Recommendations and guidelines for the diagnosis and management of Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) associated bacterial and fungal infections in Taiwan.

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is an emerging infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 that has rapidly evolved into a pandemic to cause over 600 million infections and more than 6.6 million deaths up to Nov 25, 2022. COVID-19 carries a high mortality rate in severe cases. Co-infections and secondary infections with other micro-organisms, such as bacterial and fungus, further increases the mortality and complicates the diagnosis and management of COVID-19. The current guideline provides guidance to physicians for the management and treatment of patients with COVID-19 associated bacterial and fungal infections, including COVID-19 associated bacterial infections (CABI), pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA), candidiasis (CAC) and mucormycosis (CAM). Recommendations were drafted by the 7th Guidelines Recommendations for Evidence-based Antimicrobial agents use Taiwan (GREAT) working group after review of the current evidence, using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) methodology. A nationwide expert panel reviewed the recommendations in March 2022, and the guideline was endorsed by the Infectious Diseases Society of Taiwan (IDST). This guideline includes the epidemiology, diagnostic methods and treatment recommendations for COVID-19 associated infections. The aim of this guideline is to provide guidance to physicians who are involved in the medical care for patients with COVID-19 during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 associated mold infections: Review of COVID-19 associated pulmonary aspergillosis and mucormycosis.

COVID-19-associated mold infection (CAMI) is defined as development of mold infections in COVID-19 patients. Co-pathogenesis of viral and fungal infections include the disruption of tissue barrier following SARS CoV-2 infection with the damage in the alveolar space, respiratory epithelium and endothelium injury and overwhelming inflammation and immune dysregulation during severe COVID-19. Other predisposing risk factors permissive to fungal infections during COVID-19 include the administration of immune modulators such as corticosteroids and IL-6 antagonist. COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) and COVID-19-associated mucormycosis (CAM) is increasingly reported during the COVID-19 pandemic. CAPA usually developed within the first month of COVID infection, and CAM frequently arose 10-15 days post diagnosis of COVID-19. Diagnosis is challenging and often indistinguishable during the cytokine storm in COVID-19, and several diagnostic criteria have been proposed. Development of CAPA and CAM is associated with a high mortality despiteappropriate anti-mold therapy. Both isavuconazole and amphotericin B can be used for treatment of CAPA and CAM; voriconazole is the primary agent for CAPA and posaconazole is an alternative for CAM. Aggressive surgery is recommended for CAM to improve patient survival. A high index of suspicion and timely and appropriate treatment is crucial to improve patient outcome.

The first imported case of monkeypox in Taiwan.

he first imported case of monkeypox in Taiwan was diagnosed in an Asian man with HIV-1 infection and asymptomatic COVID-19, returning from Germany. Atypical presentations included asynchronous skin lesions, anogenital lesions and prominent inguinal lymphadenopathy. Whole genomic sequence alignment indicate that the Taiwan strain clustered together with human monkeypox virus West African clade B.1, currently circulating in Europe. Prompt diagnosis and infection control measures are crucial to mitigate the spread of monkeypox.

Deep Dive into the Long Haul: Analysis of Symptom Clusters and Risk Factors for Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19 to Inform Clinical Care.

Long COVID is a chronic condition characterized by symptoms such as fatigue, dyspnea, and cognitive impairment that persist or relapse months after an acute infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Many distinct symptoms have been attributed to Long COVID; however, little is known about the potential clustering of these symptoms and risk factors that may predispose patients to certain clusters. In this study, an electronic survey was sent to patients in the UC San Diego Health (UCSDH) system who tested positive for COVID-19, querying if patients were experiencing symptoms consistent with Long COVID. Based on survey results, along with patient demographics reported in the electronic health record (EHR), linear and logistic regression models were used to examine putative risk factors, and exploratory factor analysis was performed to determine symptom clusters. Among 999 survey respondents, increased odds of Long COVID (n = 421; 42%) and greater Long COVID symptom burden were associated with female sex (OR = 1.73, 99% CI: 1.16-2.58; ß = 0.48, 0.22-0.75), COVID-19 hospitalization (OR = 4.51, 2.50-8.43; ß = 0.48, 0.17-0.78), and poorer pre-COVID self-rated health (OR = 0.75, 0.57-0.97; ß = -0.19, -0.32--0.07). Over one-fifth of Long COVID patients screened positive for depression and/or anxiety, the latter of which was associated with younger age (OR = 0.96, 0.94-0.99). Factor analysis of 16 self-reported symptoms suggested five symptom clusters-gastrointestinal (GI), musculoskeletal (MSK), neurocognitive (NC), airway (AW), and cardiopulmonary (CP), with older age (ß = 0.21, 0.11-0.30) and mixed race (ß = 0.27, 0.04-0.51) being associated with greater MSK symptom burden. Greater NC symptom burden was associated with increased odds of depression (OR = 5.86, 2.71-13.8) and anxiety (OR = 2.83, 1.36-6.14). These results can inform clinicians in identifying patients at increased risk for Long COVID-related medical issues, particularly neurocognitive symptoms and symptom clusters, as well as informing health systems to manage operational expectations on a population-health level.

