Is precision medicine the future of surgical site infection prevention?

James Price, Senior Lecturer and Honorary Consultant in Infection, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, UK Broad infection prevention and control (IPC) measures are routinely employed to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs),1 including screening for (and subsequent suppression of) key pathogens and surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis. Prediction There is growing literature on the application of mathematical modelling to routinely collected healthcare data in order to accurately predict an individual's: (i) risk of carrying or acquiring key pathogens;(ii) future need for surgery;and (iii) likelihood of developing a healthcare associated infection. [...]with large proportions of the population yet to receive routine vaccinations, incorporation of assessment and vaccine delivery within secondary care pathways has the potential to support post-discharge outcomes and to optimise preparation of future hospital admissions and procedures.

SARS-CoV-2 surface and air contamination in an acute healthcare setting during the first and second pandemic waves.

BACKGROUND: Surfaces and air in healthcare facilities can be contaminated with SARS-CoV-2. In a previous study, we identified SARS-CoV-2 RNA on surfaces and air in our hospital during the 'first wave' of the COVID-19 pandemic (April 2020). AIM: To explore whether the profile of SARS-CoV-2 surface and air contamination had changed between April 2020 and January 2021. METHODS: A prospective, cross-sectional, observational study in a multisite London hospital. In January 2021, surface and air samples were collected from comparable areas to those sampled in April 2020 comprising six clinical areas and a public area. SARS-CoV-2 was detected using RT-PCR and viral culture. Sampling was additionally undertaken in two wards with only natural ventilation. The ability of the prevalent variants at the time of the study to survive on dry surfaces was evaluated. FINDINGS: No viable virus was recovered from surfaces or air. 5% (14) of 270 surfaces and 4% (1) of 27 air samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2, which was significantly lower than in April 2020 (52% (114) of 218 of surfaces and 48% (13) of 27 air samples (p<0.001, Fisher's Exact Test)). There was no clear difference in the proportion of surfaces and air samples positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA based on the type of ventilation in the ward. All variants tested survived on dry surfaces for at least 72 hours with a <3-log10 reduction in viable count. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that enhanced infection prevention measures have reduced the burden of SARS-CoV-2 RNA on surfaces and air in healthcare.

Effectiveness of rapid SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing in supporting infection control for hospital-onset COVID-19 infection: Multicentre, prospective study.

Background: Viral sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 has been used for outbreak investigation, but there is limited evidence supporting routine use for infection prevention and control (IPC) within hospital settings. Methods: We conducted a prospective non-randomised trial of sequencing at 14 acute UK hospital trusts. Sites each had a 4-week baseline data collection period, followed by intervention periods comprising 8 weeks of 'rapid' (<48 hr) and 4 weeks of 'longer-turnaround' (5-10 days) sequencing using a sequence reporting tool (SRT). Data were collected on all hospital-onset COVID-19 infections (HOCIs; detected ≥48 hr from admission). The impact of the sequencing intervention on IPC knowledge and actions, and on the incidence of probable/definite hospital-acquired infections (HAIs), was evaluated. Results: A total of 2170 HOCI cases were recorded from October 2020 to April 2021, corresponding to a period of extreme strain on the health service, with sequence reports returned for 650/1320 (49.2%) during intervention phases. We did not detect a statistically significant change in weekly incidence of HAIs in longer-turnaround (incidence rate ratio 1.60, 95% CI 0.85-3.01; p=0.14) or rapid (0.85, 0.48-1.50; p=0.54) intervention phases compared to baseline phase. However, IPC practice was changed in 7.8 and 7.4% of all HOCI cases in rapid and longer-turnaround phases, respectively, and 17.2 and 11.6% of cases where the report was returned. In a 'per-protocol' sensitivity analysis, there was an impact on IPC actions in 20.7% of HOCI cases when the SRT report was returned within 5 days. Capacity to respond effectively to insights from sequencing was breached in most sites by the volume of cases and limited resources. Conclusions: While we did not demonstrate a direct impact of sequencing on the incidence of nosocomial transmission, our results suggest that sequencing can inform IPC response to HOCIs, particularly when returned within 5 days. Funding: COG-UK is supported by funding from the Medical Research Council (MRC) part of UK Research & Innovation (UKRI), the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) (grant code: MC_PC_19027), and Genome Research Limited, operating as the Wellcome Sanger Institute. Clinical trial number: NCT04405934.

