Conectar
by Costanza Vicentini, Enrico Ricchizzi, Antonino Russotto, Stefano Bazzolo, Catia Bedosti, Valentina Blengini, Dario Ceccarelli, Elisa Fabbri, Dario Gamba, Anna Maddaleno, Edoardo Rolfini, Margherita Tancredi, Carla Maria Zotti
IntroductionResidents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are a population at high risk of developing severe healthcare associated infections (HAIs). In the assessment of HAIs in acute-care hospitals, selection bias can occur due to cases being over-represented: patients developing HAIs usually have longer lengths of stays compared to controls, and therefore have an increased probability of being sampled in PPS, leading to an overestimation of HAI prevalence. Our hypothesis was that in LTCFs, the opposite may occur: residents developing HAIs either may have a greater chance of being transferred to acute-care facilities or of dying, and therefore could be under-represented in PPS, leading to an underestimation of HAI prevalence. Our aim was to test this hypothesis by comparing HAI rates obtained through longitudinal and cross-sectional studies.
MethodsResults from two studies conducted simultaneously in four LTCFs in Italy were compared: a longitudinal study promoted by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC, HALT4 longitudinal study, H4LS), and a PPS. Prevalence was estimated from the PPS and converted into incidence per year using an adapted version of the Rhame and Sudderth formula proposed by the ECDC. Differences between incidence rates calculated from the PPS results and obtained from H4LS were investigated using the Byar method for rate ratio (RR).
ResultsOn the day of the PPS, HAI prevalence was 1.47% (95% confidence interval, CI 0.38–3.97), whereas the H4LS incidence rate was 3.53 per 1000 patient-days (PDs, 95% CI 2.99–4.08). Conversion of prevalence rates obtained through the PPS into incidence using the ECDC formula resulted in a rate of 0.86 per 1000 PDs (95% CI 0–2.68). Comparing the two rates, a RR of 0.24 (95% CI 0.03–2.03, p 0.1649) was found.
ConclusionsThis study did not find significant differences between HAI incidence estimates obtained from a longitudinal study and through conversion from PPS data. Results of this study support the validity of the ECDC method.
To explore associations between adverse birth outcomes and childhood overweight at 3–8 years of age.
A prospective cohort study.
Six central urban districts of Tianjin, China.
1681 woman–child pairs.
1681 woman–child pairs were followed up for 8 years in Tianjin, China. Demographic and clinical information including birth outcomes was collected longitudinally, commencing from first antenatal care visit till postpartum period. Offspring height and weight were measured at 3–8 years of age. High and low weight/length ratios (WLR) at birth were, respectively, defined as ≥90th and ≤10th gestational week and sex-specific percentiles. Overweight for children at 3–5 and 6–8 years of age were, respectively, defined as body mass index (BMI)-for-age and -sex above the 2 z-score and 1 z-score curves of the WHO’s child growth standards. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to obtain ORs and 95% CI with a stepwise backward selection method to select independent predictors.
Childhood overweight.
Of 1681 children, 10.7% (n=179) and 27.8% (n=468) developed overweight at 3–5 and 6–8 years of age, respectively. Large for gestational age (LGA) was associated with increased risk of overweight at 3–5 years of age (aOR: 1.86, 95% CI: 1.27 to 2.72) while high WLR at birth was associated with increased risk of overweight at 6–8 years of age (1.82, 1.41 to 2.34). Low WLR at birth was associated with decreased risk of overweight at 6–8 years of age (0.52, 0.30 to 0.90).
LGA and high WLR at birth predicted childhood overweight at 3–5 and 6–8 years of age, respectively. Low WLR at birth was associated with decreased risk of childhood overweight at 6–8 years of age.
Infection prevention and control (IPC) teams are routinely confronted with intense emotions in their daily work, as they are involved in many change processes with front-line medical staff, for example, when promoting compliance with basic IPC measures. In addition, they are confronted with challenges due to their role as intermediaries. Based on former research, this study aims to empower IPC teams to promote clinicians’ compliance through interventions focusing on the IPC teams’ leadership skills.
The IP-POWER study (Infection Prevention with head and heart: Psychological empowerment of IPC teams), a multicentre, two-arm, non-blinded, cluster-randomised controlled trial with a parallel waiting control group, is planned to be conducted in Germany as of February to November 2024. A group of 10 voluntary hospitals is going to participate in a multistage intervention programme, including 2 days of intense psychological training; 5 hospitals will be randomly assigned to the waiting control group. After the workshops, there will be a 12-week follow-up period during which the contents learnt within the workshops can be applied and internalised into IPC practice. The proposed outcomes (both self-assessed and other-assessed leadership competencies of IPC team members and their task profiles, perceived workload, motivation to act in order to implement IP measures and goal attainment) are going to be collected with an online questionnaire, followed by an analysis with IBM SPSS (Statistics 29 (or later)) using descriptive analyses and multiple linear regressions. Additionally, as external data sources, hand hygiene compliance rates from the study hospitals’ monitoring systems will be analysed using ² tests.
