ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic brought a burden and represented a challenge for the Romanian medical system. This study explored the consequences that COVID epidemiological measures had on the quality of the mental health care provided to hospitalized patients in a regional psychiatric hospital in Romania. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Both patient-level and hospital-level indicators were considered for this comparative retrospective study. On the one hand, we extracted patient-level indicators, such as sociodemographics, diagnosis, admission, and discharge dates for 7026 hospitalized patients (3701 women, average age = 55.14) from hospital records. On the other hand, for the hospital-level indicators, we included indicators referring to the aggregated concept of mental health services, such as case mix index, length of stay, bed occupancy rate and patients' degree of satisfaction. Data extracted covered a period of two years (1 March 2019-28 February 2021) before and during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: We found that, compared to the pre-pandemic period, the pandemic period was marked by a drastic decrease in hospitalized patient admissions, coupled with an increase in emergency-based admissions. Other management indicators, such as the case mix index, the number of cases contracted/performed, and the degree of patient satisfaction, decreased. In contrast, the average length of stay and bed occupancy rate increased. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic, especially in the first year, raised multiple difficult issues for the management of psychiatric hospitals. It imposed an application of strict measures designed to face these new and unprecedented challenges. Our findings offer a detailed snapshot of the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of its impact on mental health services and suggest some future directions. Implications for hospital management are discussed.
ABSTRACT
Intraocular foreign body injuries (IOFB) can lead to a number of intraocular pathologies; the visual results depend on the mechanism of the injury, the type of foreign body and the subsequent complications. The presence of intraocular cilia (eye lashes) following penetrating injury or surgical intervention is uncommon. In the present paper, we present a case of a 58-year-old woman with a history of eye trauma and a perforated corneal wound in the left eye that occurred 50 years ago. On the ophthalmological exam we noticed in the anterior chamber a straight linear extension, resembling cilia, extending behind the iris. The patient reports that it appeared during COVID-19 infection, after repeated episodes of coughing. After a follow-up period, we decided to remove the eyelash; 24 h after surgery, the patient complained of severe eye pain. Intraocular pressure (IOP) in LE was 54 mmHg. The slit-lamp examination showed perikeratic congestion, corneal edema and mydriasis. Eye hypotensive treatment was started immediately and the patient's general condition slightly improved. Intraocular cilia can be tolerated for many years without causing any ocular reaction. The decision for surgical intervention must be taken according to the individual needs of the patient and his ocular characteristics with careful pre- and post-operative follow up.
ABSTRACT
The spread of the COVID-19 virus created more than a medical crisis, while it also negatively affected the mental health of the general population. This context increased the vulnerability of the psychiatric population. While research interest highly targeted vaccine hesitancy and acceptance, many studies focused on trust issues—both in vaccine efficacy and in communication with authorities. Less is known about the psychological underpinnings of the COVID vaccination decision, specifically in the high-uncertainty circumstances due to the novelty of the virus. In a cross-sectional study, we investigated the predictive value of several cognitive (perceived risk, vulnerability, uncertainty, and trust in one's decision) and behavioral (previous vaccinations, social media use, and practicing preventive behavior) factors, for the vaccination decision against COVID-19, for 252 psychiatric inpatients (data collected between September 2021 and February 2022). Demographics and diagnostics were also considered. We found a significant relationship between the "Perceived risk of vaccination” and the choice of vaccination (χ2(2, N = 252) = 58.59, p ≤ 0.001), and between the "Trust in own decision to vaccinate” and the decision to vaccinate (χ2(2, N = 252) = 31,5, p ≤ 0.001). The overall regression model was statistically significant (χ2 (9, N = 252) = 97.1, p < 0.001), with between 30% and 45% of the variance in the odds of a positive decision explained by the predictor set. The model coefficients analysis showed that an individual with a psychiatric disorder but with higher confidence in their decision had significant (p < 0.001) increased odds of the decision to vaccinate against COVID-19 by 893%. A former voluntary vaccination did not significantly associate with the decision to vaccinate against COVID-19 (χ2(1, N = 252) = 2.74, p > 0.05) in this special population. No other behavioral factors, diagnosis, or demographics were significant as predictors, for the clinical psychiatric population surveyed, except the educational level. Implications for future vaccination acceptance of this special population are discussed.
ABSTRACT
The spread of the COVID-19 virus created more than a medical crisis, while it also negatively affected the mental health of the general population. This context increased the vulnerability of the psychiatric population. While research interest highly targeted vaccine hesitancy and acceptance, many studies focused on trust issues-both in vaccine efficacy and in communication with authorities. Less is known about the psychological underpinnings of the COVID vaccination decision, specifically in the high-uncertainty circumstances due to the novelty of the virus. In a cross-sectional study, we investigated the predictive value of several cognitive (perceived risk, vulnerability, uncertainty, and trust in one's decision) and behavioral (previous vaccinations, social media use, and practicing preventive behavior) factors, for the vaccination decision against COVID-19, for 252 psychiatric inpatients (data collected between September 2021 and February 2022). Demographics and diagnostics were also considered. We found a significant relationship between the "Perceived risk of vaccination" and the choice of vaccination (χ2(2, N = 252) = 58.59, p ≤ 0.001), and between the "Trust in own decision to vaccinate" and the decision to vaccinate (χ2(2, N = 252) = 31,5, p ≤ 0.001). The overall regression model was statistically significant (χ2 (9, N = 252) = 97.1, p < 0.001), with between 30% and 45% of the variance in the odds of a positive decision explained by the predictor set. The model coefficients analysis showed that an individual with a psychiatric disorder but with higher confidence in their decision had significant (p < 0.001) increased odds of the decision to vaccinate against COVID-19 by 893%. A former voluntary vaccination did not significantly associate with the decision to vaccinate against COVID-19 (χ2(1, N = 252) = 2.74, p > 0.05) in this special population. No other behavioral factors, diagnosis, or demographics were significant as predictors, for the clinical psychiatric population surveyed, except the educational level. Implications for future vaccination acceptance of this special population are discussed.
ABSTRACT
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the treatment of Clostridioides Difficile (CD)-infected patients given the increasing number of co-infections with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this context, fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) shows promise in modulating the immune system's function and alleviating the burdens associated with this condition. Methods: To achieve this goal, we performed a comparative, retrospective, single-center study on 86 patients (admitted between January 2020 and March 2022). We based our approach on specific inclusion criteria: 1. The study group included 46 co-infected patients (COVID-19 and CD) receiving antibiotics and FMT; 2. In the control group, 40 co-infected patients received antibiotics only. Our results showed no significant group differences in terms of gender, age, risk factors such as cardiovascular and neurological diseases, type 2 diabetes, and obesity (p > 0.05), or in pre-treatment inflammatory status, evaluated by white blood cell (WBC) count and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels. We report a significant decrease in inflammatory syndrome (CRP, WBC) in coinfected patients receiving FMT in addition to antibiotics (p < 0.05), with a lower relapse rate and mitigation of cramping and abdominal pain (91.3%). In addition, a higher level of fibrinogen, persistent moderate abdominal pain (82.5%), and a significantly higher CD infection relapse rate (42.5%) were recorded in co-infected patients treated only with antibiotics (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Our study provides new data to support the multiple benefits of FMT in the case of COVID-19 and CD co-infection by improving patients' quality of life and inflammatory syndrome.