Increase in False Positive Fourth Generation HIV Tests in Patients with COVID-19 Disease.

BACKGROUND: We observed an increase in the frequency of false positive (FP) HIV test results correlating with SARS-CoV-2 prevalence, which led us to measure FP rates of a laboratory-based fourth generation HIV antigen/antibody test among those with polymerase-chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 compared to the FP rate of those testing PCR-negative for SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: All those PCR tested for SARS-CoV-2 result within 2 weeks of a HIV fourth generation assay were selected. Positive HIV fourth generation assays were independently reviewed and divided into groups of FP, true positives (TP), and presumptive negatives (PN). Variables included age, race, ethnicity, gender, pregnancy, and COVID-19 immunization status. Associations with positive SARS-CoV-2 tests were assessed using linear logistic regression. A multivariate logistic regression was used to assess sets of variables. RESULTS: There were 31,910 medical records that met criteria. The frequency of SARS-CoV-2 positive tests was then calculated in groups of HIV TP, FP, and PN. In total, 31,575 patients had a PN HIV test result, 248 patients had a TP, and 87 patients had a FP. Those with HIV FP tests had the highest percentage of COVID-19 positive test results at 19.5%, which was significantly higher than HIV PN (11.3%; p = 0.016) and HIV TP (7.7%; p = 0.002). After adjustment for all covariates, only FP HIV was significantly associated with COVID-19 (odds ratio 4.22; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals those patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests are significantly more likely to have a FP fourth generation HIV test than those with negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests.

COVID-19 vaccination up-take in three districts of Nepal.

Vaccine hesitancy during the COVID-19 pandemic continues to be an issue in terms of global efforts to decrease transmission rates. Despite high demand for the vaccines in Nepal, the country still contends with challenges related to vaccine accessibility, equitable vaccine distribution, and vaccine hesitancy. Study objectives were to identify: 1) up-take and intention for use of COVID-19 vaccines, 2) factors associated with vaccine up-take, and 3) trusted communication strategies about COVID-19 and the vaccines. A quantitative survey was implemented in August and September 2021 through an initiative at the Nepali Ministry of Health and Population Department of Health Services, Family Welfare Division. Data were collected from 865 respondents in three provinces (Bagmati, Lumbini, and Province 1). Ordinal multivariate logistic regression was utilized to determine relationships between vaccination status and associated factors. Overall, 62% (537) respondents were fully vaccinated and 18% (159) were partially vaccinated. Those respondents with higher education (p < .001) and higher household income (p < .001) were more likely vaccinated. There were also significant differences in vaccine up-take across the three provinces (p < .001). Respondents who were vaccinated were significantly more likely to perceive vaccines as efficacious in terms of preventing COVID-19 (p = .004) and preventing serious outcomes (p = .010). Among both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, there was a high level of trust in information about COVID-19 vaccines provided through local health-care workers [e.g. nurses and physicians]. These results are consistent with other findings within the South Asia region. Targeted advocacy and outreach efforts are needed to support ongoing COVID-19 vaccination campaigns throughout Nepal.

The Impact of a Post-Prescription Review and Feedback Antimicrobial Stewardship Program in Lebanon.

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) are effective means to optimize prescribing practices. They are under-utilized in the Middle East where many challenges exist for ASP implementation. We assessed the effectiveness of infectious disease physician-driven post-prescription review and feedback as an ASP in Lebanon. This prospective cohort study was conducted over an 18-month period in the medical, surgical, and intensive care units of a tertiary care hospital. It consisted of three phases: the baseline, intervention, and follow-up. There was a washout period of two months between each phase. Patients aged ≥16 years receiving 48 h of antibiotics were included. During the intervention phase, the AMS team reviewed antimicrobial use within 72 h post-prescription and gave alternate recommendations based on the guidelines for use. The acceptance of the recommendations was measured at 72 h. The primary outcome of the study was days of therapy per 1000 study patient days. A total of 328 patients were recruited in the baseline phase (August-October 2020), 467 patients in the intervention phase (January-June 2021), and 301 patients in the post-intervention phase (September-December 2021). The total days of therapy decreased from 11.46 during the baseline phase to 8.64 during the intervention phase (p < 0.001). Intervention acceptance occurred 88.5% of the time. The infectious disease physician-driven implementation of an ASP was successful in reducing antibiotic utilization in an acute care setting in Lebanon.

Antibiotic Stewardship in Disaster Situations: Lessons Learned in Lebanon.

A post-prescription review and feedback program was implemented as an antimicrobial stewardship intervention in Lebanon as the country grappled with complete economic collapse, the COVID-19 pandemic, and a large blast in Beirut. We describe the implications of antimicrobial use in disaster preparedness and crisis situations, the sequelae related to increasing antimicrobial resistance, and our lessons learned in Lebanon. We explore opportunities and potential solutions for future disaster preparedness.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy among Arab Americans.

