Evaluation of indoor hospital acclimatization of body temperature before COVID-19 fever screening

Comprehensive evaluation of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on sperm parameters and sex hormones

Background

The inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine has made significant contributions to fighting the epidemic in the past three years. However, the rapid development and application raised concerns about its safety in reproductive health, especially after several studies had observed a decrease in semen parameters following two doses of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Thus, it is necessary to comprehensively evaluate the effect of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on male fertility.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in the Center for Reproductive Medicine of the Affiliated Hospital of Jining Medical University between July 2021 and March 2023. A total of 409 men with different vaccination status and no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were included in this study. Their sex hormone levels and semen parameters were evaluated and compared separately.

Results

The levels of FSH and PRL in one-dose vaccinated group were higher than other groups, while there were no significant changes in other sex hormone levels between the control and inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccinated groups. Most semen parameters such as volume, sperm concentration, total sperm count, progressive motility and normal forms were similar before and after vaccination with any single dose or combination of doses (all P > 0.05). Nevertheless, the total motility was significantly decreased after receiving the 1 + 2 doses of vaccine compared to before vaccination (46.90 ± 2.40% vs. 58.62 ± 2.51%; P = 0.001). Fortunately, this parameter was still within the normal range.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated that any single dose or different combined doses of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was not detrimental to male fertility. This information could reassure men who want to conceive after vaccination and be incorporated into future fertility recommendations.

Optimal diagnostic fever thresholds using non-contact infrared thermometers under COVID-19

Fever screening is an effective method to detect infectors associated with different variants of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) based on the fact that most infectors with COVID-19 have fever symptoms. Non-contact infrared thermometers (NCITs) are widely used in fever screening. Nevertheless, authoritative data is lacking in defining "fever" at different body surface sites when using NCITs. The purpose of this study was to determine the optimal diagnostic threshold for fever screening using NICTs at different body surface sites, to improve the accuracy of fever screening and provide theoretical reference for healthcare policy. Participants (n = 1860) who were outpatients or emergency patients at Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital were recruited for this prospective investigation from March 1 to June 30, 2021. NCITs and mercury axillary thermometers were used to measure neck, temple, forehead and wrist temperatures of all participants. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to reflect the accuracy of NCITs. Linear correlation analysis was used to show the effect of age on body temperature. Multilinear regression analysis was used to explore the association between non-febrile participant's covariates and neck temperature. The mean age of participants was 3.45 ± 2.85 years for children and 28.56 ± 7.25 years for adults. In addition 1,304 (70.1%) participants were children (≤12), and 683 (36.7%) were male. The neck temperature exhibited the highest accuracy among the four sites. Further the optimal fever diagnostic thresholds of NCITs at the four body surface measurement sites were neck (36.75 °C, sensitivity: 0.993, specificity: 0.858); temple (36.55 °C, sensitivity: 0.974, specificity: 0.874); forehead (36.45 °C, sensitivity: 0.961, specificity: 0.813); and wrist (36.15 °C, sensitivity: 0.951, specificity: 0.434). Based on the findings of our study, we recommend 36.15, 36.45, 36.55, and 36.75 °C as the diagnostic thresholds of fever at the wrist, forehead, temple and neck, respectively. Among the four surface sites, neck temperature exhibited the highest accuracy.

Reliability of Non-Contact Infrared Thermometers for Fever Screening Under COVID-19

Purpose

Fever is one of the most typical clinical symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and non-contact infrared thermometers (NCITs) are commonly used to screen for fever. However, there is a lack of authoritative data to define a “fever” when an NCIT is used and previous studies have shown that NCIT readings fluctuate widely depending on ambient temperatures and the body surface site screened. The aim of this study was to establish cut-off points for normal temperatures of different body sites (neck, forehead, temples, and wrist) and investigate the accuracy of NCITs at various ambient temperatures to improve the standardization and accuracy of fever screening.

Patients and Methods

A prospective investigation was conducted among 904 participants in the outpatient and emergency departments of Chengdu Women’s and Children’s Central Hospital. Body temperature was measured using NCITs and mercury axillary thermometers. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to determine the accuracy of body temperature detection at the four body surface sites. Data on participant characteristics were also collected.

Results

Among the four surface sites, the neck temperature detection group had the highest accuracy. When the neck temperature was 37.35°C as the optimum fever diagnostic threshold, the sensitivity was 0.866. The optimum fever diagnostic thresholds for forehead, temporal, and wrist temperature were 36.65°C, 36.65°C, and 36.75°C, respectively. Moreover, triple neck temperature detection had the highest sensitivity, up to 0.998, whereas the sensitivity of triple wrist temperature detections was 0.949. Notably, the accuracy of NCITs significantly reduced when the temperature was lower than 18°C.

Conclusion

Neck temperature had the highest accuracy among the four NCIT temperature measurement sites, with an optimum fever diagnostic threshold of 37.35°C. Considering the findings reported in our study, we recommend triple neck temperature detection with NCITs as the fever screening standard for COVID-19.

FMD-Yolo: An efficient face mask detection method for COVID-19 prevention and control in public

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a world-wide epidemic and efficient prevention and control of this disease has become the focus of global scientific communities. In this paper, a novel face mask detection framework FMD-Yolo is proposed to monitor whether people wear masks in a right way in public, which is an effective way to block the virus transmission. In particular, the feature extractor employs Im-Res2Net-101 which combines Res2Net module and deep residual network, where utilization of hierarchical convolutional structure, deformable convolution and non-local mechanisms enables thorough information extraction from the input. Afterwards, an enhanced path aggregation network En-PAN is applied for feature fusion, where high-level semantic information and low-level details are sufficiently merged so that the model robustness and generalization ability can be enhanced. Moreover, localization loss is designed and adopted in model training phase, and Matrix NMS method is used in the inference stage to improve the detection efficiency and accuracy. Benchmark evaluation is performed on two public databases with the results compared with other eight state-of-the-art detection algorithms. At IoU = 0.5 level, proposed FMD-Yolo has achieved the best precision AP50 of 92.0% and 88.4% on the two datasets, and AP75 at IoU = 0.75 has improved 5.5% and 3.9% respectively compared with the second one, which demonstrates the superiority of FMD-Yolo in face mask detection with both theoretical values and practical significance.

Is body temperature mass screening a reliable and safe option for preventing COVID-19 spread?

With the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continuing worldwide, mass screening of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is a cornerstone of strategies for limiting viral spread within communities. Although mass screening of body temperature with handheld, non-contact infrared thermometers and thermal imagine scanners is now widespread in a kaleidoscope of social and healthcare settings for the purpose of detecting febrile individuals bearing SARS-CoV-2 infection, this strategy carries some drawbacks, which will be highlighted and discussed in this article. These caveats basically include high rate of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, the challenging definition of "normal" body temperature, variation of measured values according to the body district, false negative cases due to antipyretics, device inaccuracy, impact of environmental temperature, along with the low specificity of this symptom for screening COVID-19 in patients with other febrile conditions. Some pragmatic suggestions will also be endorsed for increasing accuracy and precision of mass screening of body temperature. These encompass the regular assessment of body temperature (possibly twice) with validated devices, which shall be constantly monitored over time and used following manufacturer's instructions, the definition of a range of "normal" body temperatures in the local population, patients interrogation on usual body temperature, measurement standardization of one body district, allowance of sufficient environmental acclimatization before temperature check, integration with contact history and other clinical information, along with exclusion of other causes of increased body temperature. We also endorse the importance of individual and primary care physician's regular and repeated check of personal body temperature.