Delirium in COVID-19: epidemiology and clinical correlations in a large group of patients admitted to an academic hospital

A hybrid approach to forecast the COVID-19 epidemic trend

Studying the progress and trend of the novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19) transmission mode will help effectively curb its spread. Some commonly used infectious disease prediction models are introduced. The hybrid model is proposed, which overcomes the disadvantages of the logistic model's inability to predict the number of confirmed diagnoses and the drawbacks of too many tuning parameters of the SEIR (Susceptible, Exposed, Infectious, Recovered) model. The realization and superiority of the prediction of the proposed model are proven through experiments. At the same time, the influence of different initial values of the parameters that need to be debugged on the hybrid model is further studied, and the mean error is used to quantify the prediction effect. By forecasting epidemic size and peak time and simulating the effects of public health interventions, this paper aims to clarify the transmission dynamics of COVID-19 and recommend operation suggestions to slow down the epidemic. It is suggested that the quick detection of cases, sufficient implementation of quarantine and public self-protection behaviours are critical to slow down the epidemic.

An atypical case of corticobasal syndrome with psychotic depression and delusional jealousy

Corticobasal syndrome (CBS) is one of the Parkinson-plus disorders. While initially defined as a movement disorder rather than cognition, it is now known that CBS is related to various psychiatric symptoms. We describe a patient clinically diagnosed with CBS whose initial presentation was psychiatric and rather atypical. His clinical picture included psychotic depression and delusional jealousy. Misdiagnosing these syndromes may delay the initiation of the treatment and worsen the patients' condition, as well as increase the burden of the caretakers. Finally, COVID-19-related changes in the organization of health services complicated the diagnosis and follow-up processes of this patient.

Mental and neurological disorders and risk of COVID-19 susceptibility, illness severity and mortality: A systematic review, meta-analysis and call for action

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has evolved into a worldwide pandemic, and has been found to be closely associated with mental and neurological disorders. We aimed to comprehensively quantify the association between mental and neurological disorders, both pre-existing and subsequent, and the risk of susceptibility, severity and mortality of COVID-19.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane library databases for studies published from the inception up to January 16, 2021 and updated at July 7, 2021. Observational studies including cohort and case-control, cross-sectional studies and case series that reported risk estimates of the association between mental or neurological disorders and COVID-19 susceptibility, illness severity and mortality were included. Two researchers independently extracted data and conducted the quality assessment. Based on I2 heterogeneity, we used a random effects model to calculate pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Subgroup analyses and meta-regression analysis were also performed. This study was registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD 42021230832).

FINDING

A total of 149 studies (227,351,954 participants, 89,235,737 COVID-19 patients) were included in this analysis, in which 27 reported morbidity (132,727,798), 56 reported illness severity (83,097,968) and 115 reported mortality (88,878,662). Overall, mental and neurological disorders were associated with a significant high risk of infection (pre-existing mental: OR 1·67, 95% CI 1·12-2·49; and pre-existing neurological: 2·05, 1·58-2·67), illness severity (mental: pre-existing, 1·40, 1·25-1·57; sequelae, 4·85, 2·53-9·32; neurological: pre-existing, 1·43, 1·09-1·88; sequelae, 2·17, 1·45-3·24), and mortality (mental: pre-existing, 1·47, 1·26-1·72; neurological: pre-existing, 2·08, 1·61-2·69; sequelae, 2·03, 1·66-2·49) from COVID-19. Subgroup analysis revealed that association with illness severity was stronger among younger COVID-19 patients, and those with subsequent mental disorders, living in low- and middle-income regions. Younger patients with mental and neurological disorders were associated with higher mortality than elders. For type-specific mental disorders, susceptibility to contracting COVID-19 was associated with pre-existing mood disorders, anxiety, and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); illness severity was associated with both pre-existing and subsequent mood disorders as well as sleep disturbance; and mortality was associated with pre-existing schizophrenia. For neurological disorders, susceptibility was associated with pre-existing dementia; both severity and mortality were associated with subsequent delirium and altered mental status; besides, mortality was associated with pre-existing and subsequent dementia and multiple specific neurological diseases. Heterogeneities were substantial across studies in most analysis.