COVID-19-associated candidiasis and the emerging concern of Candida auris infections.

The incidence of COVID-19-associated candidiasis (CAC) is increasing, resulting in a grave outcome among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The most alarming condition is the increasing incidence of multi-drug resistant Candida auris infections among patients with COVID-19 worldwide. The therapeutic strategy towards CAC caused by common Candida species, such as Candida albicans, Candida tropicalis, and Candida glabrata, is similar to the pre-pandemic era. For non-critically ill patients or those with a low risk of azole resistance, fluconazole remains the drug of choice for candidemia. For critically ill patients, those with a history of recent azole exposure or with a high risk of fluconazole resistance, echinocandins are recommended as the first-line therapy. Several novel therapeutic agents alone or in combination with traditional antifungal agents for candidiasis are potential options in the future. However, for multidrug-resistant C. auris infection, only echinocandins are effective. Infection prevention and control policies, including strict isolation of the patients carrying C. auris and regular screening of non-affected patients, are suggested to prevent the spread of C. auris among patients with COVID-19. Whole-genome sequencing may be used to understand the epidemiology of healthcare-associated candidiasis and to better control and prevent these infections.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated bacterial coinfection: Incidence, diagnosis and treatment.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged as a pandemic that spread rapidly around the world, causing nearly 500 billion infections and more than 6 million deaths to date. During the first wave of the pandemic, empirical antibiotics was prescribed in over 70% of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. However, research now shows a low incidence rate of bacterial coinfection in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, between 2.5% and 5.1%. The rate of secondary infections was 3.7% in overall, but can be as high as 41.9% in the intensive care units. Over-prescription of antibiotics to treat COVID-19 patients fueled the ongoing antimicrobial resistance globally. Diagnosis of bacterial coinfection is challenging due to indistinguishable clinical presentations with overlapping lower respiratory tract symptoms such as fever, cough and dyspnea. Other diagnostic methods include conventional culture, diagnostic syndromic testing, serology test and biomarkers. COVID-19 patients with bacterial coinfection or secondary infection have a higher in-hospital mortality and longer length of stay, timely and appropriate antibiotic use aided by accurate diagnosis is crucial to improve patient outcome and prevent antimicrobial resistance.

Asymptomatic carriage and transmission of SARS-CoV-2: What do we know?

