Sofa and bed-related pediatric trauma injuries treated in United States emergency departments.

INTRODUCTION: Children under the age of 5 years suffer from the highest rates of fall-related injuries. Caretakers often leave young children on sofas and beds, however, falling and rolling off these fixtures can lead to serious injury. We investigated the epidemiologic characteristics and trends of bed and sofa-related injuries among children aged <5 years treated in US emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of data from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System from 2007 through 2021 using sample weights to estimate national numbers and rates of bed and sofa-related injuries. Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were employed. RESULTS: An estimated 3,414,007 children aged <5 years were treated for bed and sofa-related injuries in emergency departments (EDs) in the United States from 2007 through 2021, averaging 115.2 injuries per 10,000 persons annually. Closed head injuries (30%) and lacerations (24%) comprised the majority of injuries. The primary location of injury was the head (71%) and upper extremity (17%). Children <1 year of age accounted for most injuries, with a 67% increase in incidence within the age group between 2007 and 2021 (p < 0.001). Falling, jumping, and rolling off beds and sofas were the primary mechanisms of injury. The proportion of jumping injuries increased with age. Approximately 4% of all injuries required hospitalization. Children <1 year of age were 1.58 times more likely to be hospitalized after injury than all other age groups (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Beds and sofas can be associated with injury among young children, especially infants. The annual rate of bed and sofa-related injuries among infants <1 year old is increasing, which underscores the need for increased prevention efforts, including parental education and improved safety design, to decrease these injuries.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Work Activity of Spanish Physical Therapists and Their Response to Vaccination.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, physical therapists have had to adopt a set of specific protection measures, which have had an impact on their clinical activity and economy. The objective was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the work of Spanish physical therapists, as well as their attitudes and predisposition to vaccination. An online questionnaire was divided into five sections: (1) demographic and professional data; (2) labor impact; (3) precautions and infection-control measures; (4) economic impact; and (5) vaccine acceptance and adverse effects. Of the 666 participants, 62.1% showed a reduction in their working hours motivated by: fear of infection (p = 0.007), financial issues (p = 0.002) and being in quarantine or isolation (p < 0.001). Of these, 36.4% were forced to close the clinic, 62.7% requested help from the government, but only 12.04% mentioned that it was adequate. The main prevention measures adopted were the use of gels and masks and, in the private sector, disinfection with ozone or ultraviolet light (p < 0.05). The acceptance of the vaccine was high, 87.5%, being lower among the group over 40 years of age, self-employed, widowed or separated. More adverse effects were mentioned after receiving the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine, compared to Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna. In conclusion, this study assessed for the first time that the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain had a negative impact on work and finances of physical therapists. The vaccine was widely accepted, in part by the economic impact that an infection in the work setting could signify.

Evaluation of Humoral and Cellular Immune Responses to the SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Patients With Common Variable Immunodeficiency Phenotype and Patient Receiving B-Cell Depletion Therapy.

Introduction: SARS-CoV-2 vaccines' effectiveness is not yet clearly known in immunocompromised patients. This study aims to assess the humoral and cellular specific immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and the predictors of poor response in patients with common variable immunodeficiency (CVID) phenotype and in patients treated with B-cell depletion therapies (BCDT), as well as the safety of these vaccines. Methods: From March to September 2021, we performed a prospective study of all adult patients who would receive the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and were previously diagnosed with (i) a CVID syndrome (CVID phenotype group; n=28) or (ii) multiple sclerosis (MS) treated with B-cell depleting therapies three to six months before vaccination (BCD group; n=24). Participants with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection; or prior SARS-CoV-2 vaccine administration; or use of any immunosuppressant (except BCDT in MS group) were excluded. A group of subjects without any medical condition that confers immunosuppression and who met all study criteria was also assessed (control group; n=14). A chemiluminescence immunoassay was used to determine pre- and post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine anti-S IgG antibodies. T-cell specific response was assessed by analysis of pre- and post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination blood samples with an interferon-gamma release assay. The baseline blood sample also included several biochemical, haematological and immunological analyses. Results: SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are safe in immunocompromised patients, although their effectiveness was lower than in healthy individuals. CVID phenotype patients showed impaired humoral (29%) and cellular (29%) response, while BCD patients fundamentally presented humoral failure (54%). Low IgA values, low CD19+ peripheral B cells, low switched memory B cells, and a low CD4+/CD8+ ratio were predictors of inadequate specific antibody response in CVID phenotype patients. No factor was found to predict poor cellular response in CVID phenotype patients, nor a defective humoral or cellular response in BCD patients. Conclusion: The effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in CVID phenotype and BCD patients is lower than in healthy individuals. Knowledge of predictive factors of humoral and cellular response failure in immunocompromised patients could be very useful in clinical practice, and thus, studies in this regard are clearly needed.