INTERPRETATION

The findings show an important role of mental and neurological disorders in the context of COVID-19 and provide clues and directions for identifying and protecting vulnerable populations in the pandemic. Early detection and intervention for neurological and mental disorders are urgently needed to control morbidity and mortality induced by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there was substantial heterogeneity among the included studies, and the results should be interpreted with caution. More studies are needed to explore long-term mental and neurological sequela, as well as the underlying brain mechanisms for the sake of elucidating the causal pathways for these associations.

FUNDING

This study is supported by grants from the National Key Research and Development Program of China, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, Special Research Fund of PKUHSC for Prevention and Control of COVID-19, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.

Delirium is a good predictor for poor outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression

AIM

Delirium is a common presenting symptom among older patients. Patients who presented with delirium may have a higher morbidity and mortality rate due to older age, other comorbidities, and atypical COVID-19 presentation. Currently, the evidence supporting delirium as one of the predictors of poor outcome of COVID-19 is still insufficient. This study aims to explore the potential association between delirium and poor outcomes from COVID-19.

METHODS

We systematically searched the PubMed and Google Scholar databases using specific keywords related to our aims until January 30th, 2021. All articles published on COVID-19 and delirium were retrieved. The quality of the study was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) tool for observational studies and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools for case-series studies. Statistical analysis was done using Review Manager 5.4 software.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis of 20 studies showed that delirium symptoms on admission was associated with poor outcomes from COVID-19 [OR 2.36 (95% CI 1.80-3.09), p < 0.00001, I² = 76%, random-effect models] and its subgroup which consist of severe COVID-19 [OR 3.89 (95% CI 1.72-8.75), p = 0.001, I² = 91%, random-effect models], and mortality from COVID-19 [OR 1.90 (95% CI 1.55-2.33), p < 0.00001, I² = 36%, random-effect models]. Meta-regression showed that the association was influenced by age (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests delirium as an important marker to identify patients at higher risk for developing poor COVID-19 outcomes. The physicians should add delirium as one of the common presenting symptoms of COVID-19 in older populations.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Dementia Risk: Potential Pathways to Cognitive Decline

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the far-reaching pandemic, has infected approximately 185 million of the world's population to date. After infection, certain groups, including older adults, men, and people of color, are more likely to have adverse medical outcomes. COVID-19 can affect multiple organ systems, even among asymptomatic/mild severity individuals, with progressively worse damage for those with higher severity infections.

SUMMARY

The COVID-19 virus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), primarily attaches to cells through the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor, a universal receptor present in most major organ systems. As SARS-CoV-2 binds to the ACE2 receptor, its bioavailability becomes limited, thus disrupting homeostatic organ function and inducing an injury cascade. Organ damage can then arise from multiple sources including direct cellular infection, overactive detrimental systemic immune response, and ischemia/hypoxia through thromboembolisms or disruption of perfusion. In the brain, SARS-CoV-2 has neuroinvasive and neurotropic characteristics with acute and chronic neurovirulent potential. In the cardiovascular system, COVID-19 can induce myocardial and systemic vascular damage along with thrombosis. Other organ systems such as the lungs, kidney, and liver are all at risk for infection damage. Key Messages: Our hypothesis is that each injury consequence has the independent potential to contribute to long-term cognitive deficits with the possibility of progressing to or worsening pre-existing dementia. Already, reports from recovered COVID-19 patients indicate that cognitive alterations and long-term symptoms are prevalent. This critical review highlights the injury pathways possible through SARS-CoV-2 infection that have the potential to increase and contribute to cognitive impairment and dementia.

What is the impact of COVID-19 on tissue viability services and pressure ulceration?

This paper explores and reviews the relevant literature and examines the impact that the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic has had on the tissue viability service (TVS) and the incidence of pressure ulcers (PUs) in a large UK teaching hospital NHS trust. A comparison has been undertaken of referral data to the TVS during two time periods-Oct-Dec 2019 and April-June 2020. Data show that the PU rate per 1000 beds increased from a pre-pandemic level of around 1 to over 2.7 in the first month of the pandemic, with an increase in device and prone position-related PUs, particularly in the expanded critical care patient population. Even though the bed occupancy decreased, the proportion of ungradable PUs increased, but there was little change in the number of Category 1 and 2 PUs.

