Why did outbreaks of severe acute respiratory syndrome occur in some hospital wards but not in others?

Comparison of the treatment status of patients with acute heart failure before and during the COVID-19 pandemic - Observational cohort study using Japanese administrative data

BACKGROUND

There is a concern that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to underutilization of non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) in patients with acute heart failure (HF). We investigated the alterations in clinical management of acute HF during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This study was an observational study of patients treated in emergency care with acute HF, using a Japanese Administrative database for a period before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Of the 9081 overall eligible patients, the ratio of patients receiving NPPV and tracheal intubation during to before the COVID-19 pandemic were 0.88 [95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.80, 0.96] and 1.38 (95 % CI: 1.11, 1.71), respectively. Propensity score matching in patients treated in COVID-19 receiving facilities and emergency declaration response areas showed that ratio of NPPV and tracheal intubation during to before the COVID-19 pandemic were 0.88 (95 % CI: 0.76, 1.03), and 1.65 (95 % CI: 1.19, 2.28), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation rate of NPPV decreased significantly in eligible patients, with a decreasing trend observed in patient populations in COVID-19 receiving facilities and emergency declaration response areas. Tracheal intubation increased in all populations.

Transferring inpatients between wards drives large nosocomial COVID-19 outbreaks, Wales, 2020-22: a matched case-control study using routine and enhanced surveillance data

BACKGROUND

The role of the hospital environment in the spread of COVID-19 is unclear.

AIM

To measure associations between ward characteristics and outbreak size to inform mitigations.

METHODS

Wards with large (case wards) and small (control wards) outbreaks in three acute hospitals were compared. Cases were healthcare-associated COVID-19 inpatients (positive polymerase chain reaction test ≥8 days post admission). Case wards were adult medical/surgical wards with ≥10 cases within rolling 14-day periods, between April 1st, 2020 and April 30th, 2022. Control wards were equivalents with 2-9 cases. Demographic and laboratory data were extracted from routine surveillance systems. Continuous data were aggregated fortnightly and analysed as binary variables according to median values. Each case ward was compared with two control wards matched on outbreak start date (±14 days) to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) using univariable and conditional multivariable logistic regression.

FINDINGS

From 170 outbreaks (median: 5 cases; interquartile range: 2-9), 35 case wards were identified. Community admissions were lower in case wards vs control wards (5 vs 10 median admissions; P<0.01, respectively), whereas transfers between wards within the same hospital were higher (58 vs 29 median transfers; P<0.01, respectively). Wards with more transfers in the preceding fortnight were significantly more likely to experience a large outbreak (≥35 vs <35 transfers; adjusted OR: 9.08; 95% CI: 2.5-33).

CONCLUSION

We recommend safely minimizing patient movements, such as by asking clinicians to record the rationale for transfer, to reduce the likelihood of disease transmission.

Using adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence level monitoring to identify bacterial reservoirs during two consecutive Enterococcus faecium and Staphylococcus capitis nosocomial infection outbreaks at a neonatal intensive care unit

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to assess the role of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence level monitoring for identifying reservoirs of the outbreak pathogen during two consecutive outbreaks caused by Enterococcus faecium and Staphylococcus capitis at a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). The secondary aim was to evaluate the long-term sustainability of the infection control measures employed one year after the final intervention measures.

METHODS

Two outbreaks occurred during a 53-day period in two disconnected subunits, A and B, that share the same attending physicians. ATP bioluminescence level monitoring, environmental cultures, and hand cultures from healthcare workers (HCW) in the NICU were performed. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) typing was carried out to investigate the phylogenetic relatedness of the isolated strains.

RESULTS

Four cases of E. faecium sepsis (patients A-8, A-7, A-9, B-8) and three cases of S. capitis sepsis (patients A-16, A-2, B-8) were diagnosed in six preterm infants over a span of 53 days. ATP levels remained high on keyboard 1 of the main station (2076 relative light unit [RLU]/100 cm2) and the keyboard of bed A-9 (4886 RLU/100 cm2). By guidance with the ATP results, environmental cultures showed that E. faecium isolated from the patients and from the main station's keyboard 1 were genotypically indistinguishable. Two different S. capitis strains caused sepsis in three patients. A total 77.8% (n = 7/9) of S. capitis cultured from HCW's hands were genotypically indistinguishable to the strains isolated from A-2 and A-16. The remaining 22.2% (n = 2/9) were genotypically indistinguishable to patient B-8. Three interventions to decrease the risk of bacterial transmission were applied, with the final intervention including a switch of all keyboards and mice in NICU-A and B to disinfectable ones. Post-intervention prospective monitoring up to one year showed a decrease in blood culture positivity (P = 0.0019) and catheter-related blood stream infection rate (P = 0.016) before and after intervention.

CONCLUSION

ATP monitoring is an effective tool in identifying difficult to disinfect areas in NICUs. Non-medical devices may serve as reservoirs of pathogens causing nosocomial outbreaks, and HCWs' hands contribute to bacterial transmission in NICUs.

Pediatric anesthesia practices during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A retrospective cohort study

Background and Aims

The onset of the coronavirus 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic brought together the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA) and the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA) to release a joint statement on anesthesia use. Their statement included a recommendation to use regional anesthesia whenever possible to mitigate the risk associated with aerosolizing procedures. We sought to examine the utilization of anesthesia in pediatric patients undergoing a surgical procedure for fractures or ligament repairs before and during COVID‐19.

Methods

Using the Premier Health Database, we retrospectively analyzed pediatric patients undergoing a surgical intervention for fractures or ligament repair before and during COVID‐19. We sought to determine if there were differences in anesthesia use among this cohort during the two time periods. Fracture groups included shoulder and clavicle, humerus and elbow, forearm and wrist, hand and finger, pelvis and hip, femur and knee, leg and ankles, and foot and toes. Ligament procedures included surgical intervention for the anterior cruciate ligament and ulnar collateral ligament repair.

Results

We identified a total of 5935 patients undergoing a surgical procedure for fractures or ligament repairs before and during COVID‐19. After exclusion for unknown anesthesia use, 2,807 patients were included in our cohort with 81.5% (n = 2288) of patients undergoing a procedure under general anesthesia, 6.4% (n = 181) under regional anesthesia, and 12.0% (n = 338) under combined general‐regional anesthesia. There did not appear to be a significant difference in the type of anesthesia used before and during COVID‐19 (p = 0.052).

Conclusions

Our study did not identify a difference in anesthesia use before and during COVID‐19 among pediatric patients undergoing a surgical procedure. Further studies should estimate the change in anesthesia used during the time period when elective procedures were resumed.

WASH to control COVID-19: A rapid review

Background

Preventive public health has been suggested as methods for reducing the transmission of COVID-19. Safety and efficacy of one such public health measure: WASH intervention for COVID-19 has not been systematically reviewed. We undertook a rapid review to assess the effect of WASH intervention in reducing the incidence of COVID-19.