Changing Patterns of Bloodstream Infections in the Community and Acute Care Across 2 Coronavirus Disease 2019 Epidemic Waves: A Retrospective Analysis Using Data Linkage.

BACKGROUND: We examined community- and hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (BSIs) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and non-COVID-19 patients across 2 epidemic waves. METHODS: We analyzed blood cultures of patients presenting to a London hospital group between January 2020 and February 2021. We reported BSI incidence, changes in sampling, case mix, healthcare capacity, and COVID-19 variants. RESULTS: We identified 1047 BSIs from 34 044 blood cultures, including 653 (62.4%) community-acquired and 394 (37.6%) hospital-acquired. Important pattern changes were seen. Community-acquired Escherichia coli BSIs remained below prepandemic level during COVID-19 waves, but peaked following lockdown easing in May 2020, deviating from the historical trend of peaking in August. The hospital-acquired BSI rate was 100.4 per 100 000 patient-days across the pandemic, increasing to 132.3 during the first wave and 190.9 during the second, with significant increase in elective inpatients. Patients with a hospital-acquired BSI, including those without COVID-19, experienced 20.2 excess days of hospital stay and 26.7% higher mortality, higher than reported in prepandemic literature. In intensive care, the BSI rate was 421.0 per 100 000 intensive care unit patient-days during the second wave, compared to 101.3 pre-COVID-19. The BSI incidence in those infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 Alpha variant was similar to that seen with earlier variants. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic have impacted the patterns of community- and hospital-acquired BSIs, in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. Factors driving the patterns are complex. Infection surveillance needs to consider key aspects of pandemic response and changes in healthcare practice.

Protocol for the COG-UK hospital-onset COVID-19 infection (HOCI) multicentre interventional clinical study: evaluating the efficacy of rapid genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 in limiting the spread of COVID-19 in UK NHS hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: Nosocomial transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has been a significant cause of mortality in National Health Service (NHS) hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. The COG-UK Consortium Hospital-Onset COVID-19 Infections (COG-UK HOCI) study aims to evaluate whether the use of rapid whole-genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2, supported by a novel probabilistic reporting methodology, can inform infection prevention and control (IPC) practice within NHS hospital settings. DESIGN: Multicentre, prospective, interventional, superiority study. SETTING: 14 participating NHS hospitals over winter-spring 2020/2021 in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients must be admitted to hospital with first-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive test result >48 hour from time of admission, where COVID-19 diagnosis not suspected on admission. The projected sample size is 2380 patients. INTERVENTION: The intervention is the return of a sequence report, within 48 hours in one phase (rapid local lab processing) and within 5-10 days in a second phase (mimicking central lab), comparing the viral genome from an eligible study participant with others within and outside the hospital site. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes are incidence of Public Health England (PHE)/IPC-defined SARS-CoV-2 hospital-acquired infection during the baseline and two interventional phases, and proportion of hospital-onset cases with genomic evidence of transmission linkage following implementation of the intervention where such linkage was not suspected by initial IPC investigation. Secondary outcomes include incidence of hospital outbreaks, with and without sequencing data; actual and desirable changes to IPC actions; periods of healthcare worker (HCW) absence. Health economic analysis will be conducted to determine cost benefit of the intervention. A process evaluation using qualitative interviews with HCWs will be conducted alongside the study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN50212645. Pre-results stage. This manuscript is based on protocol V.6.0. 2 September 2021.