Mental disorders, psychopharmacological treatments, and mortality in 2150 COVID-19 Spanish inpatients

OBJECTIVE

To determine how mental disorders and psychopharmacological treatments before and during COVID-19 hospital admissions are related to mortality.

METHODS

Subjects included in the study were all adult patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19, confirmed clinically and by PCR, who were admitted to a tertiary university hospital in Badalona (Spain) between March 1 and November 17, 2020. Data were extracted anonymously from computerized clinical records.

RESULTS

2,150 subjects were included, 57% males, mean age 61 years. History of mental disorders was registered in 957 (45%). Throughout admission, de novo diagnosis of mood or anxiety, stress, or adjustment disorder was made in 12% of patients without previous history. Delirium was diagnosed in 10% of cases. 1011 patients (47%) received a psychotropic prescription during admission (36% benzodiazepines, 22% antidepressants, and 21% antipsychotics). Mortality rate was 17%. Delirium during admission and history of mood disorder were independently associated with higher mortality risk (hazard ratios, 1.39 and 1.52 respectively), while previous year's treatments with anxiolytics/hypnotics and antidepressants were independently associated with lower mortality risk (hazard ratios, 0.47 and 0.43, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Mental symptoms are very common in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection. Detecting, diagnosing, and treating them is key to determining the prognosis of the disease and functional recovery.

Cognitive and behavioral manifestations in SARS-CoV-2 infection: not specific or distinctive features?

Patients with COVID-19 are increasingly reported to suffer from a wide range of neurological complications, affecting both the central and peripheral nervous system. Among central manifestations, cognitive and behavioral symptoms are to date not exhaustively detailed. Furthermore, it is not clear whether these represent a combination of non-specific complications of a severe systemic disease, not differing from those usually seen in patients suffering from heterogenous pathological conditions affecting the central nervous system, or instead, they are a peculiar expression of COVID-19 neurotropism; in other words, if the infection has a coincidental or causal role in such patients. We examined both hypotheses, reporting opposite points of view, with the aim to stimulate discussion and raise awareness of the topic.

Clinical Features and Outcomes of Patients with Dementia Compared to an Aging Cohort Hospitalized During the Initial New York City COVID-19 Wave

Background:

Patients with dementia are vulnerable during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, yet few studies describe their hospital course and outcomes.

Objective:

To describe and compare the hospital course for COVID-19 patients with dementia to an aging cohort without dementia in a large New York City academic medical center.

Methods:

This was a single-center retrospective cohort study describing all consecutive patients age 65 or older with confirmed COVID-19 who presented to the emergency department or were hospitalized at New York-Presbyterian/Columbia University Irving Medical Center between March 6 and April 7, 2020.

Results:

A total of 531 patients were evaluated, including 116 (21.8%) with previously diagnosed dementia, and 415 without dementia. Patients with dementia had higher mortality (50.0%versus 35.4%, p = 0.006); despite similar comorbidities and complications, multivariate analysis indicated the association was dependent on age, sex, comorbidities, and code status. Patients with dementia more often presented with delirium (36.2%versus 11.6%, p < 0.001) but less often presented with multiple other COVID-19 symptoms, and these findings remained after adjusting for age and sex.

Conclusion:

Hospitalized COVID-19 patients with dementia had higher mortality, but dementia was not an independent risk factor for death. These patients were approximately 3 times more likely to present with delirium but less often manifested or communicated other common COVID-19 symptoms. For this high-risk population in a worsening pandemic, understanding the unique manifestations and course in dementia and aging populations may help guide earlier diagnosis and optimize medical management.

Delirium and Mortality in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) - A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Introduction: Older adults are indisputably struck hard by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The main objective of this meta-analysis is to establish the association between delirium and mortality in older adults with COVID-19.