Methods

We conducted searches in PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. We undertook screening of studies in two stages and extracted data and assessed the quality of evidence for the primary outcome using GRADE recommendations.

Main results

We included a total of 13 studies with three studies on COVID-19 and 10 on SARS. The study found that hand washing, sterilization of hands, gargling, cleaning/shower after attending patients of COVID-19, or SARS was protective. Evidence also found that frequent washes can prevent SARS transmission among HCWs. However; one study reported that due to enhanced infection-prevention measures, front-line HCWs are more prone to hand-skin damage. The certainty of the evidence for our primary outcome as per GRADE was very low. We did not find any studies that assessed the effect of WASH on hospitalizations, and mortality due to COVID-19. Also; we did not find any study that compared WASH interventions with any other public health measures.

Conclusions

Current evidence of WASH interventions for COVID-19 is limited as it is largely based on indirect evidence from SARS. Findings from the included studies consistently show that WASH is important in reducing the number of cases during a pandemic. Timely implementation of WASH along with other public health interventions can be vital to ensure the desired success. Further good-quality studies providing direct evidence of the efficacy of WASH on COVID-19 are needed.

Measuring SARS-CoV-2 aerosolization in rooms of hospitalized patients

Objective

Airborne spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains a significant risk for healthcare workers. Understanding transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the hospital could help minimize nosocomial infection. The objective of this pilot study was to measure aerosolization of SARS-CoV-2 in the hospital rooms of COVID-19 patients.

Methods

Two air samplers (Inspirotec) were placed 1 and 4 m away from adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection hospitalized at an urban, academic tertiary care center from June to October 2020. Airborne SARS-CoV-2 concentration was measured by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and analyzed by clinical parameters and patient demographics.

Results

Thirteen patients with COVID-19 (eight females [61.5%], median age: 57 years old, range 25-82) presented with shortness of breath (100%), cough (38.5%) and fever (15.4%). Respiratory therapy during air sampling varied: mechanical ventilation via endotracheal tube (n = 3), high flow nasal cannula (n = 4), nasal cannula (n = 4), respiratory helmet (n = 1), and room air (n = 1). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was identified in rooms of three out of three intubated patients compared with one out of 10 of the non-intubated patients (p = .014). Airborne SARS-CoV-2 tended to decrease with distance (1 vs. 4 m) in rooms of intubated patients.

Conclusions

Hospital rooms of intubated patients had higher levels of aerosolized SARS-CoV-2, consistent with increased aerosolization of virus in patients with severe disease or treatment with positive pressure ventilation through an endotracheal tube. While preliminary, these data have safety implications for health care workers and design of protective measures in the hospital.

Level of Evidence

2.

Bacterial-Viral Interactions: A Factor That Facilitates Transmission Heterogeneities

The transmission of infectious diseases is characterized by heterogeneities that are shaped by the host, the pathogen, and the environment. Extreme forms of these heterogeneities are called super-spreading events. Transmission heterogeneities are usually identified retrospectively, but their contribution to the dynamics of outbreaks makes the ability to predict them valuable for science, medicine, and public health. Previous studies identified several factors that facilitate super-spreading; one of them is the interaction between bacteria and viruses within a host. The heightened dispersal of bacteria colonizing the nasal cavity during an upper respiratory viral infection, and the increased shedding of HIV-1 from the urogenital tract during a sexually transmitted bacterial infection, are among the most extensively studied examples of transmission heterogeneities that result from bacterial-viral interactions. Interrogating these transmission heterogeneities, and elucidating the underlying cellular and molecular mechanisms, are part of much-needed efforts to guide public health interventions, in areas that range from predicting or controlling the population transmission of respiratory pathogens, to limiting the spread of sexually transmitted infections, and tailoring vaccination initiatives with live attenuated vaccines.

Noninvasive respiratory support for COVID-19 patients: when, for whom, and how?

The significant mortality rate and prolonged ventilator days associated with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in patients with severe COVID-19 have incited a debate surrounding the use of noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) (i.e., HFNC, CPAP, NIV) as a potential treatment strategy. Central to this debate is the role of NIRS in preventing intubation in patients with mild respiratory disease and the potential beneficial effects on both patient outcome and resource utilization. However, there remains valid concern that use of NIRS may prolong time to intubation and lung protective ventilation in patients with more advanced disease, thereby worsening respiratory mechanics via self-inflicted lung injury. In addition, the risk of aerosolization with the use of NIRS has the potential to increase healthcare worker (HCW) exposure to the virus. We review the existing literature with a focus on rationale, patient selection and outcomes associated with the use of NIRS in COVID-19 and prior pandemics, as well as in patients with acute respiratory failure due to different etiologies (i.e., COPD, cardiogenic pulmonary edema, etc.) to understand the potential role of NIRS in COVID-19 patients. Based on this analysis we suggest an algorithm for NIRS in COVID-19 patients which includes indications and contraindications for use, monitoring recommendations, systems-based practices to reduce HCW exposure, and predictors of NIRS failure. We also discuss future research priorities for addressing unanswered questions regarding NIRS use in COVID-19 with the goal of improving patient outcomes.

Factors Preventing Nosocomial Outbreak Following a Single case of COVID-19 Diagnosed During Hospitalization: A Retrospective Review

OBJECTIVE

Our hospital experienced a hospital shutdown and 2 week quarantine after a case of COVID-19 was diagnosed during hospitalization. We analyzed the reopening process following hospital closure and possible factors that prevented hospital spread.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the confirmed patient's medical records and results of epidemiological survey available from the infection control team of our hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 117 hospital staff members were tested, 26 of whom were self-isolated. Of the 54 inpatients tested, 28 on the same floor, and 2 close contacts in the endoscopic room were quarantined in a single room. Finally, all quarantined hospital staff, inpatients and outpatients were tested for COVID-19 on the 14th day of close contact. The results were all negative, and the hospital work resumed completely.

CONCLUSION

Although closing and isolating the hospital appeared to have played a useful role in preventing the spread of COVID-19 inside the hospital and to the local community, it is still debated whether or not the duration of hospital closure or quarantine was appropriate. The lessons from the 2-week hospital closure suggest that wearing a mask, hand hygiene and the ward environment are important factors in preventing nosocomial outbreaks of COVID-19.

Modes de transmission du SARS-CoV-2 : que sait-on actuellement ?

