Exercise With a Novel Digital Device Increased Serum Anti-influenza Antibody Titers After Influenza Vaccination.

It has been reported that some exercise could enhance the anti-viral antibody titers after vaccination including influenza and coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines. We developed SAT-008, a novel digital device, consists of physical activities and activities related to the autonomic nervous system. We assessed the feasibility of SAT-008 to boost host immunity after an influenza vaccination by a randomized, open-label, and controlled study on adults administered influenza vaccines in the previous year. Among 32 participants, the SAT-008 showed a significant increase in the anti-influenza antibody titers assessed by hemagglutination-inhibition test against antigen subtype B Yamagata lineage after 4 wk of vaccination and subtype B Victoria lineage after 12 wk (p<0.05). There was no difference in the antibody titers against subtype "A." The SAT-008 also showed significant increase in the plasma cytokine levels of IL-10, IL-1ß, and IL-6 at weeks 4 and 12 after the vaccination (p<0.05). A new approach using the digital device may boost host immunity against virus via vaccine adjuvant-like effects. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04916145.

Low humoral and cellular immune responses early after breakthrough infection may contribute to severe COVID-19.

Background: Little is known about the immune determinants for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in individuals vaccinated against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. We therefore attempted to identify differences in humoral and cellular immune responses between patients with non-severe and severe breakthrough COVID-19. Methods: We prospectively enrolled hospitalized patients with breakthrough COVID-19 (severe and non-severe groups) and uninfected individuals who were vaccinated at a similar time (control group). Severe cases were defined as those who required oxygen therapy while hospitalized. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays and flow cytometry were used to evaluate humoral and cellular immune responses, respectively. Results: Anti-S1 IgG titers were significantly lower in the severe group than in the non-severe group within 1 week of symptom onset and higher in the non-severe group than in the control group. Compared with the control group, the cellular immune response tended to be diminished in breakthrough cases, particularly in the severe group. In multivariate analysis, advanced age and low anti-S1 IgG titer were associated with severe breakthrough COVID-19. Conclusions: Severe breakthrough COVID-19 might be attributed by low humoral and cellular immune responses early after infection. In the vaccinated population, delayed humoral and cellular immune responses may contribute to severe breakthrough COVID-19.

Clinical impact of clonal hematopoiesis on severe COVID-19 patients without canonical risk factors.

Not available.

Prescriptions patterns and appropriateness of usage of antibiotics in small and medium- sized hospitals in Korea

Background: Although small- and medium-sized hospitals comprise most healthcare providers in South Korea, data on antibiotic usage is limited in these facilities. We evaluated the pattern of antibiotic usage and its appropriateness in hospitals with <400 beds in South Korea. Methods: A multicenter retrospective study was conducted in 10 hospitals (6 long-term care hospitals, 3 acute-care hospitals, and 1 orthopedic hospital), with <400 beds in South Korea. We analyzed patterns of antibiotic prescription and their appropriateness in the participating hospitals. Data on the monthly antibiotic prescriptions and patient days for hospitalized patients were collected using electronic databases from each hospital. To avoid the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic, data were collected from January to December 2019. For the evaluation of the appropriateness of the prescription, 25 patients under antibiotic therapy were randomly selected at each hospital over 2 separate periods. Due to the heterogeneity of their characteristics, the orthopedics hospital was excluded from the analysis. The collected data were reviewed, and the appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions was evaluated by 5 specialists in infectious diseases (adult and pediatric). Data from 2 hospitals were assigned to each specialist. The appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions was evaluated from 3 aspects: route of administration, dose, and class. If the 3 aspects were ‘optimal,' the prescription was considered ‘optimal.' If only the route was ‘optimal,' and the dose and/or class was ‘suboptimal,' but not ‘inappropriate,' it was considered ‘suboptimal.' If even 1 aspect was ‘inappropriate,' it was classified as ‘inappropriate.' Results: The most commonly prescribed antibiotics in long-term care hospitals was fluoroquinolone, followed by β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor (antipseudomonal). In acute-care hospitals, these were third-generation cephalosporin, followed by first-generation cephalosporin and second-generation cephalosporin. The major antibiotics that were prescribed in the orthopedics hospital was first-generation cephalosporin. Only 2.3% of the antibiotics were administered inappropriately. In comparison, 15.3% of patients were prescribed an inappropriate dose. The proportion of inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions was 30.6% of the total antibiotic prescriptions. Conclusions: The antibiotic usage patterns vary between small- and medium-sized hospitals in South Korea. The proportion of inappropriate prescriptions exceeded 30% of the total antibiotic prescriptions.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Pregnant Women With Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Korea.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to describe the maternal, obstetrical, and neonatal outcomes in pregnant women with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and identify the predictors associated with the severity of COVID-19. METHODS: This multicenter observational study included consecutive pregnant women admitted because of COVID-19 confirmed using reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test at 15 hospitals in the Republic of Korea between January 2020 and December 2021. RESULTS: A total of 257 women with COVID-19 and 62 newborns were included in this study. Most of the patients developed this disease during the third trimester. Nine patients (7.4%) developed pregnancy-related complications. All pregnant women received inpatient treatment, of whom 9 (3.5%) required intensive care, but none of them died. The gestational age at COVID-19 diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 1.096, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.15) and parity (OR, 1.703, 95% CI, 1.13-2.57) were identified as significant risk factors of severe diseases. Among women who delivered, 78.5% underwent cesarean section. Preterm birth (38.5%), premature rupture of membranes (7.7%), and miscarriage (4.6%) occurred, but there was no stillbirth or neonatal death. The RT-PCR test of newborns' amniotic fluid and umbilical cord blood samples was negative for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. CONCLUSION: At the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, gestational age and parity of pregnant women were the risk factors of disease severity. Vertical transmission of COVID-19 was not observed, and maternal severity did not significantly affect the neonatal prognosis.