Methods: Systematic literature searches of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases were performed up until 28 November 2020. The exposure in this study was the diagnosis of delirium using clinically validated criteria. Delirium might be in-hospital, at admission, or both. The main outcome was mortality defined as clinically validated non-survivor/death. The effect estimates were reported as odds ratios (ORs) and adjusted odds ratios (aORs).

Results: A total of 3,868 patients from 9 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The percentage of patients with delirium was 27% [20%, 34%]. Every 1 mg/L increase in CRP was significantly associated with 1% increased delirium risk (OR 1.01 [1.00. 1.02], p=0.033). Delirium was associated with mortality (OR 2.39 [1.64, 3.49], p<0.001; I²: 82.88%). Subgroup analysis on delirium assessed at admission indicate independent association (OR 2.12 [1.39, 3.25], p<0.001; I²: 82.67%). Pooled adjusted analysis indicated that delirium was independently associated with mortality (aOR 1.50 [1.16, 1.94], p=0.002; I²: 31.02%). Subgroup analysis on delirium assessed at admission indicate independent association (OR 1.40 [1.03, 1.90], p=0.030; I²: 35.19%). Meta-regression indicates that the association between delirium and mortality were not significantly influenced by study-level variations in age, sex [reference: male], hypertension, diabetes, and dementia.

Conclusion: The presence of delirium is associated with increased risk of mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19.

Prevalence and risk factors for delirium in critically ill patients with COVID-19 (COVID-D): a multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

To date, 750 000 patients with COVID-19 worldwide have required mechanical ventilation and thus are at high risk of acute brain dysfunction (coma and delirium). We aimed to investigate the prevalence of delirium and coma, and risk factors for delirium in critically ill patients with COVID-19, to aid the development of strategies to mitigate delirium and associated sequelae.

METHODS

This multicentre cohort study included 69 adult intensive care units (ICUs), across 14 countries. We included all patients (aged ≥18 years) admitted to participating ICUs with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection before April 28, 2020. Patients who were moribund or had life-support measures withdrawn within 24 h of ICU admission, prisoners, patients with pre-existing mental illness, neurodegenerative disorders, congenital or acquired brain damage, hepatic coma, drug overdose, suicide attempt, or those who were blind or deaf were excluded. We collected de-identified data from electronic health records on patient demographics, delirium and coma assessments, and management strategies for a 21-day period. Additional data on ventilator support, ICU length of stay, and vital status was collected for a 28-day period. The primary outcome was to determine the prevalence of delirium and coma and to investigate any associated risk factors associated with development of delirium the next day. We also investigated predictors of number of days alive without delirium or coma. These outcomes were investigated using multivariable regression.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 20 and April 28, 2020, 4530 patients with COVID-19 were admitted to 69 ICUs, of whom 2088 patients were included in the study cohort. The median age of patients was 64 years (IQR 54 to 71) with a median Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II of 40·0 (30·0 to 53·0). 1397 (66·9%) of 2088 patients were invasively mechanically ventilated on the day of ICU admission and 1827 (87·5%) were invasively mechanical ventilated at some point during hospitalisation. Infusion with sedatives while on mechanical ventilation was common: 1337 (64·0%) of 2088 patients were given benzodiazepines for a median of 7·0 days (4·0 to 12·0) and 1481 (70·9%) were given propofol for a median of 7·0 days (4·0 to 11·0). Median Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score while on invasive mechanical ventilation was -4 (-5 to -3). 1704 (81·6%) of 2088 patients were comatose for a median of 10·0 days (6·0 to 15·0) and 1147 (54·9%) were delirious for a median of 3·0 days (2·0 to 6·0). Mechanical ventilation, use of restraints, and benzodiazepine, opioid, and vasopressor infusions, and antipsychotics were each associated with a higher risk of delirium the next day (all p≤0·04), whereas family visitation (in person or virtual) was associated with a lower risk of delirium (p<0·0001). During the 21-day study period, patients were alive without delirium or coma for a median of 5·0 days (0·0 to 14·0). At baseline, older age, higher SAPS II scores, male sex, smoking or alcohol abuse, use of vasopressors on day 1, and invasive mechanical ventilation on day 1 were independently associated with fewer days alive and free of delirium and coma (all p<0·01). 601 (28·8%) of 2088 patients died within 28 days of admission, with most of those deaths occurring in the ICU.