Des progrès remarquables ont été obtenus dans notre compréhension de la transmission du SARS-CoV-2 et la réduction de sa propagation. La prise en compte du risque majeur des formes asymptomatiques par le port universel du masque est une de ces avancées. Les données épidémiologiques (taux d'attaque et R₀) ainsi que l'accumulation de données en contexte clinique suggèrent une similitude de transmission du SARS-CoV-2 avec celle des autres virus respiratoires comme la grippe ou le SARS-CoV-1, un mode de transmission principal direct de personne à personne, à courte distance par les gouttelettes. La transmission aéroportée est possible mais rare, et ne semble se produire que dans des circonstances opportunistes, notamment lors de procédures médicales sur la sphère respiratoire de patients infectés, ou dans des conditions d'excrétion virale élevée en zone confinée mal ventilée. L'hygiène des mains et le port du masque sont les deux armes essentielles de prévention dans le contexte de la COVID-19.

A Year of Critical Care: The Changing Face of the ICU During COVID-19

During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, admissions to hospital intensive care units (ICUs) surged, exerting unprecedented stress on ICU resources and operations. The novelty of the highly infectious coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) required significant changes to the way critically ill patients were managed. Houston Methodist’s incident command center team navigated this health crisis by ramping up its bed capacity, streamlining treatment algorithms, and optimizing ICU staffing while ensuring adequate supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE), ventilators, and other ICU essentials. A tele–critical-care program and its infrastructure were deployed to meet the demands of the pandemic. Community hospitals played a vital role in creating a collaborative ecosystem for the treatment and referral of critically ill patients. Overall, the healthcare industry’s response to COVID-19 forced ICUs to become more efficient and dynamic, with improved patient safety and better resource utilization. This article provides an experiential account of Houston Methodist’s response to the pandemic and discusses the resulting impact on the function of ICUs.

Non intubated video-assisted thoracoscopic lung resections (NI-VATS) in COVID times

The emergence of epidemic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in December 2019 in Wuhan, China causing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its rapid expansion around the world, leading to a global pandemic of dimensions not observed at least since the "Spanish influenza" pandemic in 1917-18, has had great consequences at all levels, including social, health and economic spheres. This pandemic situation forces us, as health care workers, to redefine our medical and surgical actions to adapt them to this new reality. It is important, when the rules of the game change, to rethink and to reevaluate if the balance between risk and benefit have moved to a different point of equilibrium, and if our indications of certain surgical interventions need to be redefined. In this article we try to answer the doubts that arise about the suitability of the NI-VATS technique and assess whether its use in these new pandemic circumstances might add advantages, especially in relation to minimize the risks of virus contagion between patients and all healthcare personnel during the surgical procedure, as well as the known advantages described in many articles the last ten years.

An organ systems-based review of outcomes associated with sleep apnea in hospitalized patients

The current global health crisis due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has prompted the medical community to investigate the effects of underlying medical conditions, including sleep-disordered breathing, on inpatient care. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common form of sleep-disordered breathing that may complicate numerous acquired conditions, particularly in inpatient and critical care settings. Viral pneumonia is a major contributor to intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and often presents more severely in patients with underlying pulmonary disease, especially those with obesity and OSA. This review summarizes the most recent data regarding complications of both OSA and obesity and highlights their impact on clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients. Additionally, it will highlight pertinent evidence for the complications of OSA in an organ-systems approach. Finally, this review will also discuss impatient treatment approaches for OSA, particularly in relation to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Effect of sanitizer on obliteration of SARS -CoV2/COVID 19: A mini review

Corona virus is a respiratory virus which causes infectious Covid-19 (Corona Virus −2019) disease and globally the virus continues to pose major risks of mortality. It is lucid that close links are the key aspect for transitory of communicable Corona virus. Rapid research is in progress to identify prolific drugs and vaccine for Covid-19 however, it is a time consuming process. Social distancing and Sanitizers are helpful in combating virus and safeguarding the human health. Hand sanitizers are prolific when hands washing with soaps are not possible. Sanitizers are effective antibacterial agents and classified into two types as alcohol based and alcohol free. Among which alcohol based sanitizers are prospective in persuading the public needs. Efficient use of alcohol-based sanitizers during this epidemic season could significantly reduce the propagation of corona virus. This review aims at explaining the interactions of virus with hand sanitizers.

Lethal zoonotic coronavirus infections of humans - comparative phylogenetics, epidemiology, transmission, and clinical features of coronavirus disease 2019, The Middle East respiratory syndrome and severe acute respiratory syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronaviruses-2 (SARS-CoV-2), the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), emerged as a new zoonotic pathogen of humans at the end of 2019 and rapidly developed into a global pandemic. Over 106 million COVID-19 cases including 2.3 million deaths have been reported to the WHO as of February 9, 2021. This review examines the epidemiology, transmission, clinical features, and phylogenetics of three lethal zoonotic coronavirus infections of humans: SARS-CoV-1, SARS-CoV-2, and The Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-COV).

RECENT FINDINGS

Bats appear to be the common natural source of SARS-like CoV including SARS-CoV-1 but their role in SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV remains unclear. Civet cats and dromedary camels are the intermediary animal sources for SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV infection, respectively whereas that of SARS-CoV-2 remains unclear. SARS-CoV-2 viral loads peak early on days 2-4 of symptom onset and thus high transmission occurs in the community, and asymptomatic and presymptomatic transmission occurs commonly. Nosocomial outbreaks are hallmarks of SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV infections whereas these are less common in COVID-19. Several COVID-19 vaccines are now available.

SUMMARY

Of the three lethal zoonotic coronavirus infections of humans, SARS-CoV-2 has caused a devastating global pandemic with over a million deaths. The emergence of genetic variants, such as D614G, N501Y (variants 1 and 2), has led to an increase in transmissibility and raises concern about the possibility of re-infection and impaired vaccine response. Continued global surveillance is essential for both SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV, to monitor changing epidemiology due to viral variants.

Risk of Transmitting Coronavirus Disease 2019 During Nebulizer Treatment: A Systematic Review

Rationale: There is an urgent need to understand the risk of viral transmission during nebulizer treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objectives: To assess the risk of transmitting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), SARS, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and influenza with administration of drugs via nebulizer. Methods: We searched multiple electronic databases, including PubMed^®, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, preprint databases, and clinicaltrials.gov through December 1, 2020. Any study design in any language describing the risk of viral transmission with nebulizer treatment was eligible. Data were abstracted by one investigator and verified by a second. Results: We identified 22 articles: 1 systematic review, 7 cohort/case-control studies, 7 case series, and 7 simulation-based studies. Eight individual studies involved patients with SARS, five involved MERS, and one involved SARS-CoV-2. The seven cohort/case-control studies (four high risk of bias [ROB], three unclear ROB) found mixed results (median odds ratio 3.91, range 0.08-20.67) based on very weak data among a small number of health care workers (HCWs) with variable use of personal protective equipment (PPE). Case series had multiple potential contributors to transmission. Simulation studies found evidence for droplet dispersion after saline nebulization and measureable influenza viral particles up to 1.7 m from the source after 10 minutes of nebulization with a patient simulator. Study heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis. Conclusions: Case series raise concern of transmission risk, and simulation studies demonstrate droplet dispersion with virus recovery, but specific evidence that exposure to nebulizer treatment increases transmission of coronaviruses similar to COVID-19 is inconclusive. Tradeoffs balancing HCW safety and patient appropriateness can potentially minimize risk, including choice of delivery method for inhaled medications (e.g., nebulizer vs. metered dose inhaler) and PPE (e.g., N95 vs. surgical mask).

