Rui Liu’s research while affiliated with Jilin University and other places

The healthcare systems in China and globally have faced serious challenges during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The shortage of beds in traditional hospitals has exacerbated the threat of COVID-19. To increase the number of available beds, China implemented a special public health measure of opening mobile cabin hospitals. Mobile cabin hospitals, also called Fangcang shelter hospitals, refer to large-scale public venues such as indoor stadiums and exhibition centers converted to temporary hospitals. This study is a mini review of the practice of mobile cabin hospitals in China. The first part is regarding emergency preparedness, including site selection, conversion, layout, and zoning before opening the hospital, and the second is on hospital management, including organization management, management of nosocomial infections, information technology support, and material supply. This review provides some practical recommendations for countries that need mobile cabin hospitals to relieve the pressure of the pandemic on the healthcare systems.

Background To put COVID-19 patients into hospital timely, the clinical diagnosis had been implemented in Wuhan in the early epidemic. Here we compared the epidemiological characteristics of laboratory-confirmed and clinically diagnosed cases with COVID-19 in Wuhan. Methods Demographics, case severity and outcomes of 29,886 confirmed cases and 21,960 clinically diagnosed cases reported between December 2019 and February 24, 2020, were compared. The risk factors were estimated, and the effective reproduction number (Rt) of SARS-CoV-2 was also calculated. Results The age and occupation distribution of confirmed cases and clinically diagnosed cases were consistent, and their sex ratio were 1.0 and 0.9, respectively. The epidemic curve of clinical diagnosis cases was similar to that of confirmed cases, and the city centers had more cumulative cases and higher incidence density than suburbs in both of two groups. The proportion of severe and critical cases (21.5 % vs. 14.0 %, P < 0.0001) and case fatality rates (5.2 % vs. 1.2 %, P < 0.0001) of confirmed cases were all higher than those of clinically diagnosed cases. Risk factors for death we observed in both of two groups were older age, male, severe or critical cases. Rt showed the same trend in two groups, it dropped below 1.0 on February 6 among confirmed cases, and February 8 among clinically diagnosed cases. Conclusions The demographic characteristics and spatiotemporal distributions of confirmed and clinically diagnosed cases are roughly similar, but the disease severity and clinical outcome of clinically diagnosed cases are better than those of confirmed cases. In cases when detection kits are insufficient during the early epidemic, the implementation of clinical diagnosis is necessary and effective.

Background: To put COVID-19 patients into hospital timely, the clinical diagnosis had been implemented in Wuhan in the early outbreak. Here we compared the epidemiological characteristics of laboratory-confirmed and clinically diagnosed cases with COVID-19 in Wuhan. Methods: Demographics, case severity and outcomes of 29886 confirmed cases and 21960 clinically diagnosed cases reported between December 2019 and February 24, 2020, were compared. The risk factors were estimated, and the effective reproduction number of SARS-CoV-2 (Rt) was also calculated. Results: The interval between symptom onset and diagnosis of confirmed and clinically diagnosed cases reduced gradually as time went by, and the proportion of severe and critical cases as well as case fatality rates of the two groups all decreased over time. The proportion of severe and critical cases (21.5% vs 14.0%, P<0.0001) and case fatality rates (5.2% vs 1.2%, P<0.0001) of confirmed cases were all higher than those of clinically diagnosed cases. Risk factors for death we observed in all two groups were older age, male, severe or critical cases. Rt showed a downward trend after the lockdown of Wuhan, it dropped below 1.0 on February 6 among confirmed cases, and February 8 among clinically diagnosed cases. Conclusion: Public health responses taken in Wuhan, including clinical diagnosis, have contributed to slow transmission. In cases where testing kits are insufficient, clinical diagnosis is effective, which is helpful to quarantine or treat infected cases as soon as possible, and prevent the epidemic from worsening. To decrease the case fatality rate of COVID-19, it is necessary to strengthen early warning and intervention of severe and critical elderly men.