Estimation of SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Activity and Protective Immunity in Different Vaccine Types Using Three Surrogate Virus Neutralization Test Assays and Two Semiquantitative Binding Assays Targeting the Receptor-Binding Domain.

Estimating neutralizing activity in vaccinees is crucial for predicting the protective effect against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). As the plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT) requires a biosafety level 3 facility, it would be advantageous if surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) assays and binding assays could predict neutralizing activity. Here, five different assays were evaluated with respect to the PRNT in vaccinees: three sVNT assays from GenScript, Boditech Med, and SD Biosensor and two semiquantitative binding assays from Roche and Abbott. The vaccinees were subjected to three vaccination protocols: homologous ChAdOx1, homologous BNT162b2, and heterologous administration. The ability to predict a 50% neutralizing dose (ND50) of ≥20 largely varied among the assays, with the binding assays showing substantial agreement (kappa, ~0.90) and the sVNT assays showing relatively poor performance, especially in the ChAdOx1 group (kappa, 0.33 to 0.97). The ability to predict an ND50 value of ≥118.25, indicating a protective effect, was comparable among different assays. Applying optimal cutoffs based on Youden's index, the kappa agreements were greater than 0.60 for all assays in the total group. Overall, relatively poor performance was demonstrated in the ChAdOx1 group, owing to low antibody titers. Although there were intra-assay differences related to the vaccination protocols, as well as interassay differences, all assays demonstrated fair performance in predicting the protective effect using the new cutoffs. This study demonstrates the need for a different cutoff for each assay to appropriately determine a higher neutralizing titer and suggests the clinical feasibility of using various assays for estimation of the protective effect. IMPORTANCE The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to last, despite high COVID-19 vaccination rates. As many people experience breakthrough infection after prior infection and/or vaccination, estimating the neutralization activity and predicting the protective effect are major issues of concern. However, since standard neutralization tests are not available in most clinical laboratories, it would be beneficial if commercial assays could predict these aspects. In this study, we evaluated the performance of three sVNT assays and two semiquantitative binding assays targeting the receptor-binding domain with respect to the PRNT. Our results suggest that these assays could be used for predicting the protective effect by adjusting the cutoffs.

Kinetics of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibody titers and estimated protective immunity against wild-type SARS-CoV-2 and the Delta variant: A prospective nationwide cohort study comparing three COVID-19 vaccination protocols in South Korea.