Protected code blue: using in situ simulation to develop a protected code blue and modify staff training protocol-experience in a large community teaching hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic

The surge in clinical demand, shortage in personal protective equipment and high-exposure risk for healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged hospital common practices and forced a reassessment of care delivery models. Code blue teams are highly specialised units that partake in life-saving situations that can jeopardise the safety of team members. There is a paucity of guidance in regards to proper infection control measures to protect the responders.This study describes a methodical approach to assessing vulnerabilities to transmission of SARS-CoV-2 within existing code blue practices, modalities to limit the number of code blue team responders and modifications to the protocol at a large community teaching hospital. The effort undertaken faced challenges due to the nature of the pandemic and the increased demand on healthcare workers. Quality improvement methods facilitated our protocol design and implementation. To this date, there has been no identified COVID-19 disease in any protected code blue (PCB) team members. We recommend that similar practices be considered and adopted widely and practised periodically.

The burden of healthcare-associated infections among pediatrics: a repeated point prevalence survey from Pakistan

BACKGROUND

Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are considered a major threat to public health resulting in significant morbidity, mortality, and additional costs. The present study aimed to assess the current patterns and risk factors of HAIs among hospitalized children.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three repeated point prevalence surveys were conducted in the pediatric inpatients of four hospitals by using the methodology developed by the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control. All patients present in the ward at 8:00 AM on the survey day and not discharged from the hospital on the same day were included. A standardized data collection form containing information on the presence of HAIs and the associated risk factors was completed for the patients.

FINDINGS

Out of 888 hospitalized patients, 116 (13.1%) had the symptoms of HAIs. Most common infections were bloodstream infections (BSIs) (32.8%), pneumonia (21.0%), ear, eyes, nose and throat infections (11.8%), and skin and soft tissue infections (SSTs) (19.0%). Factors significantly associated with infections were the length of hospital stay (p = 0.000), admission to the medicine ward (p = 0.034), and male gender (p = 0.010). BSIs were most common in children belonging to the age group of less than one month (78.9%), who were admitted to intensive care units (73.7%). SSTs including surgical site infections were more prevalent in surgery wards (78.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

A high rate of HAIs among pediatrics was found in Pakistan. Infection control and prevention strategies are needed with a major focus on interventions to prevent the spread of most prevalent HAIs.

Hydroxychloroquine as a Chemoprophylactic Agent for COVID-19: A Clinico-Pharmacological Review

Hydroxychloroquine has gained much attention as one of the candidate drugs that can be repurposed as a prophylactic agent against SARS-CoV-2, the agent responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to high transmissibility and presence of asymptomatic carriers and presymptomatic transmission, there is need for a chemoprophylactic agent to protect the high-risk population. In this review, we dissect the currently available evidence on hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis from a clinical and pharmacological point of view. In vitro studies on Vero cells show that hydroxychloroquine effectively inhibits SARS-CoV-2 by affecting viral entry and viral transport via endolysosomes. However, this efficacy has failed to replicate in in vivo animal models as well as in most clinical observational studies and clinical trials assessing pre-exposure prophylaxis and postexposure prophylaxis in healthcare workers. An analysis of the pharmacology of HCQ in COVID-19 reveals certain possible reasons for this failure-a pharmacokinetic failure due to failure to achieve adequate drug concentration at the target site and attenuation of its inhibitory effect due to the presence of TMPRSS2 in airway epithelial cells. Currently, many clinical trials on HCQ prophylaxis in HCW are ongoing; these factors should be taken into account. Using higher doses of HCQ for prophylaxis is likely to be associated with increased safety concerns; thus, it may be worthwhile to focus on other possible interventions.

The Cutting Edge of Thoracic Anesthesia During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has quickly spread globally, causing a real pandemic. In this critical scenario, lung cancer patients scheduled for surgical treatment need to continue to receive optimal care while protecting them from an eventual severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Adequate use of personal protective equipment (PPE) during aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) and a COVID-19 specific intraoperative management are paramount in order to prevent cross infections. New suggestions or improvement of existing contagion control guidance are needed, even in case of non-symptomatic patients, possibly responsible for virus spread.

Healthcare personnel exposure to COVID - 19: an observational study on quarantined positive workers

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY

COVID-19 is characterized by super spread events occurring in communities, e.g., hospitals. To limit virus diffusion among healthcare workers the use of personal protective equipment and screening tests are highly advised; also, isolation of virus positive professionals while monitoring their health condition is recommended. This study aims to assess, in a cohort of COVID-19 positive quarantined healthcare workers, the perceived source of infection and exposure risk as well as the clinical evolution of the disease through a surveillance interview.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study accounting 896 observations on 93 healthcare professionals tested positive for COVID-19. Data were collected from the Nursing and Technical Directorate of Romagna, Ravenna, Local Health Company, Italy.

RESULTS

99.5% of the positive workers accepted phone interviews with management staff. 2.6% of workers were positive with increasing records in the specialist medical area. Nurses and social health professionals were mostly affected.  Patient exposure at a distance <1 m and a contact time > 2 hours was the first cause of positivity. In COVID-19 and territorial emergency departments, the first cause was the contact with colleagues. At the time of the infection, most of the staff wore a surgical mask. Cough, asthenia, fever, anosmia, dysgeusia, and rhinitis were common symptoms. Asymptomatic percentage was about 10%. The self-perceived physical condition was high (>7) and improved during the observation period.

CONCLUSIONS

The diffusion rate of COVID-19 among healthcare workers is relatively low, probably due to the use of personal protective equipment. The distancing, also among colleagues, is a fundamental measure to reduce the possibility of infection. Symptoms are mild and can be controlled by surveillance measures. Constant contact with the organization is an essential strategy for promoting recovering of workers and reducing the spread of the virus within the healthcare organization.

Breaking the chain of transmission within a tertiary health service: An approach to contact tracing during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Tertiary referral health service.

INTERVENTION(S)

An approach to hospital based contact tracing is described along with tools employed to streamline the process and including the development of an outbreak management team (OMT) for each contact trace.

