Cross-site collaboration on infection prevention and control research-room for improvement? A 7-year comparative study in five European countries.

BACKGROUND: The spread of SARS-CoV-2, multidrug-resistant organisms and other healthcare-associated pathogens represents supra-regional challenges for infection prevention and control (IPC) specialists in every European country. To tackle these problems, cross-site research collaboration of IPC specialists is very important. This study assesses the extent and quality of national research collaborations of IPC departments of university hospitals located in Austria, England, France, Germany, and the Netherlands, identifies network gaps, and provides potential solutions. METHODS: Joint publications of IPC heads of all university hospitals of the included countries between 1st of June 2013 until 31st of May 2020 were collected by Pubmed/Medline search. Further, two factors, the journal impact factor and the type/position of authorship, were used to calculate the Scientific Collaboration Impact (SCI) for all included sites; nationwide network analysis was performed. RESULTS: In five European countries, 95 sites and 125 responsible leaders for IPC who had been in charge during the study period were identified. Some countries such as Austria have only limited national research cooperations, while the Netherlands has established a gapless network. Most effective collaborating university site of each country were Lille with an SCI of 1146, Rotterdam (408), Berlin (268), Sussex (204), and Vienna/Innsbruck (18). DISCUSSION: The present study indicates major differences and room for improvement in IPC research collaborations within each country and underlines the potential and importance of collaborating in IPC.

Obstetric-Neonatal Care during Birth and Postpartum in Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Women Infected with SARS-CoV-2: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.

This study analyses the obstetric-neonatal outcomes of women in labour with symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19. A retrospective, multicenter, observational study was carried out between 1 March 2020 and 28 February 2021 in eight public hospitals in the Valencian community (Spain). The chi-squared test compared the obstetric-neonatal outcomes and general care for symptomatic and asymptomatic women. In total, 11,883 births were assisted in participating centers, with 10.9 per 1000 maternities (n = 130) infected with SARS-CoV-2. The 20.8% were symptomatic and had more complications both upon admission (p = 0.042) and during puerperium (p = 0.042), as well as transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU). The percentage of admission to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) was greater among offspring of symptomatic women compared to infants born of asymptomatic women (p < 0.001). Compared with asymptomatic women, those with symptoms underwent less labour companionship (p = 0.028), less early skin-to-skin contact (p = 0.029) and greater mother-infant separation (p = 0.005). The overall maternal mortality rate was 0.8%. No vertical transmission was recorded. In conclusion, symptomatic infected women are at increased risk of lack of labour companionship, mother-infant separation, and admission to the ICU, as well as to have preterm births and for NICU admissions.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Diverse Groups in the UK-Is the Driver Economic or Cultural in Student Populations.

Studies have identified a greater reluctance for members of the Black, Asian, and minority ethnic communities to be vaccinated against COVID-19 despite a higher probability of greater harm from COVID-19. We conducted an anonymised questionnaire-based study of students (recruiting primarily before first reports of embolic events) at two London universities to identify whether economic or educational levels were primarily responsible for this reluctance: a postgraduate core group (PGCC) n = 860, and a pilot study of undergraduate medical and nursing students (n = 103). Asian and Black students were 2.0 and 3.2 times (PGCC) less likely to accept the COVID vaccine than White British students. Similar findings were noted in the pilot study students. As the students were studying for Master's or PhD degrees and voluntarily paying high fees, educational and economic reasons were unlikely to be the underlying cause, and wider cultural reservations were more likely. Politicians exerted a strong negative influence, suggesting that campaigns should omit politicians.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Diverse Groups in the UK-Is the Driver Economic or Cultural in Student Populations

Studies have identified a greater reluctance for members of the Black, Asian, and minority ethnic communities to be vaccinated against COVID-19 despite a higher probability of greater harm from COVID-19. We conducted an anonymised questionnaire-based study of students (recruiting primarily before first reports of embolic events) at two London universities to identify whether economic or educational levels were primarily responsible for this reluctance: a postgraduate core group (PGCC) n = 860, and a pilot study of undergraduate medical and nursing students (n = 103). Asian and Black students were 2.0 and 3.2 times (PGCC) less likely to accept the COVID vaccine than White British students. Similar findings were noted in the pilot study students. As the students were studying for Master's or PhD degrees and voluntarily paying high fees, educational and economic reasons were unlikely to be the underlying cause, and wider cultural reservations were more likely. Politicians exerted a strong negative influence, suggesting that campaigns should omit politicians.