Introduction: Despite vaccine development, the COVID-19 pandemic is ongoing due to immunity-escaping variants of concern (VOCs). Estimations of vaccine-induced protective immunity against VOCs are essential for setting proper COVID-19 vaccination policy. Methods: We performed plaque-reduction neutralizing tests (PRNTs) using sera from healthcare workers (HCWs) collected from baseline to six months after COVID-19 vaccination and from convalescent COVID-19 patients. The 20.2% of the mean PRNT titer of convalescent sera was used as 50% protective value, and the percentage of HCWs with protective immunity for each week (percent-week) was compared among vaccination groups. A correlation equation was deduced between a PRNT 50% neutralizing dose (ND50) against wild type (WT) SARS-CoV-2 and that of the Delta variant. Results: We conducted PRNTs on 1,287 serum samples from 297 HCWs (99 HCWs who received homologous ChAdOx1 vaccination (ChAd), 99 from HCWs who received homologous BNT162b2 (BNT), and 99 from HCWs who received heterologous ChAd followed by BNT (ChAd-BNT)). Using 365 serum samples from 116 convalescent COVID-19 patients, PRNT ND50 of 118.25 was derived as 50% protective value. The 6-month cumulative percentage of HCWs with protective immunity against WT SARS-CoV-2 was highest in the BNT group (2297.0 percent-week), followed by the ChAd-BNT (1576.8) and ChAd (1403.0) groups. In the inter-group comparison, protective percentage of the BNT group (median 96.0%, IQR 91.2-99.2%) was comparable to the ChAd-BNT group (median 85.4%, IQR 15.7-100%; P =0.117) and significantly higher than the ChAd group (median 60.1%, IQR 20.0-87.1%; P <0.001). When Delta PRNT was estimated using the correlation equation, protective immunity at the 6-month waning point was markedly decreased (28.3% for ChAd group, 52.5% for BNT, and 66.7% for ChAd-BNT). Conclusion: Decreased vaccine-induced protective immunity at the 6-month waning point and lesser response against the Delta variant may explain the Delta-dominated outbreak of late 2021. Follow-up studies for newly-emerging VOCs would also be needed.

Diagnostic Performance, Stability, and Usability of Self-Collected Combo Swabs and Saliva for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Diagnosis: A Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Self-sampling procedures to detect severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is important for patients who have difficulty visiting the hospital and may decrease the burden for health care workers (HCWs). The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance, stability and usability of self-collected nasal and oral combo swabs and saliva specimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a case-control study with 50 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and 50 healthy volunteers from March, 2021 to June, 2021. We performed real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction to compare the diagnostic performance of self-collected specimens using positive percent agreements (PPAs). RESULTS: The PPAs between self-collected and HCW-collected specimens were 77.3 - 81.0% and 80.5 -86.7% for the combo swabs and saliva specimens, respectively. The PPAs increased to 88.9 - 89.2% and 81.2 - 82.1% with a cycle threshold value ≤30. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of self sampling was comparable to that of HCW sampling in patients with high viral loads and may thus assist in the early diagnosis of COVID-19.

Performance of STANDARD™ M10 SARS-CoV-2 Assay for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 from a Nasopharyngeal Swab.

The STANDARD™ M10 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) assay (M10 assay) (SD Biosensor Inc., Suwon, Korea) is a rapid, fully-automated, cartridge-type molecular diagnostic assay that detects SARS-CoV-2 RNA using primers and probes for each target gene (ORF1ab gene, E gene). This study evaluated its performance by assessing its concordance with the approved SARS-CoV-2 real-time PCR assay. Tests were performed on 80 nasopharyngeal samples. The sensitivity and specificity of the M10 assay were 100%. The M10 assay effectively diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection, and it was comparable to the approved SARS-CoV-2 real-time PCR assay. It is a viable point-of-care test due to its short turnaround time.