Final efficacy analysis, interim safety analysis, and immunogenicity of a single dose of recombinant novel coronavirus vaccine (adenovirus type 5 vector) in adults 18 years and older: an international, multicentre, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The Ad5-nCoV vaccine is a single-dose adenovirus type 5 (Ad5) vectored vaccine expressing the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that was well-tolerated and immunogenic in phase 1 and 2 studies. In this study, we report results on the final efficacy and interim safety analyses of the phase 3 trial. METHODS: This double-blind, randomised, international, placebo-controlled, endpoint-case driven, phase 3, clinical trial enrolled adults aged 18 years older at study centres in Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Pakistan, and Russia. Participants were eligible for the study if they had no unstable or severe underlying medical or psychiatric conditions; had no history of a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection; were not pregnant or breastfeeding; and had no previous receipt of an adenovirus-vectored, coronavirus, or SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. After informed consent was obtained, 25 mL of whole blood was withdrawn from all eligible participants who were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single intramuscular dose of 0·5 mL placebo or a 0·5 mL dose of 5 × 1010 viral particle (vp)/mL Ad5-nCoV vaccine; study staff and participants were blinded to treatment allocation. All participants were contacted weekly by email, telephone, or text message to self-report any symptoms of COVID-19 illness, and laboratory testing for SARS-CoV-2 was done for all participants with any symptoms. The primary efficacy objective evaluated Ad5-nCoV in preventing symptomatic, PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infection occurring at least 28 days after vaccination in all participants who were at least 28 days postvaccination on Jan 15, 2021. The primary safety objective evaluated the incidence of any serious adverse events or medically attended adverse events postvaccination in all participants who received a study injection. This trial is closed for enrolment and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04526990). FINDINGS: Study enrolment began on Sept 22, 2020, in Pakistan, Nov 6, 2020, in Mexico, Dec 2, 2020, in Russia and Chile, and Dec 17, 2020, in Argentina; 150 endpoint cases were reached on Jan 15, 2021, triggering the final primary efficacy analysis. One dose of Ad5-nCoV showed a 57·5% (95% CI 39·7-70·0, p=0·0026) efficacy against symptomatic, PCR-confirmed, COVID-19 infection at 28 days or more postvaccination (21 250 participants; 45 days median duration of follow-up [IQR 36-58]). In the primary safety analysis undertaken at the time of the efficacy analysis (36 717 participants), there was no significant difference in the incidence of serious adverse events (14 [0·1%] of 18 363 Ad5-nCoV recipients and 10 [0·1%] of 18 354 placebo recipients, p=0·54) or medically attended adverse events (442 [2·4%] of 18 363 Ad5-nCoV recipients and 411 [2·2%] of 18 354 placebo recipients, p=0·30) between the Ad5-nCoV or placebo groups, or any serious adverse events considered related to the study product (none in both Ad5-nCoV and placebo recipients). In the extended safety cohort, 1004 (63·5%) of 1582 of Ad5-nCoV recipients and 729 (46·4%) of 1572 placebo recipients reported a solicited systemic adverse event (p<0·0001), of which headache was the most common (699 [44%] of Ad5-nCoV recipients and 481 [30·6%] of placebo recipients; p<0·0001). 971 (61·3%) of 1584 Ad5-nCoV recipients and 314 (20·0%) of 1573 placebo recipients reported an injection-site adverse event (p<0·0001), of which pain at the injection site was the most frequent; reported by 939 (59%) Ad5-nCoV recipients and 303 (19%) placebo recipients. INTERPRETATION: One dose of Ad5-nCoV is efficacious and safe in healthy adults aged 18 years and older. FUNDING: CanSino Biologics and the Beijing Institute of Biotechnology.