PURPOSE: Risk to healthcare workers treating asymptomatic patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the operating room depends on multiple factors. This review examines the evidence for asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic carriage of SARS-CoV-2, the risk of transmission from asymptomatic patients, and the specific risks associated with aerosol-generating procedures. Protective measures, such as minimization of aerosols and use of personal protective equipment in the setting of treating asymptomatic patients, are also reviewed. SOURCE: We examined the published literature as well as Societal guidelines. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: There is evidence that a proportion of those infected with SARS-CoV-2 have detectable viral loads prior to exhibiting symptoms, or without ever developing symptoms. The degree of risk of transmission from asymptomatic patients to healthcare providers will depend on the prevalence of disease in the population, which is difficult to assess without widespread population screening. Aerosol-generating procedures increase the odds of viral transmission from infected symptomatic patients to healthcare providers, but transmission from asymptomatic patients has not been reported. Techniques to minimize aerosolization and appropriate personal protective equipment may help reduce the risk to healthcare workers in the operating room. Some societal guidelines recommend the use of airborne precautions during aerosol-generating procedures on asymptomatic patients during the coronavirus disease pandemic, although evidence supporting this practice is limited. CONCLUSION: Viral transmission from patients exhibiting no symptoms in the operating room is plausible and efforts to reduce risk to healthcare providers include reducing aerosolization and wearing appropriate personal protective equipment, the feasibility of which will vary based on geographic risk and equipment availability.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Le risque encouru par les travailleurs de la santé traitant des patients asymptomatiques infectés par le syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère du coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) en salle d'opération dépend de plusieurs facteurs. Ce compte rendu examine les données probantes concernant la présence asymptomatique ou pré-symptomatique du SARS-CoV-2, le risque de transmission des patients asymptomatiques, et les risques spécifiques associés aux interventions générant des aérosols. Nous passons également en revue différentes mesures de protection, telles que la minimisation des aérosols et l'utilisation d'équipements de protection individuelle, dans un contexte de traitement de patients asymptomatiques. SOURCE: Nous avons examiné la littérature publiée ainsi que les directives sociétales. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: Selon certaines données probantes, une proportion des personnes infectées par le SARS-CoV-2 possèdent des charges virales détectables avant la présence de symptômes, voire même sans manifestation de symptômes. Le degré de risque de transmission des patients asymptomatiques aux travailleurs de la santé dépendra de la prévalence de la maladie dans la population, une donnée difficile à évaluer sans dépistage généralisé. Les interventions générant des aérosols augmentent le risque de transmission virale des patients symptomatiques infectés aux travailleurs de la santé, mais la transmission de patients asymptomatiques n'a pas été rapportée. Les techniques visant à minimiser l'aérosolisation et les équipements de protection individuelle adaptés pourraient être utiles pour réduire le risque des travailleurs de la santé en salle d'opération. Certaines directives régionales et nationales recommandent le recours à des précautions contre la transmission par voie aérienne durant les interventions générant des aérosols pratiquées sur des patients asymptomatiques pendant la pandémie de coronavirus, bien que les données probantes appuyant cette pratique soient limitées. CONCLUSION: La transmission virale des patients asymptomatiques en salle d'opération est plausible et les efforts visant à réduire le risque pour les travailleurs de la santé comprennent la réduction de l'aérosolisation et le port d'équipements de protection individuelle adaptés, deux mesures dont la faisabilité variera en fonction du risque géographique et de la disponibilité des équipements.

"Helping the Helpers": The Impact of COVID-19 on Work and Home Stress for Oncology Professionals

Background: The Cancer Support Community (CSC) is a leader in providing psychosocial care and has recognized the importance of understanding the effects of COVID-19 on healthcare professionals and addressing gaps in identified supports. Recent national US surveys have found a 45% burnout prevalence rate among oncologists, while other global studies have suggested burnout rates in oncologists ranging from 20% to 70%. In October 2020, a survey was disseminated to a wide range of oncology professionals to understand the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on work and home life, including stressors related to burnout and other challenges such as compassion fatigue. Objective: To understand the stressors related to burnout and other challenges, such as compassion fatigue, is highly relevant as it affects personal well-being and quality of life of the healthcare professional. Currently no research exists regarding the impact of COVID-19 on work and home stress among oncology helping professionals. Methods: CSC disseminated an anonymous survey throughout its affiliate network, Healthcare Partners, and the larger oncology community. The target audience of oncology helping professionals included physicians, social workers, nurses, physician's assistants, psychologists, and other mental health professionals. There were 3 parts to this survey: (1) demographic questions, (2) the Professional Quality of Life Scale, and (3) an open-ended response to stressors experienced at work and at home due to COVID-19. Results: Eighty-six individuals participated in the survey. Results from this study indicate moderate levels of compassion satisfaction (M = 40.4, SD = 5.9), burnout (M = 24, SD = 6.7), and secondary traumatic stress (M = 22.9, SD = 6.4) among respondents. Bivariate analyses indicated nonwhite oncology professionals reported lower compassion satisfaction compared with whites, and hospital workers reported higher levels of burnout compared with staff in nonhospital settings. The most common stressors that oncology professionals reported experiencing at work due to COVID-19 included the primary themes of workplace issues (eg, less in-person contact), patient care (eg, increased patient needs/distress), and health (eg, concern for personal or family health/fear of COVID-19). The most common stressors that respondents reported experiencing at home due to COVID-19 also included 3 primary themes: health (eg, isolation/loneliness), family and children (eg, online school/homeschooling), and financial (eg, job insecurity). Conclusion: Survey results underscore the stress of COVID-19 on oncology professionals and the unique impact the pandemic has had on work and home-life stressors in this population. Survey results can be used as an important tool to identify support gaps and create target resources, as well as serve as a base for future research.

Exploring the roles of advanced practice nurses in the care of patients following fragility hip fracture: A systematic review.