This study was reviewed and approved by the ethics committee of the University of Leipzig (184/23-ek; vote from 4 July 2023). Findings will be disseminated via peer-review publications, and national and international conference presentations.
DRKS00031879.
by Anita Kovács, Dóra Hantosi, Nikoletta Szabó, Annamária Letoha, Csaba Lengyel, Imre Földesi, Katalin Burián, András Palkó, Dániel Veréb, Zsigmond Tamás Kincses
ObjectivesEmerging results indicate that, in COVID-19, thromboembolic complications contribute to the high mortality and morbidity. Previous research showed that the prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) is between 25–50% in COVID-19 patients, however, most of these reports are based on data from patients with severe pneumonia, treated in intensive care units.
Materials and methodsWe conducted a retrospective, single-center, observational study to estimate the prevalence of PE in COVID-19 patients who underwent CT angiography and to identify the most important predictors.Adult outpatients with COVID-19, who presented at our COVID Outpatient Clinic between 1st and 31st of March in 2021 and underwent CTA examination were included in this study. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to identify predictors of PE in COVID-19 patients. The predictors were: age, gender, disease duration, CT severity index and log-transformed quantitative D-dimer (logQDDIM) value.
Results843 COVID-19 patients were included into the study. 82.56% (693 patients) of the infected patients had a pulmonary CTA examination and D-dimer levels (mean age: 59.82 years ± 15.66). 7.61% (53 patients) of the patients had PE. 2.02% (14 patients) of the patients had main branch or lobar PE.The multiple regression analysis found that only logQDDIM was a significant predictor. A logQDDIM cut-off value of 0.0169 (1.0171 ug/ml serum D-dimer) predicted PE with 99% sensitivity (p Conclusions
We demonstrated in a large cohort of COVID-19 patients that a cut-off value of QDDIM of 1ug/ml can exclude pulmonary embolism in an outpatient setting, implicating that QDDIM might potentially supersede CTA as a screening approach in COVID-19 outpatient clinics.
The study aim was to evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE) of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Zambia. We sought to answer the question, ‘What is the vaccine effectiveness of a complete schedule of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 among HCWs in Zambia?’
We conducted a test-negative case–control study among HCWs across different levels of health facilities in Zambia offering point of care testing for COVID-19 from May 2021 to March 2022.
1767 participants entered the study and completed it. Cases were HCWs with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 and controls were HCWs who tested SARS-CoV-2 negative. Consented HCWs with documented history of vaccination for COVID-19 (vaccinated HCWs only) were included in the study. HCWs with unknown test results and unknown vaccination status, were excluded.
The primary outcome was VE among symptomatic HCWs. Secondary outcomes were VE by: SARS-CoV-2 variant strains based on the predominant variant circulating in Zambia (Delta during May 2021 to November 2021 and Omicron during December 2021 to March 2022), duration since vaccination and vaccine product.
We recruited 1145 symptomatic HCWs. The median age was 30 years (IQR: 26–38) and 789 (68.9%) were women. Two hundred and eighty-two (24.6%) were fully vaccinated. The median time to full vaccination was 102 days (IQR: 56–144). VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was 72.7% (95% CI: 61.9% to 80.7%) for fully vaccinated participants. VE was 79.4% (95% CI: 58.2% to 90.7%) during the Delta period and 37.5% (95% CI: –7.0% to 63.3%) during the Omicron period.
COVID-19 vaccines were effective in reducing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 among Zambian HCWs when the Delta variant was circulating but not when Omicron was circulating. This could be related to immune evasive characteristics and/or waning immunity. These findings support accelerating COVID-19 booster dosing with bivalent vaccines as part of the vaccination programme to reduce COVID-19 in Zambia.
To evaluate and summarize the evidence for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients and provide reference for clinical practice.
This study was an evidence summary followed by the evidence summary reporting standard of Fudan University Center for Evidence-based Nursing.
Current literatures were systematically searched for the best evidence for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients. Literature types included clinical guidelines, best practice information sheets, expert consensuses, systematic reviews, evidence summaries and cohort studies.