Pre-existing Autoantibodies Neutralizing High Concentrations of Type I Interferons in Almost 10% of COVID-19 Patients Admitted to Intensive Care in Barcelona.

BACKGROUND: It is important to predict which patients infected by SARS-CoV-2 are at higher risk of life-threatening COVID-19. Several studies suggest that neutralizing auto-antibodies (auto-Abs) against type I interferons (IFNs) are predictive of critical COVID-19 pneumonia. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to test for auto-Abs to type I IFN and describe the main characteristics of COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care depending on whether or not these auto-Abs are present. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all COVID-19 patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) in whom samples were available, from March 2020 to March 2021, in Barcelona, Spain. RESULTS: A total of 275 (70.5%) out of 390 patients admitted to ICU were tested for type I IFNs auto-antibodies (α2 and/or ω) by ELISA, being positive in 49 (17.8%) of them. Blocking activity of plasma diluted 1/10 for high concentrations (10 ng/mL) of IFNs was proven in 26 (9.5%) patients. Almost all the patients with neutralizing auto-Abs were men (92.3%). ICU patients with positive results for neutralizing IFNs auto-Abs did not show relevant differences in demographic, comorbidities, clinical features, and mortality, when compared with those with negative results. Nevertheless, some laboratory tests (leukocytosis, neutrophilia, thrombocytosis) related with COVID-19 severity, as well as acute kidney injury (17 [65.4%] vs. 100 [40.2%]; p = 0.013) were significantly higher in patients with auto-Abs. CONCLUSION: Auto-Abs neutralizing high concentrations of type I IFNs were found in 9.5% of patients admitted to the ICU for COVID-19 pneumonia in a hospital in Barcelona. These auto-Abs should be tested early upon diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, as they account for a significant proportion of life-threatening cases.

Knowledge and perceptions about Covid-19 in the marginalized population of southeastern Mexico.

Not available.

Willingness to Be Vaccinated against COVID-19 in Spain before the Start of Vaccination: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Vaccine hesitancy has increased in the past few years, influenced by the socio-cultural differences, political populism, or concerns related to the effectiveness and safety of some vaccines, resulting a feeling of distrust. This feeling can become a barrier against the achievement of the immunity necessary to stop the expansion of COVID-19. The aim of this study was to evaluate the acceptance of the vaccine against COVID-19 in Spain, as well as to identify the factors that have an influence on the concerns and attitudes of people against accepting the vaccine in the months prior to the start of vaccination on December 2020. An online questionnaire was created to obtain information about (1) sociodemographic characteristics; (2) concerns and sources of information about vaccines; and (3) attitudes about vaccination and state of health. A multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the influencing factors. Of the 2501 participants, 1207 (48.3%) would accept the COVID-19 vaccine, 623 (24.9%) were hesitant, and 671 (26.8%) would reject it. The logistic regression showed that being male, older than 60, married, retired, with a high level of education, or with a leftist political inclination, could increase the probability of accepting the COVID-19 vaccine. Disinformation and the lack of political consensus were the main sources of distrust. The patients with hypertension, immunodepression, hypercholesterolemia, or respiratory disease, or were overweight, showed a greater acceptance to the vaccine, while those with cancer took the longest to accept it. A low acceptance of the vaccine against COVID-19 was observed among the Spanish population in the phase prior to its availability, and the main fears of the population were identified. It is necessary to offer correct and transparent information about these vaccines to reduce the concerns and increase the trust of the population, to thereby guarantee the success of the vaccination campaigns.

Social Media Perceptions of Surgical Cancer Care in the Era of COVID-19: A Global Cross-Sectional Study.