AIM: This study aimed to explore the role and impact of advanced practice nurses (APNs) in care of patients following fragility hip fracture by systematically reviewing the available evidence. REVIEW DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: A search of the databases Ovid Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Emcare, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar was conducted from January-February 2019. METHOD: This systematic review adhered to The PRISMA Statement. Study selection was managed using the Covidence software platform and quality was assessed using JBI Critical appraisal tools. Studies included adults >18 years and described the role and impact of APNs in care of patients following fragility hip fracture on clinical and non-clinical outcomes. RESULTS: There were 19 papers identified that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Quality was graded as moderate to low risk of bias. Six characteristics of APNs were identified: (1) coordination; (2) collaboration; (3) education; (4) assessment, investigation and treatment recommendations; (5) discharge planning, support and follow up; and (6) documentation. Overall mortality and LOS improved when characteristics of the APN role were present. CONCLUSION: Key findings from this systematic review showed: (1) The APN title and role are not clearly defined, but characteristics of the APN role are evident; (2) characteristics of APNs promote the delivery of best practice hip fracture care and have a positive impact on mortality and LOS; and (3) innovative service delivery models involving APNs should be considered to address future projections of hip fracture rates and improve outcomes. IMPACT: This systematic review provides evidence of the role characteristics of APNs in fragility hip fracture and the impact of the role on outcomes. Findings from this research could be used to develop service delivery models using APNs to care for patients following fragility hip fracture and to inform practice where APN roles may improve outcomes for other patient cohorts.

Provider attitudes and satisfaction with rapid preoperative point-of-care COVID-19 testing using ID NOW™.

PURPOSE: Healthcare workers have experienced high levels of anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly when caring for patients with unknown infection status. We trialled rapid preoperative point-of-care COVID-19 testing using the Abbott ID NOW™ COVID-19 for clinical validation in an urgent surgical population at a single centre in British Columbia, Canada. Here, we sought to determine the opinions and beliefs of operating room (OR) staff on the usefulness and effectiveness of point-of-care tests on workflow and wellbeing in the OR. METHODS: This descriptive study used a mixed-methods cross-sectional survey of all OR staff (nurses, anesthesiologists, surgeons, and ancillary staff) at a single centre after using the ID NOW for three months. Outcomes of interest included healthcare worker satisfaction with the ID NOW, effects on OR workflow, and worries about COVID-19 transmission. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 56% (n = 133), and was highest among anesthesiologists (100%, n = 38). Respondents were satisfied with the performance of the ID NOW for rapid COVID-19 testing in preoperative patients, giving it a mean (standard deviation [SD]) rate of 4.4 [1.4] on a five-point scale. Most (115/128, 90%) recommended continued use of the ID NOW on asymptomatic patients while there are active cases of COVID-19 in the community. Respondents felt that preoperative COVID-19 testing with the ID NOW made the OR safer for staff (mean [SD] rate, 4.2 [0.8]) and patients (mean [SD] rate, 4.0 [0.9]). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to maintain the physical and mental wellbeing of hospital staff. Rapid point-of-care testing increased the sense of workplace safety, improved morale, and reduced worry associated with COVID-19 without excessive disruption of OR workflow.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les travailleurs de la santé ont connu des niveaux élevés d'anxiété au cours de la pandémie de COVID-19, en particulier lorsqu'ils prenaient soin de patients dont le statut infectieux était inconnu. Nous avons testé le dépistage préopératoire rapide de la COVID-19 au point de service avec le dispositif ID NOW™ COVID-19 d'Abbott pour validation clinique auprès d'une population devant bénéficier de chirurgie urgente dans un seul centre en Colombie-Britannique, au Canada. Notre objectif était ici de déterminer les opinions et les croyances du personnel de la salle d'opération (SOP) quant à l'utilité et à l'efficacité des tests au point de service en matière de flux de travail et de bien-être en salle d'opération. MéTHODE: Cette étude descriptive a utilisé un sondage transversal à méthodes mixtes auprès de tout le personnel de la SOP (infirmières, anesthésiologistes, chirurgiens et personnel auxiliaire) dans un seul centre après avoir utilisé le système ID NOW pendant trois mois. Les issues de l'étude comprenaient la satisfaction des travailleurs de la santé à l'égard de ID NOW, les effets sur le flux de travail de la SOP et les inquiétudes concernant la transmission de la COVID-19. RéSULTATS: Le taux de réponse global a été de 56 % (n = 133), et était le plus élevé chez les anesthésiologistes (100 %, n = 38). Les répondants étaient satisfaits de la performance de ID NOW pour le dépistage rapide de la COVID-19 chez les patients préopératoires, lui accordant une note moyenne (écart type [ÉT]) de 4,4 [1,4] sur une échelle à cinq points. La plupart (115/128, 90 %) ont recommandé de continuer à utiliser ID NOW avec les patients asymptomatiques tant qu'il y a des cas actifs de COVID-19 dans la communauté. Les répondants étaient d'avis que le dépistage préopératoire de la COVID-19 avec ID NOW rendait la SOP plus sécuritaire pour le personnel (note moyenne [ÉT], 4,2 [0,8]) et les patients (note moyenne [ÉT], 4,0 [0,9]). CONCLUSION: Pendant la pandémie de COVID-19, il est important de maintenir le bien-être physique et mental du personnel hospitalier. Le dépistage rapide au point de service a accru le sentiment de sécurité au travail, amélioré le moral et réduit l'inquiétude associée à la COVID-19, sans perturbation excessive du flux de travail de la SOP.