Prediction of hospital-onset COVID-19 infections using dynamic networks of patient contact: an international retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Real-time prediction is key to prevention and control of infections associated with health-care settings. Contacts enable spread of many infections, yet most risk prediction frameworks fail to account for their dynamics. We developed, tested, and internationally validated a real-time machine-learning framework, incorporating dynamic patient-contact networks to predict hospital-onset COVID-19 infections (HOCIs) at the individual level. METHODS: We report an international retrospective cohort study of our framework, which extracted patient-contact networks from routine hospital data and combined network-derived variables with clinical and contextual information to predict individual infection risk. We trained and tested the framework on HOCIs using the data from 51 157 hospital inpatients admitted to a UK National Health Service hospital group (Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust) between April 1, 2020, and April 1, 2021, intersecting the first two COVID-19 surges. We validated the framework using data from a Swiss hospital group (Department of Rehabilitation, Geneva University Hospitals) during a COVID-19 surge (from March 1 to May 31, 2020; 40 057 inpatients) and from the same UK group after COVID-19 surges (from April 2 to Aug 13, 2021; 43 375 inpatients). All inpatients with a bed allocation during the study periods were included in the computation of network-derived and contextual variables. In predicting patient-level HOCI risk, only inpatients spending 3 or more days in hospital during the study period were examined for HOCI acquisition risk. FINDINGS: The framework was highly predictive across test data with all variable types (area under the curve [AUC]-receiver operating characteristic curve [ROC] 0·89 [95% CI 0·88-0·90]) and similarly predictive using only contact-network variables (0·88 [0·86-0·90]). Prediction was reduced when using only hospital contextual (AUC-ROC 0·82 [95% CI 0·80-0·84]) or patient clinical (0·64 [0·62-0·66]) variables. A model with only three variables (ie, network closeness, direct contacts with infectious patients [network derived], and hospital COVID-19 prevalence [hospital contextual]) achieved AUC-ROC 0·85 (95% CI 0·82-0·88). Incorporating contact-network variables improved performance across both validation datasets (AUC-ROC in the Geneva dataset increased from 0·84 [95% CI 0·82-0·86] to 0·88 [0·86-0·90]; AUC-ROC in the UK post-surge dataset increased from 0·49 [0·46-0·52] to 0·68 [0·64-0·70]). INTERPRETATION: Dynamic contact networks are robust predictors of individual patient risk of HOCIs. Their integration in clinical care could enhance individualised infection prevention and early diagnosis of COVID-19 and other nosocomial infections. FUNDING: Medical Research Foundation, WHO, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Swiss National Science Foundation, and German Research Foundation.

The effectiveness of automated digital health solutions at successfully managing obesity and obesity-associated disorders: A PICO-structured investigation.

Most adults in the UK and USA are classified as overweight or obese. Recent studies suggest that the prevalence of obesity has further increased during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and associated lockdowns. Digital technologies may be effective at managing obesity and related comorbidities, a potential further justified by social isolation and distancing circumstances. This review of published literature employed a Patient-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome structured approach on the use of digital solutions to determine the effectiveness of their use in the management and treatment of obesity, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes and included commercially available, automated devices and applications that did not require intervention from a clinician. Our search covered studies published between January 2004 and February 2019, and 18 papers were included in the final analysis. The digital solutions reviewed were smartphone applications, wearable activity trackers, and 'digital medicine offerings' (DMO), including ingestible sensors and wearable patches. This study found that not all interventions were effective at encouraging the lifestyle changes required for the management of obesity. Smartphone applications requiring interaction from the patient appeared to be more effective at encouraging engagement with treatment interventions than more passive wearable activity trackers. Automated feedback from smartphone applications was effective at managing type 2 diabetes, while DMO were effective at reducing blood pressure. With the advancement of new technologies alongside a rapid increase in the prevalence of obesity and associated disorders, further studies comparing the various technologies available in larger sample populations for longer periods would help determine the most cost-effective preventive and therapeutic strategies.

COVID-19 pandemic and weight gain in American adults: A nationwide population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the lives of people in many ways. However, little is known about weight gain in American adults during the pandemic. AIMS AND METHODS: The purpose of this study was to conduct a national assessment of weight gain in adult Americans after the first year of the pandemic. An online questionnaire was employed to explore perceptions of adults regarding pandemic weight gain and the relationship between weight gain and sociodemographic characteristics, pre-pandemic weight status, and psychological distress. Multiple methods were used to assess the psychometric properties of the questionnaire (i.e., face validity, content validity, and internal consistency reliability testing). Chi-Square tests and logistic regression analysis were used to assess group differences and predictors of weight gain in the study participants. RESULTS: A total of 3,473 individuals participated in the study with weight changes distributed as: gained weight (48%), remained the same weight (34%), or lost weight (18%). Those who reported being very overweight before the pandemic were most likely to gain weight (65%) versus those who reported being slightly overweight (58%) or normal weight (40%) before the pandemic. Weight gain was statistically significantly higher in those with anxiety (53%), depression (52%), or symptoms of both (52%). The final multiple regression model found that the statistically significant predictors of pandemic weight gain were psychological distress, pre-pandemic weight status, having children at home; and time since last bodyweight check. CONCLUSIONS: Population health promotion strategies in the pandemic should emphasize stress reduction to help individuals manage body weight and avoid chronic diseases in the future.

