Impact of face masks during the treadmill exercise tests. / Impacto del uso de la mascarilla durante la realización de la prueba de esfuerzo en tapiz rodante.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: There is little literature on the use of face masks in a treadmill test (TMT) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of this study is to analyze the impact of face masks during a TMT performed during the prepandemic (without face mask) and postpandemic (with face mask) era. METHODS: Retrospective observational unicentric study of patients undergoing TMT. The inclusion criterion were being over 16years old and having performed at least one TMT in the prepandemic and postpandemic period. RESULTS: One thousand six hundred fifty-five patients were included in the study. Nine hundred thirty-five (56.5%) were men and 720 (43.5%) women. The mean age was 57.3±14.9 and the mean follow-up time was 15.4 months. Fifty-three percent patients had arterial hypertension, 20% dyslipidemia, 12% diabetes mellitus, 8% smoking habit, 19% personal history of ischemic heart disease, 5% COPD, 8% bronchial asthma, and 8% atrial fibrillation. In almost all the variables studied in PE, including the appearance of ventricular arrhythmias, no significant differences were found, neither by age nor sex, except for the existence of a very slight decrease in exercise capacity with mask use in older patients (>65years). CONCLUSIONS: The use of surgical or FFP2 face masks during the TMT did not affect functional capacity, blood pressure, heart rate, or increased ventricular arrhythmias.

Impact of face masks during the treadmill exercise tests

Introduction and objective There is little literature on the use of face masks in a treadmill test (TMT) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of this study is to analyse the impact of face masks during a TMT performed during the pre-pandemic (without face mask) and post-pandemic (with face mask) era. Methods Retrospective observational unicentric study of patients undergoing TMT. The inclusion criterion were being over 16 years old and having performed at least one TMT in the pre-pandemic and post-pandemic period. Results One thousand six hundred fifty-five patients were included in the study. 935 (56.5%) were men and 720 (43.5%) women. The mean age was 57.3 ± 14.9 and the mean follow-up time was 15.4 months. 53% patients had arterial hypertension, 20% dyslipidemia, 12% diabetes mellitus, 8% smoking habit, 19% personal history of ischemic heart disease, 5% COPD, 8% bronchial asthma, and 8% atrial fibrillation. In almost all the variables studied in PE, including the appearance of ventricular arrhythmias, no significant differences were found, neither by age nor sex, except for the existence of a very slight decrease in exercise capacity with mask use in older patients (>65 years). Conclusions The use of surgical or FFP2 face masks during the TMT did not affect functional capacity, blood pressure, heart rate, or increased ventricular arrhythmias. Resumen Introducción y objetivos Existe poca literatura sobre el uso de la mascarilla en la realización de una prueba de esfuerzo (PE) durante la pandemia de COVID-19.El objetivo de este estudio es analizar el impacto del uso de la mascarilla durante la realización de una PE en un grupo de pacientes que han realizado al menos una PE con y sin mascarilla. Metodos Estudio observacional retrospectivo unicéntrico de pacientes sometidos a una PE con tapiz rodante. El criterio de inclusión fue tener más de 16 años y haber realizado al menos una PE en época prepandemia (sin mascarilla) y postpandemia (con mascarilla). Resultados Un total de 1655 pacientes fueron incluidos en el estudio. 935 (56.5%) eran varones y 720 (43.5%) mujeres. La edad media fue de 57.3 ± 14.9 y el tiempo medio de seguimiento fue de 15,4 meses. 53% pacientes presentaron antecedentes personales de hipertensión arterial, 20% dislipemia, 12% diabetes mellitus, 8% hábito tabáquico, 19% cardiopatía isquémica, 5% EPOC, 8% asma bronquial y 8% fibrilación auricular. En la casi totalidad de las variables estudiadas en la PE, incluida la aparición de arritmias ventriculares, no se evidenciaron diferencias significativas, ni por edad ni sexo, salvo la existencia de una muy leve disminución en la capacidad de ejercicio con el uso de mascarilla en los pacientes de mayor edad (>65 años). Conclusiones El uso de mascarillas quirúrgicas o FFP2 durante la PE no afectó a la capacidad funcional, la tensión arterial, la frecuencia cardiaca ni incrementó las arritmias ventriculares.