UpToDate, BMJ Best Practice, Joanna Briggs Institute, Guidelines International Network, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Sinomed, Web of Science, Yi Maitong Guidelines Network, DynaMed, MEDLINE, CNKI, WanFang database, Chinese Medical Journal Full-text Database, European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism website, the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition website were searched from January 2012 to April 2023.
We finally identified 18 articles that had high-quality results. We summarized the 24 pieces of best evidence from these articles, covering five aspects: screening and assessment of the risk of enteral nutritional tolerance; formulation of enteral nutrition preparations; enteral nutritional feeding implementation; feeding intolerance symptom prevention and management; and multidisciplinary management. Of these pieces of evidence, 19 were ‘strong’ and 5 were ‘weak’, 7 pieces of evidence were recommended in level one and 4 pieces of evidence were recommended in level two.
The following 24 pieces of evidence for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients were finally recommended. However, as these evidences came from different countries, relevant factors such as the clinical environment should be evaluated before application. Future studies should focus on more specific symptoms of feeding intolerance and more targeted prevention design applications.
The clinical medical staffs are recommended to take evidence-based recommendations for the implementation of standardized enteral nutrition to improve patient outcomes and decrease gastrointestinal intolerance in critically ill patients.
The management of enteral nutrition feeding intolerance has always been a challenge and difficulty in critically ill patients. This study summarizes 24 pieces of the best evidence for prevention and management of enteral nutrition feeding intolerance in critically ill patients. Following and implementing these 24 pieces of evidence is beneficial to the prevention and management of feeding intolerance in clinical practice. The 24 pieces of evidence include five aspects, including screening and assessment of the risk of enteral nutritional tolerance, formulation of enteral nutrition preparations, enteral nutritional feeding implementation, feeding intolerance symptom prevention and management and multidisciplinary management. These five aspects constitute a good implementation process. Screening and assessment of enteral nutritional tolerance throughout intervention are important guarantees for developing a feasible nutrition program in critically ill patients. This study will be benefit to global medical workers in the nutritional management of critically ill patients.
This evidence summary followed the evidence summary reporting specifications of Fudan University Center for Evidence-based Nursing, which were based on the methodological process for the summary of the evidence produced by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). The reporting specifications include problem establishment, literature retrieval, literature screening, literature evaluation, the summary and grading of evidence and the formation of practical suggestions. This study was based on the evidence summary reporting specifications of the Fudan University Center for the Evidence-based Nursing, the register name is ‘Best evidence summary for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients’, the registration number is ‘ES20231823’.
by Katayi Mwila-Kazimbaya, Samuel Bosomprah, Obvious Nchimunya Chilyabanyama, Caroline Cleopatra Chisenga, Mwelwa Chibuye, Natasha Makabilo Laban, Michelo Simuyandi, Bert Huffer Jr, Miren Iturriza-Gomara, Robert K. M. Choy, Roma Chilengi
BackgroundRotavirus gastroenteritis remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality despite the introduction of vaccines. Research shows there are several factors contributing to the reduced efficacy of rotavirus vaccines in low- and middle-income settings. Proposed factors include environmental enteric dysfunction (EED), malnutrition, and immune dysfunction. This study aimed to assess the effect of these factors on vaccine responses using a machine learning lasso approach.
MethodsSerum samples from two rotavirus clinical trials (CVIA 066 n = 99 and CVIA 061 n = 124) were assessed for 11 analytes using the novel Micronutrient and EED Assessment Tool (MEEDAT) multiplex ELISA. Immune responses to oral rotavirus vaccines (Rotarix, Rotavac, and Rotavac 5D) as well as a parenteral rotavirus vaccine (trivalent P2-VP8) were also measured and machine learning using the lasso approach was then applied to investigate any associations between immune responses and environmental enteric dysfunction, systemic inflammation, and growth hormone resistance biomarkers.
ResultsBoth oral and parenteral rotavirus vaccine responses were negatively associated with retinol binding protein 4 (RBP4), albeit only weakly for oral vaccines. The parenteral vaccine responses were positively associated with thyroglobulin (Tg) and histidine-rich protein 2 (HRP2) for all three serotypes (P8, P6 and P4), whilst intestinal fatty acid binding protein (I-FABP) was negatively associated with P6 and P4, but not P8, and soluble transferrin receptor (sTfR) was positively associated with P6 only.
ConclusionMEEDAT successfully measured biomarkers of growth, systemic inflammation, and EED in infants undergoing vaccination, with RBP4 being the only analyte associated with both oral and parenteral rotavirus vaccine responses. Tg and HRP2 were associated with responses to all three serotypes in the parenteral vaccine, while I-FABP and sTfR results indicated possible strain specific immune responses to parenteral immunization.
FreshRSS 