COVID-19 pandemic and weight gain in American adults: A nationwide population-based study

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the lives of people in many ways. However, little is known about weight gain in American adults during the pandemic. Aims and methods The purpose of this study was to conduct a national assessment of weight gain in adult Americans after the first year of the pandemic. An online questionnaire was employed to explore perceptions of adults regarding pandemic weight gain and the relationship between weight gain and sociodemographic characteristics, pre-pandemic weight status, and psychological distress. Multiple methods were used to assess the psychometric properties of the questionnaire (i.e., face validity, content validity, and internal consistency reliability testing). Chi-Square tests and logistic regression analysis were used to assess group differences and predictors of weight gain in the study participants. Results A total of 3473 individuals participated in the study with weight changes distributed as: gained weight (48%), remained the same weight (34%), or lost weight (18%). Those who reported being very overweight before the pandemic were most likely to gain weight (65%) versus those who reported being slightly overweight (58%) or normal weight before the pandemic (40%). Weight gain was statistically significantly higher in those with anxiety (53%), depression (52%), or symptoms of both (52%). The final multiple regression model found that the statistically significant predictors of pandemic weight gain were psychological distress, pre-pandemic weight status, having children at home;and time since last bodyweight check. Conclusions Population health promotion strategies in the pandemic should emphasize stress reduction to help individuals manage body weight and avoid chronic diseases in the future.

COVID-19 Pandemic and the Burden of Internet Addiction in the United States

Despite the extensive usage of the internet, little is known about internet addiction among Americans during the pandemic. A valid and reliable questionnaire was deployed online via MTurk to recruit a national sample of adult Americans to understand the nature and extent of internet addiction. A total of 1305 individuals participated in the study where the majority were males (64%), whites (78%), non-Hispanic (70%), married (72%), 18–35 years old (57%), employed full time (86%), and with a Bachelor’s degree or higher (83%). The prevalence of internet addiction was distributed as no addiction (45%), probable addiction or risk of addiction (41%), and definite or severe addiction (14%). More than a fourth of the population had depression (28%) or anxiety (25%). Despite adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, definite/severe internet addiction was strongly predictive of depression, anxiety, and psychological distress in multiple regression analyses. Those who were probably addicted or at risk of addiction were also more likely to have depression or anxiety. Compared to estimates before the pandemic, this study suggests an increase in internet addiction among U.S. adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. Population-based interventions and mental health promotion strategies should focus on a reduction in internet consumption and screen time.

Investigating Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Surface and Air Contamination in an Acute Healthcare Setting During the Peak of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic in London.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) surface and air contamination during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in London. METHODS: Prospective, cross-sectional, observational study in a multisite London hospital. Air and surface samples were collected from 7 clinical areas occupied by patients with COVID-19 and a public area of the hospital. Three or four 1.0-m3 air samples were collected in each area using an active air sampler. Surface samples were collected by swabbing items in the immediate vicinity of each air sample. SARS-CoV-2 was detected using reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and viral culture; the limit of detection for culturing SARS-CoV-2 from surfaces was determined. RESULTS: Viral RNA was detected on 114 of 218 (52.3%) surfaces and in 14 of 31 (38.7%) air samples, but no virus was cultured. Viral RNA was more likely to be found in areas immediately occupied by COVID-19 patients than in other areas (67 of 105 [63.8%] vs 29 of 64 [45.3%]; odds ratio, 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-0.9; P = .025, χ2 test). The high PCR cycle threshold value for all samples (>30) indicated that the virus would not be culturable. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings of extensive viral RNA contamination of surfaces and air across a range of acute healthcare settings in the absence of cultured virus underlines the potential risk from environmental contamination in managing COVID-19 and the need for effective use of personal protective equipment, physical distancing, and hand/surface hygiene.