Comprehensive Rehabilitation in Severely Ill Inpatients With COVID-19: A Cohort Study in a Tertiary Hospital.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the effects of comprehensive rehabilitation management on functional recovery and examine the correlation between clinical parameters and improvements in functional outcomes in severe-to-critical inpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a tertiary hospital. METHODS: Post-acute COVID-19 patients who had a World Health Organization (WHO) ordinal scale of 5-7, underwent intensive care, and received comprehensive rehabilitation management, including exercise programs, nutritional support, dysphagia evaluation, and psychological care were included. The appendicular skeletal muscle mass index (SMI), Medical Research Council sum score, handgrip strength, number of repetitions in the 1-minute sit-to-stand test, gait speed, Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and Functional Ambulation Classification (FAC) were evaluated at hospital stay, discharge, and 1-month follow-up. The correlation between the rehabilitation dose and improvement in each outcome measure was analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 37 patients were enrolled, of whom 59.5% and 32.4% had a score of 6 and 7 on the WHO ordinal scale, respectively. Lengths of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital were 33.6 ± 23.9 and 63.8 ± 36.5 days. Outcome measures revealed significant improvements at discharge and 1-month follow-up. The SMI was significantly increased at the 1-month follow-up (6.13 [5.24-7.76]) compared with that during the hospital stay (5.80 [5.39-7.05]). We identified dose-response associations between the rehabilitation dose and FAC (ρ = 0.46) and BBS (ρ = 0.50) scores. Patients with older age, longer hospitalization, longer stay at the intensive care unit, longer duration of mechanical ventilation, tracheostomy, a more depressive mood, and poorer nutritional status revealed poorer improvement in gait speed at the 1-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive rehabilitation management effectively improved muscle mass, muscle strength, and physical performance in severe-to-critical COVID-19 patients. Dose-response relationship of rehabilitation and functional improvement emphasizes the importance of intensive post-acute inpatient rehabilitation in COVID-19 survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05104411.

Breakthrough COVID-19 Infection During the Delta Variant Dominant Period: Individualized Care Based on Vaccination Status Is Needed.

BACKGROUND: The clinical features of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the COVID-19 vaccination era need to be clarified because breakthrough infection after vaccination is not uncommon. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed hospitalized COVID-19 patients during a delta variant-dominant period 6 months after the national COVID-19 vaccination rollout. The clinical characteristics and risk factors for severe progression were assessed and subclassified according to vaccination status. RESULTS: A total of 438 COVID-19 patients were included; the numbers of patients in the unvaccinated, partially vaccinated and fully vaccinated groups were 188 (42.9%), 117 (26.7%) and 133 (30.4%), respectively. The vaccinated group was older, less symptomatic and had a higher Charlson comorbidity index at presentation. The proportions of patients who experienced severe progression in the unvaccinated and fully vaccinated groups were 20.3% (31/153) and 10.8% (13/120), respectively. Older age, diabetes mellitus, solid cancer, elevated levels of lactate dehydrogenase and chest X-ray abnormalities were associated with severe progression, and the vaccination at least once was the only protective factor for severe progression. Chest X-ray abnormalities at presentation were the only predictor for severe progression among fully vaccinated patients. CONCLUSION: In the hospitalized setting, vaccinated and unvaccinated COVID-19 patients showed different clinical features and risk of oxygen demand despite a relatively high proportion of patients in the two groups. Vaccination needs to be assessed as an initial checkpoint, and chest X-ray may be helpful for predicting severe progression in vaccinated patients.

The generation of stem cell-like memory cells early after BNT162b2 vaccination is associated with durability of memory CD8+ T cell responses.

COVID-19 vaccines elicit humoral and cellular immune responses. Durable maintenance of vaccine-induced immunity is required for long-term protection of the host. Here, we examine activation and differentiation of vaccine-induced CD8+ T cells using MHC class I (MHC-I) multimers and correlations between early differentiation and the durability of CD8+ T cell responses among healthcare workers immunized with two doses of BNT162b2. The frequency of MHC-I multimer+ cells is robustly increased by BNT162b2 but decreases 6 months post-second vaccination to 2.4%-65.6% (23.0% on average) of the peak. MHC-I multimer+ cells dominantly exhibit phenotypes of activated effector cells 1-2 weeks post-second vaccination and gradually acquire phenotypes of long-term memory cells, including stem cell-like memory T (TSCM) cells. Importantly, the frequency of TSCM cells 1-2 weeks post-second vaccination significantly correlates with the 6-month durability of CD8+ T cells, indicating that early generation of TSCM cells determines the longevity of vaccine-induced memory CD8+ T cell responses.