RESULTS

Forty-one OMTs occurred, involving 23 HCW and 18 patient index cases. The total furloughed HCWs arising from these contact traces was 383, with individual contact traces furloughing a mean (range) of 10 (0-80) HCWs. Importantly, 15 furloughed HCWs subsequently became COVID-19 positive during their 14-day isolation period, showing the importance of the contact tracing process and the ability to remove workers from the workplace before they become infectious.

CONCLUSIONS

A standardised, streamlined contact tracing procedure in healthcare settings ensures any impacts of COVID-19 positive cases are consistently managed. This response framework may be of use to other health services and help reduce the transmission of COVID-19 in the workplace.

Early predictors of in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19 in a large American cohort

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has aggressively spread across the United States with numerous fatalities. Risk factors for mortality are poorly described. This was a multicentered cohort study identifying patient characteristics and diagnostic markers present on initial evaluation associated with mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Epidemiological, demographic, clinical, and laboratory characteristics of survivors and non-survivors were obtained from electronic medical records and a multivariable survival regression analysis was conducted to identify risk factors of in-hospital death. Of 1629 consecutive hospitalized adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 from March 1st thru March 31, 2020, 1461 patients were included in final analysis. 327 patients died during hospitalization and 1134 survived to discharge. Median age was 62 years (IQR 50.0, 74.0) with 56% of hospitalized patients under the age of 65. 47% were female and 63% identified as African American. Most patients (55%) had either no or one comorbidity. In multivariable analysis, older age, admission respiratory status including elevated respiratory rate and oxygen saturation ≤ 88%, and initial laboratory derangements of creatinine > 1.33 mg/dL, alanine aminotransferase > 40 U/L, procalcitonin > 0.5 ng/mL, and lactic acid ≥ 2 mmol/L increased risk of in-hospital death. This study is one of the largest analyses in an epicenter for the COVID-19 pandemic. Older age, low oxygen saturation and elevated respiratory rate on admission, and initial lab derangements including renal and hepatic dysfunction and elevated procalcitonin and lactic acid are risk factors for in-hospital death. These factors can help clinicians prognosticate and should be considered in management strategies.

Aerosol Generation from the Respiratory Tract with Various Modes of Oxygen Delivery

Rationale: Aerosol generation with modes of oxygen therapy such as high-flow nasal cannula and noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation is a concern for healthcare workers during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. The amount of aerosol generation from the respiratory tract with these various oxygen modalities is unknown.Objectives: To measure the size and number concentration of particles and droplets generated from the respiratory tract of humans exposed to various oxygen delivery modalities.Methods: Ten healthy participants with no active pulmonary disease were enrolled. Oxygen modalities tested included nonhumidified nasal cannula, face mask, heated and humidified high-flow nasal cannula, and noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation. Aerosol generation was measured with each oxygen mode while participants performed maneuvers of normal breathing, talking, deep breathing, and coughing. Testing was conducted in a negative-pressure room. Particles with a diameter between 0.37 and 20 μm were measured using an aerodynamic particle spectrometer.Measurements and Main Results: Median particle concentration ranged from 0.041 to 0.168 particles/cm3. Median diameter ranged from 1.01 to 1.53 μm. Cough significantly increased the number of particles measured. Measured aerosol concentration did not significantly increase with the use of either humidified high-flow nasal cannula or noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation. This was the case during normal breathing, talking, deep breathing, and coughing.Conclusions: Oxygen delivery modalities of humidified high-flow nasal cannula and noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation do not increase aerosol generation from the respiratory tract in healthy human participants with no active pulmonary disease measured in a negative-pressure room.

COVID-19 respiratory support in the emergency department setting

Introduction

Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), may result in severe complications, multiorgan dysfunction, acute respiratory failure, and death. SARS-CoV-2 is highly contagious and places healthcare workers at significant risk, especially during aerosol-generating procedures, including airway management.

Objective

This narrative review outlines the underlying respiratory pathophysiology of patients with COVID-19 and discusses approaches to airway management in the emergency department (ED) based on current literature.

Discussion

Patients presenting with SARS-CoV-2 infection are at high risk for acute respiratory failure requiring airway management. Among hospitalized patients, 10–20% require intensive care unit admission, and 3–10% require intubation and mechanical ventilation. While providing respiratory support for these patients, proper infection control measures, including adherence to personal protective equipment policies, are necessary to prevent nosocomial transmission to healthcare workers. A structured approach to respiratory failure in these patients includes the use of exogenous oxygen via nasal cannula or non-rebreather, as well as titrated high-flow nasal cannula and non-invasive ventilation. This review offers several guiding principles and resources designed to be adapted in conjunction with local workplace policies for patients requiring respiratory support.

Conclusions

While the fundamental principles of acute respiratory failure management are similar between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients, there are some notable differences, including a focus on provider safety. This review provides an approach to airway management and respiratory support in the patient with COVID-19.

End-of-life care in patients with a highly transmissible respiratory virus: implications for COVID-19

Symptom management and end-of-life care are core skills for all physicians, although in ordinary times many anesthesiologists have fewer occasions to use these skills. The current coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has caused significant mortality over a short time and has necessitated an increase in provision of both critical care and palliative care. For anesthesiologists deployed to units caring for patients with COVID-19, this narrative review provides guidance on conducting goals of care discussions, withdrawing life-sustaining measures, and managing distressing symptoms.

High-flow nasal cannula for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in patients with COVID-19: systematic reviews of effectiveness and its risks of aerosolization, dispersion, and infection transmission

PURPOSE

We conducted two World Health Organization-commissioned reviews to inform use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). We synthesized the evidence regarding efficacy and safety (review 1), as well as risks of droplet dispersion, aerosol generation, and associated transmission (review 2) of viral products.

SOURCE

Literature searches were performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Chinese databases, and medRxiv. Review 1: we synthesized results from randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HFNC to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in critically ill patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Review 2: we narratively summarized findings from studies evaluating droplet dispersion, aerosol generation, or infection transmission associated with HFNC. For both reviews, paired reviewers independently conducted screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. We evaluated certainty of evidence using GRADE methodology.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

No eligible studies included COVID-19 patients. Review 1: 12 RCTs (n = 1,989 patients) provided low-certainty evidence that HFNC may reduce invasive ventilation (relative risk [RR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 0.99) and escalation of oxygen therapy (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.98) in patients with respiratory failure. Results provided no support for differences in mortality (moderate certainty), or in-hospital or intensive care length of stay (moderate and low certainty, respectively). Review 2: four studies evaluating droplet dispersion and three evaluating aerosol generation and dispersion provided very low certainty evidence. Two simulation studies and a crossover study showed mixed findings regarding the effect of HFNC on droplet dispersion. Although two simulation studies reported no associated increase in aerosol dispersion, one reported that higher flow rates were associated with increased regions of aerosol density.

CONCLUSIONS

High-flow nasal cannula may reduce the need for invasive ventilation and escalation of therapy compared with COT in COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. This benefit must be balanced against the unknown risk of airborne transmission.

