Corrigendum: SARS-CoV-2 antibody response after mRNA vaccination in healthcare workers with and without previous COVID-19, a follow-up study from the University Hospital in Krakow, Poland.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.1071204.].

SARS-CoV-2 antibody response after mRNA vaccination in healthcare workers with and without previous COVID-19, a follow-up study from a university hospital in Poland during 6 months 2021.

Introduction: Healthcare workers (HCWs) from the beginning of the pandemic have been at risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2, so they were vaccinated as first. Objectives: The purpose of the study was to determine the level of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in HCWs before and after vaccination with mRNA preparations according to previous COVID- 19. Patients and methods: The HCWs from the University Hospital in Krakow completed two surveys: the baseline survey before receiving the first dose of vaccine (in January 2021) and the follow-up survey in June 2021. In parallel, two blood samples were collected from each participant at baseline and at follow-up. Total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels were measured using the ECLIA technique. Results: At baseline, 41.1% of HCWs had positive antibody test results, and at follow-up, the vaccinated HCWs had almost 100 times higher antibody levels than the unvaccinated HCWs. Participants under 30 years of age had significantly higher antibody levels in June than older HCWs. Among participants with positive antibody test results in January, HCWs who had experienced asymptomatic COVID-19 had more than five times higher antibody levels in June than HCWs self-reported severe COVID-19. In total, 86.9% of HCWs received Comirnaty or Spikevax. The incidence rate of COVID-19 in the unvaccinated vs. vaccinated group was 13 times higher, 20.5% and 1.9% respectively. Conclusions: These results confirm the effectiveness of vaccination in the prevention of COVID-19 in HCWs. It is worth getting vaccinated regardless of previous infection. Furthermore, vaccination among HCWs under 30 years of age induced more effective antibody production compared to older individuals.

Cultivable oral bacteriota dysbiosis in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients.

Potential interactions between the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the human oral microbiota are currently investigated widely. Patients with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation in an intensive care unit (ICU) setting are at high risk of developing severe complications, including ventilator-associated pneumonia, thus making oral health management important. The aim of this study was to evaluate the oral health status and assess the dysbiosis of cultivable oral bacteriota in COVID-19 patients hospitalized in an ICU with acute respiratory distress within 36 h following intubation. In this prospective cohort study, we recruited 56 adult COVID-19 patients that qualified for mechanical ventilation in the Temporary ICU for COVID-19 Patients of the University Hospital in Krakow. On admission to the ICU, oral health of patients was assessed using the modified Beck Oral Assessment Score (BOAS). Four oral habitats were sampled, namely the buccal mucosa, tongue, buccal dental surface and gingival pocket. Microorganisms were identified by MALDI/TOF mass spectrometry. The mean age of the study population was 66.5 ± 12.7 years, there were 24 (42.9%) females. All patients included in this study were intubated and ventilated in the ICU, with a corresponding high mortality rate (76.8%). On admission to ICU, 76.8% subjects scored 11-20 on the BOAS scale (median 12 [IQR 10-14]), indicating moderate or severe dysfunction of oral health. Potentially pathogenic bacteria were identified in the oral microbiota samples, including Acinetobacter baumannii, Enterococcus faecalis, Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae in 23.2%, 39.3%, 17.9%, and 19.6% of patients, respectively. Lactobacillus spp. were present in 57.1% subjects. The mean CFU counts of all bacteria strains in dental brushes were 9.3E+5 (1.4E+6) and in gingival pockets 7.6E+5 (1.4E+6). The highest CFU counts were observed for Enterococcus spp. and, Lactobacillus spp., although these did not differ significantly from CFU counts of Streptococcus spp. and Staphylococcus spp. In this report we comprehensively characterized the oral health condition and cultivable oral bacteriota in COVID-19 patients hospitalized in an ICU with acute respiratory distress within 36 h following intubation. The oral bacteriota showed significant qualitative and quantitative dysbiosis. Hospitalization in an ICU and mechanical ventilation are important factors leading to oral dysbiosis in SARS-CoV-2 patients.

The Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies among HealthCare Workers in University Hospital in Krakow before the Era of Vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of occupational health is crucial to the safety of healthcare workers in the pandemic period. The aim of our study was the rating of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in connection with selected demographic, social, and organizational factors, as well as the identification of key elements determining the safety of HCWs and patients of the University Hospital in Krakow. METHODS: This was a non-interventional, uncontrolled, open, single-center, cross-sectional online survey on the preparedness for the COVID-19 epidemic and the seroprevalence of medical and non-medical HCWs and students. Serum specimens from 1221 persons were tested using an immunoassay analyzer based on the ECLIA technique for the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies IgM + IgG. RESULTS: The total seroprevalence was 42.7%. In medical students it was 25.2%, while in physicians it was 43.4% and in nurses/midwives it was 48.1%. Of those who tested positive, 21.5% did not know their serological status. The use of personal protective equipment did not have any significant impact on the result of testing for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The risk of developing the disease was not influenced by sex, professional work experience, workplace, or intensity of contact with the patient. Among the studied elements, only care of COVID-19 patients significantly increased the risk. The protective factor was starting work between the waves of the epidemic (June-September 2020). CONCLUSIONS: PPE is only one element of infection prevention and control-without other components, such as hand hygiene, it can be dangerous and contribute to self-infection. It is also very important to test healthcare workers. Not being aware of the COVID-19 status of HCWs poses a threat to other staff members, as well as patients and the family and friends of the infected. Thus, extreme caution should be applied when employing respirators with exhalation valves during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies among HealthCare Workers in University Hospital in Krakow before the Era of Vaccination