Baricitinib versus dexamethasone for adults hospitalised with COVID-19 (ACTT-4): a randomised, double-blind, double placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib and dexamethasone have randomised trials supporting their use for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. We assessed the combination of baricitinib plus remdesivir versus dexamethasone plus remdesivir in preventing progression to mechanical ventilation or death in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, double placebo-controlled trial, patients were enrolled at 67 trial sites in the USA (60 sites), South Korea (two sites), Mexico (two sites), Singapore (two sites), and Japan (one site). Hospitalised adults (≥18 years) with COVID-19 who required supplemental oxygen administered by low-flow (≤15 L/min), high-flow (>15 L/min), or non-invasive mechanical ventilation modalities who met the study eligibility criteria (male or non-pregnant female adults ≥18 years old with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection) were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either baricitinib, remdesivir, and placebo, or dexamethasone, remdesivir, and placebo using a permuted block design. Randomisation was stratified by study site and baseline ordinal score at enrolment. All patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (or matching oral placebo) for a maximum of 14 days or dexamethasone (or matching intravenous placebo) for a maximum of 10 days. The primary outcome was the difference in mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29 between the two treatment groups in the modified intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in the as-treated population, comprising all participants who received one dose of the study drug. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04640168. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2020, and April 13, 2021, 1047 patients were assessed for eligibility. 1010 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 516 (51%) to baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo and 494 (49%) to dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo. The mean age of the patients was 58·3 years (SD 14·0) and 590 (58%) of 1010 patients were male. 588 (58%) of 1010 patients were White, 188 (19%) were Black, 70 (7%) were Asian, and 18 (2%) were American Indian or Alaska Native. 347 (34%) of 1010 patients were Hispanic or Latino. Mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29 was similar between the study groups (Kaplan-Meier estimates of 87·0% [95% CI 83·7 to 89·6] in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 87·6% [84·2 to 90·3] in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group; risk difference 0·6 [95% CI -3·6 to 4·8]; p=0·91). The odds ratio for improved status in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group compared with the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group was 1·01 (95% CI 0·80 to 1·27). At least one adverse event occurred in 149 (30%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 179 (37%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 7·5% [1·6 to 13·3]; p=0·014). 21 (4%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group had at least one treatment-related adverse event versus 49 (10%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 6·0% [2·8 to 9·3]; p=0·00041). Severe or life-threatening grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 143 (28%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 174 (36%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 7·7% [1·8 to 13·4]; p=0·012). INTERPRETATION: In hospitalised patients with COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen by low-flow, high-flow, or non-invasive ventilation, baricitinib plus remdesivir and dexamethasone plus remdesivir resulted in similar mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29, but dexamethasone was associated with significantly more adverse events, treatment-related adverse events, and severe or life-threatening adverse events. A more individually tailored choice of immunomodulation now appears possible, where side-effect profile, ease of administration, cost, and patient comorbidities can all be considered. FUNDING: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Changes in Anxiety Level and Personal Protective Equipment Use Among Healthcare Workers Exposed to COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between changes in anxiety levels and personal protective equipment (PPE) use is yet to be evaluated. The present study assessed this relationship among healthcare workers (HCWs) involved in the care of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: An online survey was conducted in a municipal hospital with 195 nationally designated negative pressure isolation units in Korea. Anxiety level was measured using the self-rating anxiety scale (SAS), and changes in anxiety levels were assessed based on the time when COVID-19 vaccine was introduced in March 2021 in Korea. Monthly PPE usage between June 2020 and May 2021 was investigated. RESULTS: The mean SAS score (33.25 ± 5.97) was within normal range and was lower than those reported in previous studies conducted before COVID-19 vaccination became available. Among the 93 HCWs who participated, 64 (68.8%) answered that their fear of contracting COVID-19 decreased after vaccination. The number of coveralls used per patient decreased from 33.6 to 0. However, a demand for more PPE than necessary was observed in situations where HCWs were exposed to body fluids and secretions (n = 38, 40.9%). Excessive demand for PPE was not related to age, working experience, or SAS score. CONCLUSION: Anxiety in HCWs exposed to COVID-19 was lower than it was during the early period of the pandemic, and the period before vaccination was introduced. The number of coveralls used per patient also decreased although an excessive demand for PPE was observed.

Clinical findings, viral load, and outcomes of COVID-19: Comparison of patients with negative and positive initial chest computed tomography.