INTERPRETATION

Acute brain dysfunction was highly prevalent and prolonged in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Benzodiazepine use and lack of family visitation were identified as modifiable risk factors for delirium, and thus these data present an opportunity to reduce acute brain dysfunction in patients with COVID-19.

FUNDING

None.

TRANSLATIONS

For the French and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Neurological Consequences of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Concurrence of Treatment-Induced Neuropsychiatric Adverse Events in COVID-19 Patients: Navigating the Uncharted

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) binds to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor and invade the human cells to cause COVID-19-related pneumonia. Despite an emphasis on respiratory complications, the evidence of neurological manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infection is rapidly growing, which is substantially contributing to morbidity and mortality. The neurological disorders associated with COVID-19 may have several pathophysiological underpinnings, which are yet to be explored. Hypothetically, SARS-CoV-2 may affect the central nervous system (CNS) either by direct mechanisms like neuronal retrograde dissemination and hematogenous dissemination, or via indirect pathways. CNS complications associated with COVID-19 include encephalitis, acute necrotizing encephalopathy, diffuse leukoencephalopathy, stroke (both ischemic and hemorrhagic), venous sinus thrombosis, meningitis, and neuroleptic malignant syndrome. These may result from different mechanisms, including direct virus infection of the CNS, virus-induced hyper-inflammatory states, and post-infection immune responses. On the other hand, the Guillain-Barre syndrome, hyposmia, hypogeusia, and myopathy are the outcomes of peripheral nervous system injury. Although the therapeutic potential of certain repurposed drugs has led to their off-label use against COVID-19, such as anti-retroviral drugs (remdesivir, favipiravir, and lopinavir-ritonavir combination), biologics (tocilizumab), antibiotics (azithromycin), antiparasitics (chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine), and corticosteroids (dexamethasone), unfortunately, the associated clinical neuropsychiatric adverse events remains a critical issue. Therefore, COVID-19 represents a major threat to the field of neuropsychiatry, as both the virus and the potential therapies may induce neurologic as well as psychiatric disorders. Notably, potential COVID-19 medications may also interact with the medications of pre-existing neuropsychiatric diseases, thereby further complicating the condition. From this perspective, this review will discuss the possible neurological manifestations and sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection with emphasis on the probable underlying neurotropic mechanisms. Additionally, we will highlight the concurrence of COVID-19 treatment-associated neuropsychiatric events and possible clinically relevant drug interactions, to provide a useful framework and help researchers, especially the neurologists in understanding the neurologic facets of the ongoing pandemic to control the morbidity and mortality.

Delirium in Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study are to report the prevalence of delirium on admission to the unit in patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection, to identify the factors associated with delirium, and to evaluate the association between delirium and in-hospital mortality.

DESIGN

Multicenter observational cohort study.

SETTINGS

Acute medical units in four Italian hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 516 patients (median age 78 years) admitted to the participating centers with SARS-CoV-2 infection from February 22 to May 17, 2020.

MEASUREMENTS

Comprehensive medical assessment with detailed history, physical examinations, functional status, laboratory and imaging procedures. On admission, delirium was determined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th edition) criteria, 4AT, m-Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale, or clinical impression depending on the site. The primary outcomes were delirium rates and in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Overall, 73 (14.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 11.0-17.3%) patients presented delirium on admission. Factors significantly associated with delirium were dementia (odds ratio, OR = 4.66, 95% CI = 2.03-10.69), the number of chronic diseases (OR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.03; 1.40), and chest X-ray or CT opacity (OR = 3.29, 95% CI = 1.12-9.64 and 3.35, 95% CI = 1.07-10.47, for multiple or bilateral opacities and single opacity vs no opacity, respectively). There were 148 (33.4%) in-hospital deaths in the no-delirium group and 43 (58.9%) in the delirium group (P-value assessed using the Gray test <.001). As assessed by a multivariable Cox model, patients with delirium on admission showed an almost twofold increased hazard ratio for in-hospital mortality with respect to patients without delirium (hazard ratio = 1.88, 95% CI = 1.25-2.83).