COVID Vaccine Information Sources Utilized by Female Healthcare Workers.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of the messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccines excluded individuals with active reproductive needs (attempting to conceive, currently pregnant, and/or lactating). Women comprise three-quarters of healthcare workers in the United States-an occupational field among the first to receive the vaccine. Professional medical and government organizations have encouraged shared decision-making and access to vaccination among those with active reproductive needs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterize the information sources used by pregnancy-capable healthcare workers for information about the COVID-19 vaccines and to compare the self-reported "most important" source by the respondents' active reproductive needs, if any. STUDY DESIGN: This was a web-based national survey of female, US-based healthcare workers in January 2021. Recruitment was done using social media and subsequent sharing via word of mouth. We classified the respondents into 6 groups on the basis of self-reported reproductive needs as follows: (1) preventing pregnancy, (2) attempting pregnancy, (3) currently pregnant, (4) lactating, (5) attempting pregnancy and lactating, and (6) currently pregnant and lactating. We provided respondents with a list of information sources (friends, family, obstetrician-gynecologists, pediatrician, news, social media, government organizations, their employer, and "other") and asked respondents which source(s) they used when looking for information about the vaccine and their most important source. We used descriptive statistics to characterize the information sources and compared the endorsement of government organizations and obstetrician-gynecologists, which were the most important information source between reproductive groups, using the chi-square test. The effect size was calculated using Cramér V. RESULTS: Our survey had 11,405 unique respondents: 5846 (51.3%) were preventing pregnancy, 955 (8.4%) were attempting pregnancy, 2196 (19.3%) were currently pregnant, 2250 (19.7%) were lactating, 67 (0.6%) were attempting pregnancy and lactating, and 91 (0.8%) were currently pregnant and lactating. The most endorsed information sources were government organizations (88.7%), employers (48.5%), obstetrician-gynecologists (44.9%), and social media (39.6%). Considering the most important information source, the distribution of respondents endorsing government organizations was different between reproductive groups (P<.001); it was most common among respondents preventing pregnancy (62.6%) and least common among those currently pregnant (31.5%). We observed an inverse pattern among the respondents endorsing an obstetrician-gynecologist as the most important source; the source was most common among currently pregnant respondents (51.4%) and least common among those preventing pregnancy (5.8%), P<.001. The differences in the endorsement of social media as an information source between groups were significant but had a small effect size. CONCLUSION: Healthcare workers use government and professional medical organizations for information. Respondents attempting pregnancy and those pregnant and/or lactating are more likely to use social media and an obstetrician-gynecologist as information sources for vaccine decision-making. These data can inform public health messaging and counseling for clinicians.

Characterizing initial COVID-19 vaccine attitudes among pregnancy-capable healthcare workers.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers were prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination roll-out because of the high occupational risk. Vaccine trials excluded individuals who were trying to conceive and those who are pregnant and lactating, necessitating vaccine decision-making in the absence of data specific to this population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the initial attitudes about COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy-capable healthcare workers by reproductive status and occupational exposure. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a structured survey distributed via social media of US-based healthcare workers involved in patient care since March 2020 who were pregnancy-capable (biologic female sex without history of sterilization or hysterectomy) from January 8, 2021 to January 31, 2021. Participants were asked about their desire to receive the COVID-19 vaccine and their perceived safety of the COVID-19 vaccine using 5-point Likert items with 1 corresponding to "I strongly don't want the vaccine" or "very unsafe for me" and 5 corresponding to "I strongly want the vaccine" or "very safe for me." We categorized participants into the following 2 groups: (1) reproductive intent (preventing pregnancy vs attempting pregnancy, currently pregnant, or currently lactating), and (2) perceived COVID-19 occupational risk (high vs low). We used descriptive statistics to characterize the respondents and their attitudes about the vaccine. Comparisons between reproductive and COVID-19 risk groups were conducted using Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Our survey included 11,405 pregnancy-capable healthcare workers: 51.3% were preventing pregnancy (n=5846) and 48.7% (n=5559) were attempting pregnancy, currently pregnant, and/or lactating. Most respondents (n=8394, 73.6%) had received a vaccine dose at the time of survey completion. Most participants strongly desired vaccination (75.3%) and very few were strongly averse (1.5%). Although the distribution of responses was significantly different between respondents preventing pregnancy and those attempting conception or were pregnant and/or lactating and also between respondents with a high occupational risk and those with a lower occupational risk of COVID-19, the effect sizes were small and the distribution was the same for each group (median, 5; interquartile range, 4-5). CONCLUSION: Most of the healthcare workers desired vaccination. Negative feelings toward vaccination were uncommon but were significantly higher among those attempting pregnancy and those who are pregnant and lactating and also among those with a lower perceived occupational risk of contracting COVID-19, although the effect size was small. Understanding healthcare workers' attitudes toward vaccination may help guide interventions to improve vaccine education and uptake in the general population.

Age-Dependent Serotype-Associated Case-Fatality Rate in Invasive Pneumococcal Disease in the Autonomous Community of Madrid between 2007 and 2020.