Bacterial infections in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Bacterial infections may complicate the course of COVID-19 patients. The rate and predictors of bacterial infections were examined in patients consecutively admitted with COVID-19 at one tertiary hospital in Madrid between March 1st and April 30th, 2020. Among 1594 hospitalized patients with COVID-19, 135 (8.5%) experienced bacterial infectious events, distributed as follows: urinary tract infections (32.6%), bacteremia (31.9%), pneumonia (31.8%), intra-abdominal infections (6.7%) and skin and soft tissue infections (6.7%). Independent predictors of bacterial infections were older age, neurological disease, prior immunosuppression and ICU admission (p < 0.05). Patients with bacterial infections who more frequently received steroids and tocilizumab, progressed to lower Sap02/FiO2 ratios, and experienced more severe ARDS (p < 0.001). The mortality rate was significantly higher in patients with bacterial infections as compared to the rest (25% vs 6.7%, respectively; p < 0.001). In multivariate analyses, older age, prior neurological or kidney disease, immunosuppression and ARDS severity were associated with an increased mortality (p < 0.05) while bacterial infections were not. Conversely, the use of steroids or steroids plus tocilizumab did not confer a higher risk of bacterial infections and improved survival rates. Bacterial infections occurred in 8.5% of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic. They were not independently associated with increased mortality rates. Baseline COVID-19 severity rather than the incidence of bacterial infections seems to contribute to mortality. When indicated, the use of steroids or steroids plus tocilizumab might improve survival in this population.

Severe Lymphopenia as a Predictor of COVID-19 Mortality in Immunosuppressed Patients.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has a high mortality in certain group of patients. We analysed the impact of baseline immunosuppression in COVID-19 mortality and the role of severe lymphopenia in immunocompromised subjects. METHODS: We analysed all patients admitted with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital in Madrid between March 1st and April 30th 2020. Epidemiological and clinical data, including severe lymphopenia (<500 lymphocytes/mm3) during admission, were analysed and compared based on their baseline immunosuppression condition. RESULTS: A total of 1594 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were hospitalised during the study period. 166 (10.4%) were immunosuppressed. Immunocompromised patients were younger (64 vs. 67 years, p = 0.02) but presented higher rates of hypertension, diabetes, heart, neurological, lung, kidney and liver disease (p < 0.05). They showed more severe lymphopenia (53% vs 24.1%, p < 0.001), lower SapO2/FiO2 ratios (251 vs 276, p = 0.02) during admission and higher mortality rates (27.1% vs 13.5%, p < 0.001). After adjustment, immunosuppression remained as an independent factor related to mortality (Odds Ratio (OR): 2.24, p < 0.001). In the immunosuppressed group, age (OR = 1.06, p = 0.01), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (OR = 12.27, p = 0.017) and severe lymphopenia (OR = 3.48, p = 0.04) were the factors related to high mortality rate. CONCLUSION: Immunosuppression is an independent mortality risk factor in COVID-19. Severe lymphopenia should be promptly identified in these patients.

Cardiac magnetic resonance in recovering COVID-19 patients. Feature tracking and mapping analysis to detect persistent myocardial involvement.