Reports detailing the clinical characteristics, viral load, and outcomes of patients with normal initial chest CT findings are lacking. We sought to compare the differences in clinical findings, viral loads, and outcomes between patients with confirmed COVID-19 who initially tested negative on chest CT (CT negative) with patients who tested initially positive on chest CT (CT positive). The clinical data, viral loads, and outcomes of initial CT-positive and CT-negative patients examined between January 2020 and April 2020 were retrospectively compared. The efficacy of viral load (cyclic threshold value [Ct value]) in predicting pneumonia was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and area under the curve (AUC). In total, 128 patients underwent initial chest CT (mean age, 54.3 ± 19.0 years, 50% male). Of those, 36 were initially CT negative, and 92 were CT positive. The CT-positive patients were significantly older (P < .001) than the CT-negative patients. Only age was significantly associated with the initial presence of pneumonia (odds ratio, 1.060; confidence interval (CI), 1.020-1-102; P = .003). In addition, age (OR, 1.062; CI, 1.014-1.112; P = .011), fever at diagnosis (OR, 6.689; CI, 1.715-26.096; P = .006), and CRP level (OR, 1.393; CI, 1.150-1.687; P = .001) were significantly associated with the need for O2 therapy. Viral load was significantly higher in the CT-positive group than in the CT-negative group (P = .017). The cutoff Ct value for predicting the presence of pneumonia was 27.71. Outcomes including the mean hospital stay, intensive care unit admission, and O2 therapy were significantly worse in the CT-positive group than in the CT-negative group (all P < .05). In conclusion, initially CT-negative patients showed better outcomes than initially CT-positive patients. Age was significantly associated with the initial presence of pneumonia, and viral load may help in predicting the initial presence of pneumonia.

Are the Current Guidelines Sufficient to Establish Infection Control Strategies for COVID-19 Related Issues in Hospitals?

As hospitals cater to elderly and vulnerable patients, a high mortality rate is expected if a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak occurs. Consequently, policies to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in hospital settings are essential. This study was conducted to investigate how effectively national and international guidelines provide recommendations for infection control issues in hospitals. After selecting important issues in infection control, we performed a systematic review and analysis of recommendations and guidelines for preventing COVID-19 transmission within medical institutions at national and international levels. We analyzed guidelines from the World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, and Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency. Recent guidelines do not provide specific solutions to infection control issues. Therefore, efforts need to be made to devise consistent advice and guidelines for COVID-19 control.

Strategies for Prevention of COVID-19 Transmission in Hospitals

Background Infection control measures against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) within a hospital often rely on expert experience and intuition due to the lack of clear guidelines. This study surveyed current strategies for the prevention of the spread of COVID-19 in medical institutions. Methods Upon systematic review of the guidelines at the national level, 14 key topics were selected. Six hospitals were provided an open survey that assessed their responses to these topics between August 11 and 25, 2020. Using these data, an online questionnaire was developed and sent to the infection control teams of 46 hospitals in South Korea. The survey was conducted between January 31, 2021, and February 20, 2021. Results All 46 hospitals responded to the survey, and 24 hospitals (52.2%) had treated 100 or more cases of COVID-19. All hospitals operated screening clinics, and the criteria were respiratory symptoms (100%), fever (97.8%), and epidemiological association (93.5%). It was found that 89.1% (41/46) of hospitals allowed symptomatic patients to visit their general outpatient clinics if fever or respiratory symptoms were not associated with COVID-19. Most hospitals (87.2%;34/39) conducted polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests for all hospitalized patients. Moreover, 76.1% (35/46) of hospitals implemented preemptive isolation policies for hospitalized patients, of which 97.1% (34/35) were released from isolation after a single negative PCR test. A little over half of the hospitals (58.7%;27/46) treated patients that met the national criteria for release from isolation but consistently had positive PCR results. Of these hospitals, 63% (17/27) used N95/KF94 masks, and 40.7% (11/27) used surgical masks without other personal protective equipment for treating them. Most hospitals (76.9%;20/26) accommodated them in shared rooms when the cycle threshold value of the PCR test was more than a certain value (34.6%;9/26), or after a certain period that satisfied the national criteria (26.9%;7/26). Finally, 76.1% (35/46) of hospitals performed emergency procedures or operations on suspected patients. Table 1. Screening and selective treatment policy to prevent COVID-19 patients from entering the hospital Note Values are presented as number (%) Abbreviations: COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019;PCR, polymerase chain reaction 1 This question requested the respondent to select multiple items. 2 Suspected cases of COVID-19 include fever, respiratory symptoms, and epidemiological associations with COVID-19 patients. Note Values are presented as number (%) Abbreviations: COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019;PCR, polymerase chain reaction;PAPR, powered air-purifying respirator;Ct, cycle threshold 1 This question requested the respondent to select multiple items. 2 It includes infectious diseases, pulmonology, and the infection control and prevention office. 3 One hospital that wrote a non-categorical answer for the question was excluded. The hospital made a decision after discussing it with an infectious diseases specialist. Conclusion Various guidelines were being applied by each medical institution, but there was a lack of an explicit set of national guidelines to support them. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Are coveralls required as personal protective equipment during the management of COVID-19 patients?