CONCLUSION

Delirium is prevalent and associated with in-hospital mortality among older patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Implementing Delirium Prevention in the Era of COVID-19

Patients admitted with COVID-19 can develop delirium due to predisposing factors, isolation, and the illness itself. Standard delirium prevention methods focus on interaction and stimulation. It can be challenging to deliver these methods of care in COVID settings where it is necessary to increase patient isolation. This paper presents a typical clinical vignette of representative patients in a tertiary care hospital and how a medical team modified an evidence-based delirium prevention model to deliver high-quality care to COVID-19 patients. The implemented model focuses on four areas of delirium-prevention: Mobility, Sleep, Cognitive Stimulation, and Nutrition. Future studies will be needed to track quantitative outcome measures.

The Many Faces of Covid-19 at a Glance: A University Hospital Multidisciplinary Account From Milan, Italy

In March 2020, northern Italy became the second country worldwide most affected by Covid-19 and the death toll overtook that in China. Hospital staff soon realized that Covid-19 was far more severe than expected from the few data available at that time. The Covid-19 pandemic forced hospitals to adjust to rapidly changing circumstances. We report our experience in a general teaching hospital in Milan, the capital of Lombardy, the most affected area in Italy. First, we briefly describe Lombardy's regional Covid-19-related health organizational changes as well as general hospital reorganization. We also provide a multidisciplinary report of the main clinical, radiological and pathological Covid-19 findings we observed in our patients.

First Person Account COVID 19 Delirium in a Doctor: When Death Stalks the Mind

Previous studies reported that 20-30% of COVID-19 patients will develop delirium during the hospitalization, achieving 70% in cases of severe illness. The risks factors and the consequences of delirium are well-documented in the literature; however, little is known about the personal experience of delirium. Delirium burden is common and tends to be distressing even after the delirium episode has resolved. Taking this in mind, the present work provides a first-person account of a doctor who acquired Covid-19 and developed bilateral pneumonia and had delirium and a complicate course of illness. During the course of his delirium, the patient recalled experiences of reality and unreality, complete disorientation, lack of control, strong emotions, and intense fear of dying which was significantly distressing. We anticipate that delirium burden will be common on these patients and family members and clinicians should be aware of this phenomenon in order to evaluate the neuropsychiatric consequences of this condition.

Rehabilitation and COVID-19: a rapid living systematic review 2020 by Cochrane Rehabilitation Field. Update as of September 30th, 2020

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 outbreak response requires identifying and understanding the long-term consequences of this new pathology and how to manage these. This living systematic review presents the most current and seminal information coming from the scientific literature. It is the monthly update of the second edition of the rapid living systematic review 2020 conducted by Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER Action Steering Committee. The aim of this review was to update the monthly COVID-19 and rehabilitation literature research up to September 30, 2020.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Methodology described in the second edition of the rapid living systematic review 2020 conducted by Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER action was applied. The most important medical databases were searched, and papers related to COVID-19 and rehabilitation were retrieved and summarized descriptively.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The database search retrieved 2526 publications. Duplicates were removed, and 1150 unique records were screened for inclusion. After screening titles, abstracts and full-texts, 37 papers were included in the present review. According to OCEBM 2011 levels of evidence table, most studies (78.4%) fall within the level of evidence 4 category, while the remainder (22.6%) are categorized as level of evidence 3. Most studies described patients in acute (51.4%) or subacute (35.0%) phase, while no studies described the chronic consequences of COVID-19. Just one study dealt with rehabilitation interventions regarding COVID-19, and two discussed reorganization of rehabilitative services.

CONCLUSIONS

The most recently published COVID-19 research focuses more on describing the clinical presentations and the natural history of the pathology, rather than rehabilitation interventions or service delivery. Studies with high levels of evidence regarding the efficacy of interventions, long-term monitoring, or new organization models remain lacking.