Risk factors associated with occurrence of COVID-19 among household persons exposed to patients with confirmed COVID-19 in Qingdao Municipal, China

Tracing and isolation of close contacts is used to control outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China. However, risk factors associated with the occurrence of COVID-19 among close contacts have not been well described. A total of 106 household contacts were included in this study, of whom 19 developed into COVID-19 cases, and the secondary attack rate was 17.9%. Multivariable analysis showed that increasing risk of occurrence of COVID-19 among household contacts was associated with female index patients (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 3.84, 95% CI = 1.07-13.78), critical disease index patients (aHR = 7.58, 95% CI = 1.66-34.66), effective contact duration with index patients > 2 days (aHR = 4.21, 95% CI = 1.29-13.73), and effective contact duration > 11 days (aHR = 17.88, 95% CI = 3.26-98.01). The sex and disease severity of index patients with COVID-19 and longer effective contact duration with patients with confirmed COVID-19 could help epidemiologists to identify potential COVID-19 cases among household contacts at an early stage.

Containment of a healthcare-associated COVID-19 outbreak in a university hospital in Seoul, Korea: A single-center experience

Background

Our hospital experienced the first healthcare-associated COVID-19 outbreak in Seoul at the time the first COVID-19 cases were confirmed in Korea. The first confirmed COVID-19 patient was a hospital personnel who was in charge of transferring patients inside our hospital. To contain the virus spread, we shutdown our hospital, and tested all inpatients, medical staff members, and employees.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the results of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing according to the contact history, occupation, and presence of respiratory symptoms. Closed-circuit television (CCTV) was reviewed in the presence of an epidemiologist to identify individuals who came into contact with confirmed COVID-19 patients.

Results

A total of 3,091 respiratory samples from 2,924 individuals were obtained. Among 2,924 individuals, two inpatients, and one caregiver tested positive (positivity rate, 0.1%). Although all confirmed cases were linked to a general ward designated for pulmonology patients, no medical staff members, medical support personnel, or employees working at the same ward were infected. Contact with confirmed COVID-19 cases was frequent among inpatients and medical support personnel. The most common contact area was the general ward for pulmonology patients and medical support areas, including clinical and imaging examination rooms. Finally, the total number of hospital-associated infections was 14, consisting of four diagnosed at our hospital and ten diagnosed outside the hospital.

Conclusions

The robust control of the COVID-19 outbreak further minimized the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the hospital and local communities. However, there was also a debate over the appropriate period of hospital shutdown and testing of all hospital staff and patients. Future studies are required to refine and establish the in-hospital quarantine and de-isolation guidelines based on the epidemiological and clinical settings.

Management in the paediatric wards facing novel coronavirus infection: a rapid review of guidelines and consensuses

OBJECTIVES

Relevant guidelines and consensuses for COVID-19 contain recommendations aimed at optimising the management in paediatric wards. The goal of this study was to determine the quality of those recommendations and provide suggestions to hospital managers for the adjustment of existing hospital prevention and control strategies, and also to offer recommendations for further research.

DESIGN

A rapid review of the guidelines and consensuses for the management in paediatric wards facing COVID-19.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, UpToDate, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Wanfang database and relevant websites such as medlive.cn, dxy.cn, the National Health and Health Commission and the China Center for Disease Control and Prevention were systematically searched through late May 2020. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool was then used to assess the quality of the selected articles and summarise the relevant evidence concerning management in paediatric wards.

RESULTS

A total of 35 articles were included, composed of 3 consensus guidelines, 25 expert consensuses and 7 expert opinions. Of the 35 papers, 24 were from China, 2 from the USA, 1 from Spain, 1 from Brazil, 1 from Saudi Arabia and 6 from multinational cooperative studies. Scores for the six domains of the AGREE II tool (scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigour of development, clarity of presentation, applicability and editorial independence) were 98.57%, 53.57%, 17.92%, 69.62%, 26.96% and 50.35%, respectively. Recommendations for nosocomial infection and control, human resource management as well as management of paediatric patients and their families were summarised.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to the outbreak of COVID-19, the quality of rapid guidelines and consensuses for the management in paediatric wards affected by COVID-19 is unsatisfactory. In the future, it will be necessary to develop more high-quality guidelines or consensuses for the management in paediatric wards to deal with nosocomial outbreaks in order to fully prepare for emergency medical and health problems.

Oxygen Therapy and Risk of Infection for Health Care Workers Caring for Patients With Viral Severe Acute Respiratory Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Study objective

To synthesize the evidence regarding the infection risk associated with different modalities of oxygen therapy used in treating patients with severe acute respiratory infection. Health care workers face significant risk of infection when treating patients with a viral severe acute respiratory infection. To ensure health care worker safety and limit nosocomial transmission of such infection, it is crucial to synthesize the evidence regarding the infection risk associated with different modalities of oxygen therapy used in treating patients with severe acute respiratory infection.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 1, 2000, to April 1, 2020, for studies describing the risk of infection associated with the modalities of oxygen therapy used for patients with severe acute respiratory infection. The study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed by independent reviewers. The primary outcome measure was the infection of health care workers with a severe acute respiratory infection. Random-effect models were used to synthesize the extracted data.

Results

Of 22,123 citations, 50 studies were eligible for qualitative synthesis and 16 for meta-analysis. Globally, the quality of the included studies provided a very low certainty of evidence. Being exposed or performing an intubation (odds ratio 6.48; 95% confidence interval 2.90 to 14.44), bag-valve-mask ventilation (odds ratio 2.70; 95% confidence interval 1.31 to 5.36), and noninvasive ventilation (odds ratio 3.96; 95% confidence interval 2.12 to 7.40) were associated with an increased risk of infection. All modalities of oxygen therapy generate air dispersion.

Conclusion

Most modalities of oxygen therapy are associated with an increased risk of infection and none have been demonstrated as safe. The lowest flow of oxygen should be used to maintain an adequate oxygen saturation for patients with severe acute respiratory infection, and manipulation of oxygen delivery equipment should be minimized.

