The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has infected over 1.5 million individuals and led to over 91, 000 deaths in the United States (US) alone as of May 20th, 2020. Minority populations, however, continue to be a high-risk population to contract the SARS-CoV-2 infection. While socioeconomic inequality may help to explain why minority ethnic populations are contracting the SARS-CoV-2 in larger proportions, the reason for elevated mortality rates in African Americans is still unknown. African Americans are less likely than whites to utilize high-quality hospitals, ambulatory care services, and regular primary care providers; this is most likely a result of barriers to accessing high quality treatment, as African Americans have substantially higher uninsured rates. However, previous reports have shown that regardless of insurance status, African Americans are more likely to be directed toward lower quality treatment plans compared to their white counterparts, and that physicians carry implicit biases that negatively impact treatment regimens for these minority populations. While income, education, and access to healthcare should be revised in due time, in the short term physicians should do everything possible to learn about implicit biases that may exist in healthcare, as the first step to minimize implicit biases is to recognize that they exist.

Since December 2019, several new infectious diseases, mainly lung diseases caused by novel coronavirus infections, have been discovered in Wuhan, Hubei Province. With the spread of the epidemic, cases in other regions of China and abroad have been confirmed. This sudden outbreak of a new type of infectious disease has seriously threatened people’s health and safety, and China has adopted strong prevention and control measures in response. To provide a reference for international health emergency management workers, this article summarizes, from an academic perspective, the main prevention and control measures taken in China.

The 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic has significantly altered lives across the globe. In the United States, several states attempted to manage the pandemic by issuing stay-at-home orders. In this research note, I examine whether the gender of state policy makers in the executive branch might impact a state's adoption of a stay-at-home order. Using event history analysis, I find that the governor's gender has no impact on the likelihood of a state adopting a stay-at-home order. However, I find that gender plays a significant role for agency heads. Specifically, my analysis shows that states with a female-headed health agency tend to adopt stay-at-home orders earlier than states with a male administrator. These findings shed light on how female leadership in the executive branch may impact public policy regarding COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has raised significant concerns for population mental health and the effective provision of mental health services in the light of increased demands and barriers to service delivery [1]. Particular attention is being directed toward the possible neuropsychiatric sequelae of both COVID-19 and of the stringent societal mitigation steps deployed by national governments, concerns that are informed by historical increases in the incidence of psychotic disorders following influenza pandemics [2]. However, so far there has been scant attention paid to other important areas of psychiatry during COVID-19, including medico-legal aspects and human rights. In this paper, we discuss the legal implications for psychiatry of the COVID-19 pandemic and report a novel situation in which psychiatric patients may experience diminution of their statutory protections. We believe that this represents a paradigm shift in psychiatric care and that the consideration of the fundamental rights of psychiatric patients as “less important” than infection control measures compel mental health professionals to “advocate for … patients and their caregivers” in this time of crisis [1].

As the COVID-19 pandemic escalates worldwide, it is apparent that many patients with more severe illness will also experience delirium. These patients pose a particular challenge in the application of optimal care due to issues with infectious risk, respiratory compromise and potential interactions between medications that can be used to manage delirium with antiviral and other treatments used for COVID-19. We describe a guidance resource adapted from existing guidelines for delirium management that has been tailored to the specific challenge of managing delirium in patients with COVID-19 infection. Issues around the assessment and treatment of these patients are examined and distilled into a simple (one-paged guidance resource that can assist clinicians in managing suspected delirium.

Hypertension is a common comorbidity in COVID-19 patients. However, the association of hypertension with the severity and fatality of COVID-19 remain unclear. In the present meta-analysis, relevant studies reported the impacts of hypertension on SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified by searching PubMed, Elsevier Science Direct, Web of Science, Wiley Online Library, Embase and CNKI up to 20 March 2020. As the results shown, 12 publications with 2389 COVID-19 patients (674 severe cases) were included for the analysis of disease severity. The severity rate of COVID-19 in hypertensive patients was much higher than in non-hypertensive cases (37.58% vs 19.73%, pooled OR: 2.27, 95% CI: 1.80–2.86). Moreover, the pooled ORs of COVID-19 severity for hypertension vs. non-hypertension was 2.21 (95% CI: 1.58–3.10) and 2.32 (95% CI: 1.70–3.17) in age <50 years and ⩾50 years patients, respectively. Additionally, six studies with 151 deaths of 2116 COVID-19 cases were included for the analysis of disease fatality. The results showed that hypertensive patients carried a nearly 3.48-fold higher risk of dying from COVID-19 (95% CI: 1.72–7.08). Meanwhile, the pooled ORs of COVID-19 fatality for hypertension vs. non-hypertension was 6.43 (95% CI: 3.40–12.17) and 2.66 (95% CI: 1.27–5.57) in age <50 years and ⩾50 years patients, respectively. Neither considerable heterogeneity nor publication bias was observed in the present analysis. Therefore, our present results provided further evidence that hypertension could significantly increase the risks of severity and fatality of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

In response to the global pandemic COVID-19, the Irish government has called upon the Garda Síochána to implement an unparalleled mode of policing to mitigate and contain the spread of the Coronavirus. Studies investigating smaller scale epidemics, such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), indicate that staff at the frontlines of an outbreak are exposed to an insuperable amount of stress and experience increased psychological morbidities as a result. Furthermore, research not only indicates that heighted levels of psychological distress are an occupational hazard associated with the law enforcement profession, but that members of the Garda Síochána feel their mental health needs are largely unmet by their organisation. Given the pandemic’s propensity to expose officers to indeterminate echelons of physical and psychological threat; there has never been a more appropriate time to explore the potential burdens associated with ‘policing’ a pandemic, question the governments capacity to address the psychological support needs of frontline professionals, and plan future research for best practice.