(1) Background: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have a significant impact on reducing morbidity and mortality from infection. However, vaccine hesitancy remains an obstacle in combating the pandemic. The Arab American (AA) population is understudied; thus, we aimed to explore COVID-19 attitudes within this community. (2) Methods: This was a cross-sectional study. An anonymous online survey was distributed to members of different AA associations and to the community through the snowball method. (3) Results: A total of 1746 participants completed the survey. A total of 92% of respondents reported having received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. A total of 73% reported willingness to receive a booster, and 72% plan to give their children the vaccine. On multivariate analysis, respondents were more likely to be vaccine-hesitant if they were hesitant about receiving any vaccine in general. They were less likely to be vaccine-hesitant if they were immigrants, over the age of 40, up to date on their general vaccination and if they believed that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective in preventing an infection. The belief that all vaccines are effective at preventing diseases was also associated with lower hesitancy. (4) Conclusions: This sample of AAs have higher vaccination rates and are more willing to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 when compared to the rest of the population. However, a reemergence of hesitancy might be arising towards the boosters.

INITIAL APPROACH TO TREATMENT OF COVID-19-INFECTED PATIENTS IN THE ICU AT ACADEMIC CENTERS IN THE US

B Introduction: b The overwhelming influx of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a novel, highly infectious respiratory pathogen, created unprecedented circumstances for intensive care unit (ICU) providers early in the pandemic. This study aimed to determine the initial strategies adopted by academic institutions in the US for treating COVID-19 infected patients in the ICU. B Conclusions: b Our study describes the initial strategies adopted by academic institutions in the US for treating COVID-19 infected patients in the ICU. [Extracted from the article] Copyright of Critical Care Medicine is the property of Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 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 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 . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Evaluation of COVID-19 Vaccine Attitudes among Arab American Healthcare Professionals Living in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy is the next great barrier for public health. Arab Americans are a rapidly growing demographic in the United States with limited information on the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy. We therefore sought to study the attitudes towards the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine amongst Arab American health professionals living in the United States. METHODS: This was a cross sectional study utilizing an anonymous online survey. The survey was distributed via e-mail to National Arab American Medical Association members and Arab-American Center for Economic and Social Services healthcare employees. Respondents were considered vaccine hesitant if they selected responses other than a willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. RESULTS: A total of 4000 surveys were sent via e-mail from 28 December 2020 to 31 January 2021, and 513 responses were received. The highest group of respondents were between the ages of 18-29 years and physicians constituted 48% of the respondents. On multivariable analysis, we found that respondents who had declined an influenza vaccine in the preceding 5 years (p < 0.001) and allied health professionals (medical assistants, hospital administrators, case managers, researchers, scribes, pharmacists, dieticians and social workers) were more likely to be vaccine hesitant (p = 0.025). In addition, respondents earning over $150,000 US dollars annually were less likely to be vaccine hesitant and this finding was significant on multivariable analysis (p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine hesitancy among health care providers could have substantial impact on vaccine attitudes of the general population, and such data may help inform vaccine advocacy efforts.

Rapid Reorganization of an Academic Infectious Diseases Program During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic in Detroit: A Novel Unit-based Group Rounding Model.

The surge of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations at our 877-bed quaternary care hospital in Detroit led to an emergent demand for Infectious Diseases (ID) consultations. The traditional 1-on-1 consultation model was untenable. Therefore, we rapidly restructured our ID division to provide effective consultative services. We implemented a novel unit-based group rounds model that focused on delivering key updates to teams and providing unit-wide consultations simultaneously to all team members. Effectiveness of the program was studied using Likert-scale survey data. The survey captured data from the first month of the Detroit COVID-19 pandemic. During this period there were approximately 950 patients hospitalized for treatment of COVID-19. The survey of trainees and faculty reported an overall 95% positive response to delivery of information, new knowledge acquisition, and provider confidence in the care of COVID-19 patients. This showed that the unit-based consult model is a sustainable effort to provide care during epidemics.

Impact of Race and Socioeconomic Status on Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The impact of race and socioeconomic status on clinical outcomes has not been quantified in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between patient sociodemographics and neighborhood disadvantage with frequencies of death, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Four hospitals in an integrated health system serving southeast Michigan. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients admitted to the hospital with a COVID-19 diagnosis confirmed by polymerase chain reaction. MAIN MEASURES: Patient sociodemographics, comorbidities, and clinical outcomes were collected. Neighborhood socioeconomic variables were obtained at the census tract level from the 2018 American Community Survey. Relationships between neighborhood median income and clinical outcomes were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression models, controlling for patient age, sex, race, Charlson Comorbidity Index, obesity, smoking status, and living environment. KEY RESULTS: Black patients lived in significantly poorer neighborhoods than White patients (median income: $34,758 (24,531-56,095) vs. $63,317 (49,850-85,776), p < 0.001) and were more likely to have Medicaid insurance (19.4% vs. 11.2%, p < 0.001). Patients from neighborhoods with lower median income were significantly more likely to require IMV (lowest quartile: 25.4%, highest quartile: 16.0%, p < 0.001) and ICU admission (35.2%, 19.9%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for age, sex, race, and comorbidities, higher neighborhood income ($10,000 increase) remained a significant negative predictor for IMV (OR: 0.95 (95% CI 0.91, 0.99), p = 0.02) and ICU admission (OR: 0.92 (95% CI 0.89, 0.96), p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Neighborhood disadvantage, which is closely associated with race, is a predictor of poor clinical outcomes in COVID-19. Measures of neighborhood disadvantage should be used to inform policies that aim to reduce COVID-19 disparities in the Black community.