in October–November 2020. Among randomly selected inhabitants of Katowice, Gliwice, and Sosnowiec (N = 1167), the presence of SARS-CoV-2 virus infection was assessed based on a positive IgG test result performed with the ELISA method. Data on deaths due to COVID-19 were obtained from the Registry Offices of each city. The infection fatality rate was calculated using the formula IFR (%) = [number of deaths/number of infected] × 100.ResultsResults of our study showed the prevalence of infection at 11.4% (95% CI: 9.5–13.2). In three examined towns, in the period January–November 2020, there was a total of 516 COVID-19 deaths. The resulting crude IFR was 0.65% (95% CI: 0.56–0.78). The IgG test had 88% sensitivity and 99% specificity and these figures were used to adjust IFR. The adjusted IFR value was similar to the crude value: IFR = 0.62% (95% CI: 0.53–0.74).ConclusionsThe value of IFR estimated for the USMA population was similar to average values obtained in other countries and can be used as the background for monitoring the course and impact of COVID-19 pandemic in the Upper Silesian Industrial Area. Med Pr. 2021;72(6):671–6
PL
WstępW trakcie pandemii COVID-19 wszczęto w skali globalnej szerokie spektrum badań, w tym także ukierunkowanych na oszacowanie wskaźnika śmiertelności infekcji (infection fatality rate – IFR). Wyznaczenie IFR wymaga znajomości liczby zgonów w danej populacji i danym czasie oraz liczby osób zakażonych, zwykle określanej na podstawie wyników badania serologicznego (anty-SARS-CoV-2 IgG w przypadku COVID-19). Celem badania było oszacowanie IFR w przebiegu pandemii COVID-19 w 2020 r. w Aglomeracji Górnośląskiej (AG).Materiał i metodyBadanie seroepidemiologiczne przeprowadzono w październiku i listopadzie 2020 r. Wśród losowo wybranych mieszkańców Katowic, Gliwic i Sosnowca (N = 1167) oceniano obecność zakażenia wirusem SARS-CoV-2 na podstawie dodatniego wyniku testu IgG wykonanego metodą ELISA. Dane o zgonach z powodu COVID-19 uzyskano z Urzędów Stanu Cywilnego każdego z miast. Wskaźnik śmiertelności infekcji obliczono, stosując formułę: IFR (%) = (liczba zgonów / liczba zakażonych) × 100.WynikiWyniki badania potwierdziły obecność przeciwciał anty-SARS-CoV-2 (klasa IgG) na poziomie 11,4% (95% CI: 9,5–13,2). Do listopada 2020 r. w populacji ww. miast zarejestrowano 516 zgonów, a tym samym surowy współczynnik IFR wyniósł 0,65% (95% CI: 0,56–0,78). Test diagnostyczny (IgG) odznaczał się czułością na poziomie 88% i swoistością wynoszącą 99%. Parametry te pozwoliły na oszacowanie skorygowanej pod względem trafności diagnostycznej testu wartości IFR. Skorygowany IFR miał podobną wartość: 0,62% (95% CI: 0,53–0,74).WnioskiOszacowana dla populacji AG wartość IFR jest zbliżona do przeciętnych poziomów obserwowanych w innych państwach i stanowi podstawę monitorowania przebiegu i skutków pandemii COVID-19 w tym regionie. Med. Pr. 2021;72(6):671–676
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.