OBJECTIVES: Few studies have investigated the contamination of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the management of patients with severe-to-critical coronavirus disease (COVID-19). This study aimed to determine the necessity of coveralls and foot covers for body protection during the management of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: PPE samples were collected from the coveralls of physicians exiting a room after the management of a patient with severe-to-critical COVID-19 within 14 days after the patient's symptom onset. The surface of coveralls was categorized into coverall-only parts (frontal surface of the head, anterior neck, dorsal surface of the foot cover, and back and hip) and gown-covered parts (the anterior side of the forearm and the abdomen). Sampling of the high-contact surfaces in the patient's environment was performed. We attempted to identify significant differences in contamination with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between the coverall-only and gown-covered parts. RESULTS: A total of 105 swabs from PPEs and 28 swabs from patient rooms were collected. Of the PPE swabs, only three (2.8%) swabs from the gown-covered parts were contaminated with SARS-CoV-2. However, 23 of the 28 sites (82.1%) from patient rooms were contaminated. There was a significant difference in the contamination of PPE between the coverall-only and gown-covered parts (0.0 vs 10.0%, p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Coverall contamination rarely occurred while managing severe-to-critical COVID-19 patients housed in negative pressure rooms in the early stages of the illness. Long-sleeved gowns may be used in the management of COVID-19 patients.

Usefulness of ELISA Using Total Antibody against Plant-Expressed Recombinant Nucleocapsid Protein of SARS-CoV-2.

Here, we aimed to investigate the diagnostic value of a serological assay using the nucleocapsid protein developed for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection and evaluated its performance using three commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), namely, Standard E 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) total antibody (Ab) ELISA (SD Biosensor), and EDI novel coronavirus COVID-19 IgG and IgM ELISA. A recombinant nucleocapsid protein (rNP) was expressed from plants and Escherichia coli for the detection of serum total Ab. We prospectively collected 141 serum samples from 32 patients with reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR)-confirmed COVID-19 and determined the sensitivity and dynamics of their total Ab response. Specificity was evaluated using 158 prepandemic samples. To validate the assays, we evaluated the performance using two different cutoff values. The sensitivity and specificity for each assay were as follows: 92.91% and 94.30% (plant-rNP), 83.69% and 98.73% (SD Biosensor), 75.89% and 98.10% (E. coli-rNP), 76.47% and 100% (EDI-IgG), and 80.39% and 80% (EDI-IgM). The plant-based rNP showed the highest sensitivity and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (0.980) among all the assays (P < 0.05). The seroconversion rate for total Ab increased sequentially with disease progression, with a sensitivity of 100% after 10 to 12 days of post-symptom onset (PSO) for both rNP-plant-based and SD Biosensor ELISAs. After 2 weeks of PSO, the seroconversion rates were >80% and 100% for EDI-IgM and EDI-IgG ELISA, respectively. Seroconversion occurred earlier with rNP plant-based ELISA (5 days PSO) compared with E. coli-based (7 days PSO) and SD Biosensor (8 days PSO) ELISA. We determined that rNP produced in plants enables the robust detection of SARS-CoV-2 total Abs. The assay can be used for serosurvey and complementary diagnosis of COVID-19. IMPORTANCE At present, the principal diagnostic methods for COVID-19 comprise the identification of viral nucleic acid by genetic approaches, including PCR-based techniques or next-generation sequencing. However, there is an urgent need for validated serological assays which are crucial for the understanding of immune responses against SARS-CoV-2. In this study, a highly sensitive and specific serological antibody assay was developed for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 with an overall accuracy of 93.56% using a recombinant nucleoprotein expressed from plants.