PURPOSE: The rapid dissemination of information through social media renders a profound lens to evaluate perceptions of emerging topics, especially in the context of a global pandemic. The primary objective of this cross-sectional study was to elucidate trends on social media in the setting of surgical cancer care affected by the COVID-19 pandemic across the globe. METHODS: A public search of Twitter from April 1 to 30, 2020, was conducted, which yielded 996 posts related to COVID-19 and cancer. Two authors (E.J.K. and H.S.) individually reviewed all posts and recorded the post category, engagement, author category, and geographic location. Data were then analyzed through descriptive analyses. Only English-language posts were included, and any noncancer- or non-COVID-related posts were excluded from the analysis. RESULTS: A total of 734 unique authors from 26 different countries wrote 996 relevant posts that averaged 12.0 likes, 4.7 retweets, and 0.5 hashtags per post. Only 2.3% (23 of 996) of posts included a video. Authors of the included tweets most frequently were friends and families of patients (183; 18.4%), academic institutions or organizations (182; 18.3%), and physicians (138; 13.9%). Topics of importance were cancellations of surgeries (299; 40.1%), COVID-19 education (211; 121.2%), and research studies (93; 9.3%). The United Kingdom and the United States made up 81.5% of the cohort, followed by Canada (6.6%) and India (2.4%). Of posts where a specific type of surgery was identified (196), the most common type mentioned was breast cancer (50; 25.5%), followed by lung cancer (37; 18.9%) and urologic cancer (22; 11.2%). CONCLUSION: This analysis provides insight into the resulting impacts of COVID-19 on the global discussion of surgical cancer care.

Exploring the Impact of COVID-19 on Progress Towards Achieving Global Surgery Goals.

INTRODUCTION: In the 5 months since it began, the COVID-19 pandemic has placed extraordinary demands on health systems around the world including surgery. Competing health objectives and resource redeployment threaten to retard the scale-up of surgical services in low- and middle-income countries where access to safe, affordable and timely care is low. The key aspiration of the Lancet Commission on global surgery was promotion of resilience in surgical systems. The current pandemic provides an opportunity to stress-test those systems and identify fault-lines that may not be easily apparent outside of times of crisis. METHODS: We endeavoured to explore vulnerable points in surgical systems learning from the experience of past outbreaks, using examples from the current pandemic, and make recommendations for future health emergencies. The 6-component framework for surgical systems planning was used to categorise the effects of COVID-19 on surgical systems, with a particular focus on low- and middle-income countries. Key vulnerabilities were identified and recommendations were made for the current pandemic and for the future. RESULTS: Multiple stress points were identified throughout all of the 6 components of surgical systems. The impact is expected to be highest in the workforce, service delivery and infrastructure domains. Innovative new technologies should be employed to allow consistent, high-quality surgical care to continue even in times of crisis. CONCLUSIONS: If robust progress towards global surgery goals for 2030 is to continue, the stress points identified should be reinforced. An ongoing process of reappraisal and fortification will keep surgical systems in low- and middle-income countries responsive to "old threats and new challenges". Multiple opportunities exist to help realise the dream of surgical systems resilient to external shocks.

The challenges facing indigenous communities in Latin America as they confront the COVID-19 pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) pandemic struck Latin America in late February and is now beginning to spread across the rural indigenous communities in the region, home to 42 million people. Eighty percent of this highly marginalized population is concentrated in Bolivia, Guatemala, Mexico and Peru. Health care services for these ethnic groups face distinct challenges in view of their high levels of marginalization and cultural differences from the majority. Drawing on 30 years of work on the responses of health systems in the indigenous communities of Latin America, our group of researchers believes that countries in the region must be prepared to combat the epidemic in indigenous settings marked by deprivation and social disparity. We discuss four main challenges that need to be addressed by governments to guarantee the health and lives of those at the bottom of the social structure: the indigenous peoples in the region. More than an analysis, our work provides a practical guide for designing and implementing a response to COVID-19 in indigenous communities.