BACKGROUND: Post-COVID-19 patients may incur myocardial involvement secondary to systemic inflammation. Our aim was to detect possible oedema/diffuse fibrosis using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) mapping and to study myocardial deformation of the left ventricle (LV) using feature tracking (FT). METHODS: Prospective analysis of consecutively recruited post-COVID-19 patients undergoing CMR. T1 and T2 mapping sequences were acquired and FT analysis was performed using 2D steady-state free precession cine sequences. Statistical significance was set to p < 0.05. RESULTS: Included were 57 post-COVID-19 patients and 20 healthy controls, mean age 59 ± 15 years, men 80.7%. The most frequent risk factors were hypertension (33.3%) and dyslipidaemia (36.8%). The contact-to-CMR interval was 81 ± 27 days. LV ejection fraction (LVEF) was 61 ± 10%. Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) was evident in 26.3% of patients (19.3%, non-ischaemic). T2 mapping values (suggestive of oedema) were higher in the study patients than in the controls (50.9 ± 4.3 ms vs 48 ± 1.9 ms, p < 0.01). No between-group differences were observed for native T1 nor for circumferential strain (CS) or radial strain (RS) values (18.6 ± 3.3% vs 19.2 ± 2.1% (p = 0.52) and 32.3 ± 8.1% vs 33.6 ± 7.1% (p = 0.9), respectively). A sub-group analysis for the contact-to-CMR interval (<8 weeks vs ≥ 8 weeks) showed that FT-CS (15.6 ± 2.2% vs 18.9 ± 2.6%, p < 0.01) and FT-RS (24.9 ± 5.8 vs 33.5 ± 7.2%, p < 0.01) values were lower for the shorter interval. CONCLUSIONS: Post-COVID-19 patients compared to heathy controls had raised T2 values (related to oedema), but similar native T1, FT-CS and FT-RS values. FT-CS and FT-RS values were lower in post-COVID-19 patients undergoing CMR after < 8 weeks compared to ≥ 8 weeks.

Macro level factors influencing strategic responses to emergent pandemics: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Strategic planning is critical for successful pandemic management. This study aimed to identify and review the scope and analytic depth of situation analyses conducted to understand their utility, and capture the documented macro-level factors impacting pandemic management. METHODS: To synthesise this disparate body of literature, we adopted a two-step search and review process. A systematic search of the literature was conducted to identify all studies since 2000, that have 1) employed a situation analysis; and 2) examined contextual factors influencing pandemic management. The included studies are analysed using a seven-domain systems approach from the discipline of strategic management. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included in the final review ranging from single country (6) to regional, multi-country studies (13). Fourteen studies had a single disease focus, with 5 studies evaluating responses to one or more of COVID-19, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), Influenza A (H1N1), Ebola virus disease, and Zika virus disease pandemics. Six studies examined a single domain from political, economic, sociological, technological, ecological or wider industry (PESTELI), 5 studies examined two to four domains, and 8 studies examined five or more domains. Methods employed were predominantly literature reviews. The recommendations focus predominantly on addressing inhibitors in the sociological and technological domains with few recommendations articulated in the political domain. Overall, the legislative domain is least represented. CONCLUSIONS: Ex-post analysis using the seven-domain strategic management framework provides further opportunities for a planned systematic response to pandemics which remains critical as the current COVID-19 pandemic evolves.

Macro level influences on strategic responses to the COVID-19 pandemic - an international survey and tool for national assessments.

BACKGROUND: Variation in the approaches taken to contain the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic at country level has been shaped by economic and political considerations, technical capacity, and assumptions about public behaviours. To address the limited application of learning from previous pandemics, this study aimed to analyse perceived facilitators and inhibitors during the pandemic and to inform the development of an assessment tool for pandemic response planning. METHODS: A cross-sectional electronic survey of health and non-health care professionals (5 May - 5 June 2020) in six languages, with respondents recruited via email, social media and website posting. Participants were asked to score inhibitors (-10 to 0) or facilitators (0 to +10) impacting country response to COVID-19 from the following domains - Political, Economic, Sociological, Technological, Ecological, Legislative, and wider Industry (the PESTELI framework). Participants were then asked to explain their responses using free text. Descriptive and thematic analysis was followed by triangulation with the literature and expert validation to develop the assessment tool, which was then compared with four existing pandemic planning frameworks. RESULTS: 928 respondents from 66 countries (57% health care professionals) participated. Political and economic influences were consistently perceived as powerful negative forces and technology as a facilitator across high- and low-income countries. The 103-item tool developed for guiding rapid situational assessment for pandemic planning is comprehensive when compared to existing tools and highlights the interconnectedness of the 7 domains. CONCLUSIONS: The tool developed and proposed addresses the problems associated with decision making in disciplinary silos and offers a means to refine future use of epidemic modelling.