The aim of this study was to investigate the serotype-associated fatality rate in cases of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) in the Spanish region of Madrid between 2007 and 2020. Serotyping was performed by Pneumotest Latex and the Quellung reaction using commercial antisera. Case-fatality rate was estimated as the ratio between the number of deaths at hospital discharge and the number of cases attributable to each serotype. To evaluate the association measures, the odds ratios with a 95% confidence interval were calculated. Twenty five pneumococcal serotypes were associated to mortality and comprised 87.8% of the total number of isolates characterized. Serotypes 8, 3, 19A, 1, 7F, 22F, 12F, and 11A were the most prevalent (≥3% each). Serotypes 31, 11A, and 19F were significantly associated to high case-fatality rates (>20% each). The lower significantly associated case-fatality rate (<10% each) was found in serotypes 5, 1, 12B, 7F, 12F, 8, 33, and 10A. The serotypes with higher mortality levels (≥0.04 per 100,000 population) were 11A (fatality 24.0%), 3 (fatality 18.7%), 19A (fatality 12.5%), and 8 (fatality 7.2%). Serotype 3 was worrisome because it is associated with important fatality levels combined with very high incidence and mortality rates. Serotype 11A also showed a high fatality with marked incidence and mortality levels. Some few frequent serotypes as 31, 19F, and 15A despite its high fatality had low levels of mortality. By contrast other serotypes as 8 showing low fatality had high mortality ranges because it shows a wide extended distribution. Finally, common serotypes, such as 1 and 5, presented small mortality length, due to their low case-fatality rates.

Comorbidity-adjusted NEWS predicts mortality in suspected patients with COVID-19 from nursing homes: Multicentre retrospective cohort study.

AIMS: To assess the prognostic accuracy of comorbidity-adjusted National Early Warning Score in suspected Coronavirus disease 2019 patients transferred from nursing homes by the Emergency Department. DESIGN: Multicentre retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Patients transferred by high-priority ambulances from nursing homes to Emergency Departments with suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, from March 12 to July 31 2020, were considered. Included variables were: clinical covariates (respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, temperature, level of consciousness and supplemental oxygen use), the presence of comorbidities and confirmatory analytical diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. The primary outcome was a 2-day mortality rate. The discriminatory capability of the National Early Warning Score was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in two different cohorts, the validation and the revalidation, which were randomly selected from the main cohort. RESULTS: A total of 337 nursing homes, 10 advanced life support units, 51 basic life support units and 8 hospitals in Spain entailing 1,324 patients (median age 87 years) was involved in this study. Two-day mortality was 11.5% (152 cases), with a positivity rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 of 51.2%, 77.7% of hospitalization from whom 1% was of intensive care unit admission. The National Early Warning Score results for the revalidation cohort presented an AUC of 0.771, and of 0.885, 0.778 and 0.730 for the low-, medium- and high-level groups of comorbidities. CONCLUSION: The comorbidity-adjusted National Early Warning Score provides a good short-term prognostic criterion, information that can help in the decision-making process to guide the best strategy for each older adult, under the current pandemic. IMPACT: What problem did the study address? Under the current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, targeting older adults at high risk of deterioration in nursing homes remains challenging. What were the main findings? Comorbidity-adjusted National Early Warning Score helps to forecast the risk of clinical deterioration more accurately. Where and on whom will the research have impact? A high NEWS, with a low level of comorbidity is associated with optimal predictive performance, making these older adults likely to benefit from continued follow up and potentially hospital referral under the current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Modelo de riesgo de mortalidad en pacientes con sospecha de enfermedad por COVID-19 basado en información del centro coordinador de urgencias