The Alpha variant was not associated with excess nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection in a multi-centre UK hospital study.

OBJECTIVES: Recently emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants have been associated with an increased rate of transmission within the community. We sought to determine whether this also resulted in increased transmission within hospitals. METHODS: We collected viral sequences and epidemiological data of patients with community and healthcare associated SARS-CoV-2 infections, sampled from 16th November 2020 to 10th January 2021, from nine hospitals participating in the COG-UK HOCI study. Outbreaks were identified using ward information, lineage and pairwise genetic differences between viral sequences. RESULTS: Mixed effects logistic regression analysis of 4184 sequences showed healthcare-acquired infections were no more likely to be identified as the Alpha variant than community acquired infections. Nosocomial outbreaks were investigated based on overlapping ward stay and SARS-CoV-2 genome sequence similarity. There was no significant difference in the number of patients involved in outbreaks caused by the Alpha variant compared to outbreaks caused by other lineages. CONCLUSIONS: We find no evidence to support it causing more nosocomial transmission than previous lineages. This suggests that the stringent infection prevention measures already in place in UK hospitals contained the spread of the Alpha variant as effectively as other less transmissible lineages, providing reassurance of their efficacy against emerging variants of concern.

Comparison of deliberate self-harm incidents attended by Helicopter Emergency Medical Services before and during the first wave of COVID-19 in the East of England.

INTRODUCTION: There is significant interest in the mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) attend the most seriously unwell and injured patients in the community; their data therefore present an early opportunity to examine self-harm trends. The primary aim was to compare the incidence of deliberate self-harm incident (DSH-I) encounters by HEMS before and during the first wave of COVID-19. METHODS: Data were obtained from all three East of England HEMS: total number of activations and stand-downs, number of DSH-I activations and stand-downs, self-harm mechanism and number of 'severe' DSH-I patient encounters, in two 61-day periods: 1 March to 30 April in 2019 (control) and 2020 (COVID-19). Severe DSH-I was defined as cardiac arrest and/or died prehospital. Proportions were compared with a Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: There were a total of 1725 HEMS activations: n=981 (control) and n=744 (COVID-19), a decrease of 24.2% during COVID-19. DSH-I patient encounters increased by 65.4%: n=26 (control) and n=43 (COVID-19). The proportion of encounters that were DSH-I and severe DSH-I both significantly increased during COVID-19: p=0.002 and p=0.001, respectively. The absolute number of hangings and falls from height both approximately tripled during COVID-19, whereas the number of other mechanisms remained almost constant. CONCLUSION: Despite a reduction in overall HEMS patient encounters, there were significant increases in both the proportion of DSH-Is and their severity attended by HEMS during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the East of England.

SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 is associated with greater disease severity among hospitalised women but not men: multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 has been associated with an increased rate of transmission and disease severity among subjects testing positive in the community. Its impact on hospitalised patients is less well documented. METHODS: We collected viral sequences and clinical data of patients admitted with SARS-CoV-2 and hospital-onset COVID-19 infections (HOCIs), sampled 16 November 2020 to 10 January 2021, from eight hospitals participating in the COG-UK-HOCI study. Associations between the variant and the outcomes of all-cause mortality and intensive therapy unit (ITU) admission were evaluated using mixed effects Cox models adjusted by age, sex, comorbidities, care home residence, pregnancy and ethnicity. FINDINGS: Sequences were obtained from 2341 inpatients (HOCI cases=786) and analysis of clinical outcomes was carried out in 2147 inpatients with all data available. The HR for mortality of B.1.1.7 compared with other lineages was 1.01 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.28, p=0.94) and for ITU admission was 1.01 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.37, p=0.96). Analysis of sex-specific effects of B.1.1.7 identified increased risk of mortality (HR 1.30, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.78, p=0.096) and ITU admission (HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.90, p=0.011) in females infected with the variant but not males (mortality HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.10, p=0.177; ITU HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.04, p=0.086). INTERPRETATION: In common with smaller studies of patients hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2, we did not find an overall increase in mortality or ITU admission associated with B.1.1.7 compared with other lineages. However, women with B.1.1.7 may be at an increased risk of admission to intensive care and at modestly increased risk of mortality.