Technologies to Optimize the Care of Severe COVID-19 Patients for Health Care Providers Challenged by Limited Resources

Health care systems are belligerently responding to the new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a specific condition, whose distinctive features are severe hypoxemia associated with (>50% of cases) normal respiratory system compliance. When a patient requires intubation and invasive ventilation, the outcome is poor, and the length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) is usually 2 or 3 weeks. In this article, the authors review several technological devices, which could support health care providers at the bedside to optimize the care for COVID-19 patients who are sedated, paralyzed, and ventilated. Particular attention is provided to the use of videolaryngoscopes (VL) because these can assist anesthetists to perform a successful intubation outside the ICU while protecting health care providers from this viral infection. Authors will also review processed electroencephalographic (EEG) monitors which are used to better titrate sedation and the train-of-four monitors which are utilized to better administer neuromuscular blocking agents in the view of sparing limited pharmacological resources. COVID-19 can rapidly exhaust human and technological resources too within the ICU. This review features a series of technological advancements that can significantly improve the care of patients requiring isolation. The working conditions in isolation could cause gaps or barriers in communication, fatigue, and poor documentation of provided care. The available technology has several advantages including (a) facilitating appropriate paperless documentation and communication between all health care givers working in isolation rooms or large isolation areas; (b) testing patients and staff at the bedside using smart point-of-care diagnostics (SPOCD) to confirm COVID-19 infection; (c) allowing diagnostics and treatment at the bedside through point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) and thromboelastography (TEG); (d) adapting the use of anesthetic machines and the use of volatile anesthetics. Implementing technologies for safeguarding health care providers as well as monitoring the limited pharmacological resources are paramount. Only by leveraging new technologies, it will be possible to sustain and support health care systems during the expected long course of this pandemic.

Awake breast cancer surgery: strategy in the beginning of COVID-19 emergency

Introduction

COVID-19 is a declared worldwide pandemic. In our country, due to shortage of hospitals and beds in intensive care unit, oncological and breast cancer (BC) resources are temporarily shifted to COVID-19 patients. In addition, risk of cross-infections should be considered in these frail patients. To accomplish more surgical procedures and to reduce the length of hospital stay (LOS), fast track awake BC surgery should be implemented. The aim of the study is to estimate the effects of surgical shift in our facility during the early COVID-19 outbreak.

Materials and methods

From 30th January 2020 to 30th of March 2020, 86 consecutive patients were retrospectively enrolled and divided into pre-COVID-19-BC and COVID-19-BC. Clinical parameters and anamnestic data were collected and analyzed. Surgical procedures, relative complications and type of anaesthesia were reported. The effect on surgical time (ST), operative room time (ORT) and length of stay (LOS) were described and examined.

Results

No statistical difference was found in complications rate, clinical data and surgical procedures (p > 0.05). Awake breast conservative surgery (BCS) was the most frequent procedure in COVID-19-BC (p = 0.006). A statistically significant decrease in ORT and LOS was reported in COVID-19-BC (p = 0.040 and p = 0.0015 respectively), while comparable time resulted for ST (p = 0.976). Mean ORT and LOS reduction were 20.79 min and 0.57 hospital bed days.

Conclusion

In the “COVID-19 era”, fast track awake breast surgery provides a reduction of ORT, LOS and potentially surgical treatment for a wider number of oncological patients.

Regional anesthesia in the time of COVID-19: a minireview

The treatment of surgical patients who are confirmed or suspected of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a challenge for all anesthesiologists. The safety of both patients and healthcare workers should be taken into consideration when performing anesthesia management for patients with COVID-19. General anesthesia requiring airway intervention may exacerbate COVID-19 pneumonia, and aerosol generation during airway intervention risks COVID-19 transmission to medical staff. However, regional anesthesia is not an aerosol-generating procedure. The neuraxial anesthesia may have little adverse influence on clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 after reviewing previous case reports. Regional anesthesia may have some advantages over general anesthesia for this group of patients, but unplanned conversion to general anesthesia during surgery is not preferred. Thus, careful consideration should be given to ensure that the surgery is performed entirely under regional anesthesia. The use of ultrasound guidance and the performance by an experienced physician may reduce the incidence of failed block and complications. The use of long-acting local anesthetic prolongs the anesthetic effect of regional anesthesia. Besides, a safe and sufficient dose of local anesthetic should be used.

Technologies to Optimize the Care of Severe COVID-19 Patients for Health Care Providers Challenged by Limited Resources

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Health care systems are belligerently responding to the new Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a specific condition, whose distinctive features are severe hypoxemia associated with (>50% of cases) normal respiratory system compliance.¹ When a patient requires intubation and invasive ventilation, the outcome is poor,^2–4 and the length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) is usually 2or 3 weeks.² In this article, theauthors review several technological devices, which could support health care providers at the bedside to optimizethe care for COVID-19 patients who are sedated, paralyzed, and ventilated. Particular attention is provided to the use of videolaryngoscopes (VL) because these can assist anesthetists to perform a successful intubation outside the ICU while protecting health care providers from this viral infection. Authors will also review processed electroencephalographic (EEG) monitors which are used to better titrate sedation and the train-of-four monitors which are utilizedto better titrate neuromuscular blocking agents in the view of sparing limited pharmacological resources. COVID-19 can rapidly exhaust human and technological resources too within the ICU. This review features a series of technological advancements that can significantly improve the care of patients requiring isolation. The working conditions in isolation could cause gaps or barriers in communication, fatigue, and poor documentation of provided care. The available technology has several advantages including (a) facilitating appropriate paperless documentation and communication between all health care givers working in isolation rooms or large isolation areas; (b) testing patients and staff at the bedside using smart point-of-care diagnostics (SPOCD) to confirm COVID-19 infection; (c) allowing diagnostics and treatment at the bedside through point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) and thromboelastography(TEG); (d) adapting the use of anesthetic machines and the use of volatile anesthetics. Implementing technologies for safeguarding health care providers as well as monitoring the limited pharmacological resources are paramount. Only by leveraging new technologies, it will be possible to sustain and support health care systems during the expected long course of this pandemic.

Anesthetic Management of Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke During COVID-19 Pandemic: Consensus Statement From Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology & Critical Care (SNACC): Endorsed by Society of Vascular & Interventional Neurology (SVIN), Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery (SNIS), Neurocritical Care Society (NCS), European Society of Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy (ESMINT) and American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) and Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) Cerebrovascular Section

The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has unique implications for the anesthetic management of endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke. The Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care appointed a task force to provide timely, consensus-based expert recommendations using available evidence for the safe and effective anesthetic management of endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke during the COVID-19 pandemic. The goal of this consensus statement is to provide recommendations for anesthetic management considering the following (and they are): (1) optimal neurological outcomes for patients; (2) minimizing the risk for health care professionals, and (3) facilitating judicious use of resources while accounting for existing variability in care. It provides a framework for selecting the optimal anesthetic technique (general anesthesia or monitored anesthesia care) for a given patient and offers suggestions for best practices for anesthesia care during the pandemic. Institutions and health care providers are encouraged to adapt these recommendations to best suit local needs, considering existing practice standards and resource availability to ensure safety of patients and providers.

Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes COVID-19 and is spread person-to-person through close contact. We aimed to investigate the effects of physical distance, face masks, and eye protection on virus transmission in health-care and non-health-care (eg, community) settings.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the optimum distance for avoiding person-to-person virus transmission and to assess the use of face masks and eye protection to prevent transmission of viruses. We obtained data for SARS-CoV-2 and the betacoronaviruses that cause severe acute respiratory syndrome, and Middle East respiratory syndrome from 21 standard WHO-specific and COVID-19-specific sources. We searched these data sources from database inception to May 3, 2020, with no restriction by language, for comparative studies and for contextual factors of acceptability, feasibility, resource use, and equity. We screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We did frequentist and Bayesian meta-analyses and random-effects meta-regressions. We rated the certainty of evidence according to Cochrane methods and the GRADE approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020177047.

FINDINGS

Our search identified 172 observational studies across 16 countries and six continents, with no randomised controlled trials and 44 relevant comparative studies in health-care and non-health-care settings (n=25 697 patients). Transmission of viruses was lower with physical distancing of 1 m or more, compared with a distance of less than 1 m (n=10 736, pooled adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·18, 95% CI 0·09 to 0·38; risk difference [RD] -10·2%, 95% CI -11·5 to -7·5; moderate certainty); protection was increased as distance was lengthened (change in relative risk [RR] 2·02 per m; pinteraction=0·041; moderate certainty). Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection (n=2647; aOR 0·15, 95% CI 0·07 to 0·34, RD -14·3%, -15·9 to -10·7; low certainty), with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar (eg, reusable 12-16-layer cotton masks; pinteraction=0·090; posterior probability >95%, low certainty). Eye protection also was associated with less infection (n=3713; aOR 0·22, 95% CI 0·12 to 0·39, RD -10·6%, 95% CI -12·5 to -7·7; low certainty). Unadjusted studies and subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed similar findings.

INTERPRETATION

The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support physical distancing of 1 m or more and provide quantitative estimates for models and contact tracing to inform policy. Optimum use of face masks, respirators, and eye protection in public and health-care settings should be informed by these findings and contextual factors. Robust randomised trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance.

FUNDING

World Health Organization.

Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes COVID-19 and is spread person-to-person through close contact. We aimed to investigate the effects of physical distance, face masks, and eye protection on virus transmission in health-care and non-health-care (eg, community) settings.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the optimum distance for avoiding person-to-person virus transmission and to assess the use of face masks and eye protection to prevent transmission of viruses. We obtained data for SARS-CoV-2 and the betacoronaviruses that cause severe acute respiratory syndrome, and Middle East respiratory syndrome from 21 standard WHO-specific and COVID-19-specific sources. We searched these data sources from database inception to May 3, 2020, with no restriction by language, for comparative studies and for contextual factors of acceptability, feasibility, resource use, and equity. We screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We did frequentist and Bayesian meta-analyses and random-effects meta-regressions. We rated the certainty of evidence according to Cochrane methods and the GRADE approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020177047.

FINDINGS

Our search identified 172 observational studies across 16 countries and six continents, with no randomised controlled trials and 44 relevant comparative studies in health-care and non-health-care settings (n=25 697 patients). Transmission of viruses was lower with physical distancing of 1 m or more, compared with a distance of less than 1 m (n=10 736, pooled adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·18, 95% CI 0·09 to 0·38; risk difference [RD] -10·2%, 95% CI -11·5 to -7·5; moderate certainty); protection was increased as distance was lengthened (change in relative risk [RR] 2·02 per m; p_interaction=0·041; moderate certainty). Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection (n=2647; aOR 0·15, 95% CI 0·07 to 0·34, RD -14·3%, -15·9 to -10·7; low certainty), with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar (eg, reusable 12-16-layer cotton masks; p_interaction=0·090; posterior probability >95%, low certainty). Eye protection also was associated with less infection (n=3713; aOR 0·22, 95% CI 0·12 to 0·39, RD -10·6%, 95% CI -12·5 to -7·7; low certainty). Unadjusted studies and subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed similar findings.

INTERPRETATION

The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support physical distancing of 1 m or more and provide quantitative estimates for models and contact tracing to inform policy. Optimum use of face masks, respirators, and eye protection in public and health-care settings should be informed by these findings and contextual factors. Robust randomised trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance.

FUNDING

World Health Organization.

Identifying and Interrupting Superspreading Events-Implications for Control of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2

It appears inevitable that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 will continue to spread. Although we still have limited information on the epidemiology of this virus, there have been multiple reports of superspreading events (SSEs), which are associated with both explosive growth early in an outbreak and sustained transmission in later stages. Although SSEs appear to be difficult to predict and therefore difficult to prevent, core public health actions can prevent and reduce the number and impact of SSEs. To prevent and control of SSEs, speed is essential. Prevention and mitigation of SSEs depends, first and foremost, on quickly recognizing and understanding these events, particularly within healthcare settings. Better understanding transmission dynamics associated with SSEs, identifying and mitigating high-risk settings, strict adherence to healthcare infection prevention and control measures, and timely implementation of nonpharmaceutical interventions can help prevent and control severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, as well as future infectious disease outbreaks.

Aerosol-generating procedures and infective risk to healthcare workers from SARS-CoV-2: the limits of the evidence

The transmission behaviour of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is still being defined. It is likely that it is transmitted predominantly by droplets and direct contact and it is possible that there is at least opportunistic airborne transmission. In order to protect healthcare staff adequately it is necessary that we establish whether aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) increase the risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Where we do not have evidence relating to SARS-CoV-2, guidelines for safely conducting these procedures should consider the risk of transmitting related pathogens. Currently there is very little evidence detailing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 associated with any specific procedures. Regarding AGPs and respiratory pathogens in general, there is still a large knowledge gap that will leave clinicians unsure of the risk to themselves when offering these procedures. This review aimed to summarize the evidence (and gaps in evidence) around AGPs and SARS-CoV-2.

Hand Sanitizers: A Review on Formulation Aspects, Adverse Effects, and Regulations

Hand hygiene is of utmost importance as it may be contaminated easily from direct contact with airborne microorganism droplets from coughs and sneezes. Particularly in situations like pandemic outbreak, it is crucial to interrupt the transmission chain of the virus by the practice of proper hand sanitization. It can be achieved with contact isolation and strict infection control tool like maintaining good hand hygiene in hospital settings and in public. The success of the hand sanitization solely depends on the use of effective hand disinfecting agents formulated in various types and forms such as antimicrobial soaps, water-based or alcohol-based hand sanitizer, with the latter being widely used in hospital settings. To date, most of the effective hand sanitizer products are alcohol-based formulations containing 62%-95% of alcohol as it can denature the proteins of microbes and the ability to inactivate viruses. This systematic review correlated with the data available in Pubmed, and it will investigate the range of available hand sanitizers and their effectiveness as well as the formulation aspects, adverse effects, and recommendations to enhance the formulation efficiency and safety. Further, this article highlights the efficacy of alcohol-based hand sanitizer against the coronavirus.