Objective. To develop and validate a scale to stratify risk of 2-day mortality based on data collected during calls to an emergency dispatch center from patients with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods. Retrospective multicenter study of consecutive patients over the age of 18 years with suspected COVID-19 who were transported from home over the course of 3 months after telephone interviews with dispatchers. We analyzed clinical and epidemiologic variables and comorbidities in relation to death within 2 days of the call. Using data from the development cohort, we built a risk model by means of logistic regression analysis of categorical variables that were independently associated with 2-day mortality. The scale was validated first in a validation cohort in the same province and then in a cohort in a different province. Results. A total of 2320 patients were included. The mean age was 79 years, and 49.8% were women. The overall 2-day mortality rate was 22.6% (376 deaths of patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection). The model included the following factors: age, location (rural location as a protective factor), institutionalization, desaturation, lung sounds (rhonchi), and altered mental status. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for death within 2 days was 0.763 (95% CI, 0.725-0.802;P < .001). Mortality in patients at high risk (more than 2.4 points on the scale) was 60%. Conclusions. This risk scale derived from information available to an emergency dispatch center is applicable to patients with suspected COVID-19. It can stratify patients by risk of early death (within 2 days), possibly helping with decision making regarding whether to transport from home or what means of transport to use, and destination. Objetivo. Derivar y validar una escala basada en variables recogidas durante la llamada a un centro coordinador de urgencias (CCU) que permita estratificar el riesgo de mortalidad a 2 días en pacientes con sospecha de enfermedad por COVID-19. Método. Estudio multicéntrico retrospectivo que incluyó a los pacientes consecutivos ≥ 18 años durante 3 meses, catalogados como caso sospechoso de COVID-19 después de la entrevista telefónica del CCU y que precisaron evacuación. Se analizaron variables clínico-epidemiológicas, comorbilidades y resultado de muerte a los 2 días. Se derivó una escala con las variables categóricas asociadas de forma independiente con la mortalidad a 2 días mediante regresión logística, en la cohorte de derivación. La escala se validó mediante una cohorte de validación y otra de revalidación obtenida en una provincia distinta. Resultados. Se incluyeron 2.320 pacientes (edad mediana 79 años, 49,8% mujeres). La mortalidad global fue del 22,6% (376 casos en pacientes con SARS-CoV-2). El modelo incluyó edad, localización (zona rural como variable protectora), institucionalización, desaturación, roncus, taquipnea y alteración del nivel de conciencia. El área bajo la curva (ABC) para la mortalidad a 2 días fue de 0,763 (IC 95%: 0,725-0,802;p < 0,001). La mortalidad en los pacientes de alto riesgo (> 2,4 puntos) fue del 60%. Conclusiones. La escala, derivada a través de información obtenida con datos del CCU, es aplicable a pacientes con sospecha de infección por COVID-19, estratifica el riesgo de mortalidad precoz (menos de 2 días) y puede ser una herramienta que ayude en la toma de decisiones, referidas a su evacuación, destino o vector de transporte.

Early Warning Scores in Patients with Suspected COVID-19 Infection in Emergency Departments.

Early warning scores (EWSs) help prevent and recognize and thereby act as the first signs of clinical and physiological deterioration. The objective of this study is to evaluate different EWSs (National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2), quick sequential organ failure assessment score (qSOFA), Modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (MREMS) and Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS)) to predict mortality within the first 48 h in patients suspected to have Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted a retrospective observational study in patients over 18 years of age who were treated by the advanced life support units and transferred to the emergency departments between March and July of 2020. Each patient was followed for two days registering their final diagnosis and mortality data. A total of 663 patients were included in our study. Early mortality within the first 48 h affected 53 patients (8.3%). The scale with the best capacity to predict early mortality was the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2), with an area under the curve of 0.825 (95% CI: 0.75-0.89). The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive patients presented an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.804 (95% CI: 0.71-0.89), and the negative ones with an AUC of 0.863 (95% CI: 0.76-0.95). Among the EWSs, NEWS2 presented the best predictive power, even when it was separately applied to patients who tested positive and negative for SARS-CoV-2.

Risk of acute deterioration and care complexity individual factors associated with health outcomes in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: a multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence about the impact of systematic nursing surveillance on risk of acute deterioration of patients with COVID-19 and the effects of care complexity factors on inpatient outcomes is scarce. The aim of this study was to determine the association between acute deterioration risk, care complexity factors and unfavourable outcomes in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A multicentre cohort study was conducted from 1 to 31 March 2020 at seven hospitals in Catalonia. All adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to hospitals and with a complete minimum data set were recruited retrospectively. Patients were classified based on the presence or absence of a composite unfavourable outcome (in-hospital mortality and adverse events). The main measures included risk of acute deterioration (as measured using the VIDA early warning system) and care complexity factors. All data were obtained blinded from electronic health records. Multivariate logistic analysis was performed to identify the VIDA score and complexity factors associated with unfavourable outcomes. RESULTS: Out of a total of 1176 patients with COVID-19, 506 (43%) experienced an unfavourable outcome during hospitalisation. The frequency of unfavourable outcomes rose with increasing risk of acute deterioration as measured by the VIDA score. Risk factors independently associated with unfavourable outcomes were chronic underlying disease (OR: 1.90, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.72; p<0.001), mental status impairment (OR: 2.31, 95% CI 1.45 to 23.66; p<0.001), length of hospital stay (OR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.21; p<0.001) and high risk of acute deterioration (OR: 4.32, 95% CI 2.83 to 6.60; p<0.001). High-tech hospital admission was a protective factor against unfavourable outcomes (OR: 0.57, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.89; p=0.01). CONCLUSION: The systematic nursing surveillance of the status and evolution of COVID-19 inpatients, including the careful monitoring of acute deterioration risk and care complexity factors, may help reduce deleterious health outcomes in COVID-19 inpatients.