An updated look at the 16-week window between doses of vaccines in BC for COVID-19

A single vaccine dose clearly reduces COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and death. Early effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination with BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine and ChAdoX1 adenovirus vector vaccine on symptomatic disease, hospitalisations and mortality in older adults in England. medRxiv. NACI rapid response: Extended dose intervals for COVID-19 vaccines to optimize early vaccine rollout and population protection in Canada. [Extracted from the article] Copyright of British Columbia Medical Journal is the property of British Columbia Medical Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

What is the evidence for extending the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccine dosing schedule?

Vaccine rollout for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) in British Columbia is underway with two approved mRNA vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna). Traditionally, an inactivated or attenuated pathogen may have been used as a vaccine, whereas mRNA and DNA vaccines provide genetic material that instruct the body's cells to produce a viral spike protein antigen. Presently, both mRNA vaccines are approved for use as a two-dose schedule given either 21 days or 28 days apart. However, there is a relative scarcity of vaccine compared to the population of British Columbia. BC's public health officials have proposed a delay between the primary vaccination and booster to 35 days from the recommended 21 and 28 days. Based on unpublished data available to the National Advisory Committee on Immunization through Health Canada for both the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, there was no difference in vaccine efficacy between the people who got their second dose at day 19 and the people who got it at day 42. Various jurisdictions around the world are permitting a prolonged second dosing interval. Despite the paucity of clinical trial data, it is likely that increasing the interval between the first and second doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna is safe, both in the intervening period between doses and for long-term efficacy. Extending the vaccine schedule is likely warranted in order to allow the widest population to receive the first dose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of British Columbia Medical Journal is the property of British Columbia Medical Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Precompetitive Consensus Building to Facilitate the Use of Digital Health Technologies to Support Parkinson Disease Drug Development through Regulatory Science.

Innovative tools are urgently needed to accelerate the evaluation and subsequent approval of novel treatments that may slow, halt, or reverse the relentless progression of Parkinson disease (PD). Therapies that intervene early in the disease continuum are a priority for the many candidates in the drug development pipeline. There is a paucity of sensitive and objective, yet clinically interpretable, measures that can capture meaningful aspects of the disease. This poses a major challenge for the development of new therapies and is compounded by the considerable heterogeneity in clinical manifestations across patients and the fluctuating nature of many signs and symptoms of PD. Digital health technologies (DHT), such as smartphone applications, wearable sensors, and digital diaries, have the potential to address many of these gaps by enabling the objective, remote, and frequent measurement of PD signs and symptoms in natural living environments. The current climate of the COVID-19 pandemic creates a heightened sense of urgency for effective implementation of such strategies. In order for these technologies to be adopted in drug development studies, a regulatory-aligned consensus on best practices in implementing appropriate technologies, including the collection, processing, and interpretation of digital sensor data, is required. A growing number of collaborative initiatives are being launched to identify effective ways to advance the use of DHT in PD clinical trials. The Critical Path for Parkinson's Consortium of the Critical Path Institute is highlighted as a case example where stakeholders collectively engaged regulatory agencies on the effective use of DHT in PD clinical trials. Global regulatory agencies, including the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, are encouraging the efficiencies of data-driven engagements through multistakeholder consortia. To this end, we review how the advancement of DHT can be most effectively achieved by aligning knowledge, expertise, and data sharing in ways that maximize efficiencies.