COVID-19 Morbidity and Mortality in Social Networks: Does It Influence Vaccine Hesitancy?

The impact of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among family and friends on vaccination preferences is not well explored. A valid and reliable questionnaire was deployed online via mTurk to recruit a national random sample of adult Americans to understand COVID-19 vaccination preferences and its relationship with COVID-19 infection in social networks. A total of 1602 individuals participated in the study where the majority had taken at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine (79%) and almost a tenth were planning to do so (10%) or did not want to take the vaccine (11%). Compared to those who knew family members or friends affected by COVID-19, those who did not know anyone infected with (AOR = 3.20), hospitalized for (AOR = 3.60), or died of COVID-19 (AOR = 2.97) had statistically significantly higher odds of refusing the vaccines. Most strategies for reducing COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy focus on highlighting the benefits of COVID-19 vaccines. We suggest that the dangers of not getting the vaccine should also be emphasized as many people who do not know someone who was affected with COVID-19 are also hesitant towards vaccination. These individuals may not fully appreciate the morbidity and mortality impact of COVID-19 infections and the messaging can be tailored to highlight the risk of not having vaccines.

Restricted Use of Echocardiography in Suspected Endocarditis during COVID-19 Lockdown: A Multidisciplinary Team Approach.

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis (IE) is challenging to manage in the COVID-19 lockdown period, in part given its reliance on echocardiography for diagnosis and management and the associated virus transmission risks to patients and healthcare workers. This study assesses utilisation of the endocarditis team (ET) in limiting routine echocardiography, especially transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE), in patients with suspected IE, and explores the effect on clinical outcomes. METHODS: All patients discussed at the ET meeting at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust during the first lockdown in the UK (23 March to 8 July 2020) were prospectively included and analysed in this observational study. RESULTS: In total, 38 patients were referred for ET review (71% male, median age 54 [interquartile range 48, 65.5] years). At the time of ET discussion, 21% had no echo imaging, 16% had point-of-care ultrasound only, and 63% had formal TTE. In total, only 16% underwent TOE. The ability of echocardiography, in those where it was performed, to affect IE diagnosis according to the Modified Duke Criteria was significant (p=0.0099); however, sensitivity was not affected. All-cause mortality was 17% at 30 days and 25% at 12 months from ET discussion in those with confirmed IE. CONCLUSION: Limiting echocardiography in patients with a low pretest probability (not probable or definite IE according to the Modified Duke Criteria) did not affect the diagnostic ability of the Modified Duke Criteria to rule out IE in this small study. Moreover, restricting nonessential echocardiography, and importantly TOE, in patients with suspected IE through use of the ET did not impact all-cause mortality.

The Nature and Extent of COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancy in Healthcare Workers.

COVID-19 vaccines were approved in late 2020 and early 2021 for public use in countries across the world. Several studies have now highlighted COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in the general public. However, little is known about the nature and extent of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in healthcare workers worldwide. Thus, the purpose of this study was to conduct a comprehensive worldwide assessment of published evidence on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers. A scoping review method was adopted to include a final pool of 35 studies in this review with study sample size ranges from n = 123 to 16,158 (average = 2185 participants per study). The prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy worldwide in healthcare workers ranged from 4.3 to 72% (average = 22.51% across all studies with 76,471 participants). The majority of the studies found concerns about vaccine safety, efficacy, and potential side effects as top reasons for COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in healthcare workers. The majority of the studies also found that individuals who were males, of older age, and doctoral degree holders (i.e., physicians) were more likely to accept COVID-19 vaccines. Factors such as the higher perceived risk of getting infected with COVID-19, direct care for patients, and history of influenza vaccination were also found to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake probability. Given the high prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in healthcare workers, communication and education strategies along with mandates for clinical workers should be considered to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake in these individuals. Healthcare workers have a key role in reducing the burden of the pandemic, role modeling for preventive behaviors, and also, helping vaccinate others.