Background: Knowledge of occupational health is crucial to the safety of healthcare workers in the pandemic period. The aim of our study was the rating of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in connection with selected demographic, social, and organizational factors, as well as the identification of key elements determining the safety of HCWs and patients of the University Hospital in Krakow. Methods: This was a non-interventional, uncontrolled, open, single-center, cross-sectional online survey on the preparedness for the COVID-19 epidemic and the seroprevalence of medical and non-medical HCWs and students. Serum specimens from 1221 persons were tested using an immunoassay analyzer based on the ECLIA technique for the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies IgM + IgG. Results: The total seroprevalence was 42.7%. In medical students it was 25.2%, while in physicians it was 43.4% and in nurses/midwives it was 48.1%. Of those who tested positive, 21.5% did not know their serological status. The use of personal protective equipment did not have any significant impact on the result of testing for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The risk of developing the disease was not influenced by sex, professional work experience, workplace, or intensity of contact with the patient. Among the studied elements, only care of COVID-19 patients significantly increased the risk. The protective factor was starting work between the waves of the epidemic (June–September 2020). Conclusions: PPE is only one element of infection prevention and control-without other components, such as hand hygiene, it can be dangerous and contribute to self-infection. It is also very important to test healthcare workers. Not being aware of the COVID-19 status of HCWs poses a threat to other staff members, as well as patients and the family and friends of the infected. Thus, extreme caution should be applied when employing respirators with exhalation valves during the COVID-19 pandemic.

[Bundle care - prevention of pneumonia in patients mechanically ventilated in COVID-19 pandemia - a challenge for patients and personnel safety]. / Bundle care ­ prewencja zapalen pluc u wentylowanych pacjentów w pandemii COVID-19 ­ wyzwanie dla bezpieczenstwa pacjentów i personelu.

Intensive care units are characterized by the high risk of infections in patients. Pneumonia is one of the most common forms of infection with a high risk of death. Hence, to improve patient safety, specific packages of procedures, the so-called "bundle care," are recommended by experts in the field. The usage of selected protective procedures carries the risk of transmitting microbes from patients to staff, which in the case of pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2 can have serious health consequences for staff. Therefore, medical staff of intensive care units should strictly follow recommendation concerning healthcare workers safety and the rules of isolation, which in the current pandemic should be supplemented with specific elements. The paper presents an overview of the optimization of patient care and staff safety within the so-called "bundle care" in the COVID-19 pandemic. Med Pr. 2021;72(6):721-8.

Preparedness of Health Care Workers and Medical Students in University Hospital in Krakow for COVID-19 Pandemic within the CRACoV Project.

Backgrounds Health care workers' (HCWs) knowledge of and compliance with personal protective procedures is a key for patients' and personnel safety. The aim of this study was to assess which factors are associated with higher self-evaluations of training on infection prevention and control (IPC) and higher self-assessment of IPC practices used by HCWs regarding COVID-19 in University Hospital in Krakow, Poland, in January 2021. Material and methods This was an online survey on the preparedness for COVID-19 epidemic of medical/non-medical staff and medical students. Questions included in the survey concerned participants' socio-demographic characteristics, hospital staff involvement in the training, knowledge about the hand hygiene, and adherence to IPC measures. Knowledge and Performance Index (K&PI) based on selected questions was constructed for to reflect both subjective (self-evaluation) of preparedness and objective IPC knowledge and skills of HCWs participated in the IPC training. Results A total of 1412 health care workers, including 129 medical students, participated in the study. The largest group, 53.6%, was made up of nurses and paramedics. Age of respondents significantly correlated with knowledge of IPC and with K&PI. The mean age of workers with high K&PI was 42.39 ± 12.53, and among those with low, 39.71 ± 13.10, p < 0.001. 51% UHK workers participated in IPC training, but 11.3% of physicians, 28.8% of other HCWs, and 55.8% of students did not know the IPC standard precaution. Most participants, 72.3%, felt that they had received sufficient training; however, 45.8% of students declined this. There was no correlation between self-reported preparedness and the K&PI, indicating that self-reported preparedness was inadequate for knowledge and skills. Nurses and paramedics assessed their knowledge most accurately. Participants with low K&PI and high subjective evaluation constituted a substantial group in all categories. Students least often overestimated (23.8%) and most often (9.6%) underestimated their knowledge and skills. Conclusions Our study revealed inadequate IPC practice, especially as it refers to the training programme. We confirmed the urgent need of including theory and practice of IPC in curricula of health professions' training in order to provide students with knowledge and skills necessary not only for future pandemic situations but also for everyday work.