ABSTRACT
Over the past few years, COVID-19 pandemic has imposed a high toll worldwide, with a high burden of morbidity and mortality. Healthcare practitioners (HCPs) have been in the frontline since the beginning of the outbreak, and the high level of stress have affected their physical and mental status, as well as their relationships. We aimed at exploring the self-reported changes in comprehensive well-being in a cohort of Italian physicians. An online-based survey was administered to the members of the Italian Society of Internal Medicine (SIMI) between March and June 2021. The survey was based on 32 multiple-choice questions exploring self-reported physical and mental well-being, as well as changes in workloads, work-related feelings and physicians' relationship with patients, colleagues and families. 228 physicians (mean age: 35.7 ± 9.8 years) participated in the survey; 120 (52.6%) were residents, 196 (86.0%) worked in COVID-19 units and 65 (28.5%) had COVID-19 during the pandemic. A significant proportion of respondents reported to have experience onset or worsening of physical and mental symptoms, with insomnia/sleep disorders (58.3%) and mood swings (47.8%) being the most common, respectively. The burden of physical and mental consequences was broadly higher among residents compared to specialists, with the former reporting more frequently an increase in the number of worked hours (p = 0.020) and being more frequently infected with COVID-19 (35.0% vs. 21.3, p = 0.032). Moreover, familiar and doctor-patient relationships were also considerably affected. Physicians have been suffering a wide spectrum of physical, mental and relational consequences during COVID-19 pandemic, with youngest doctors being more likely to present several physical and mental health symptoms. Further studies are needed to evaluate long-term consequences of COVID-19 pandemic on the well-being of HCPs, and potential preventive strategies.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Endothelial dysfunction has a role in acute COVID-19, contributing to systemic inflammatory syndrome, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and vascular events. Evidence regarding COVID-19 middle- and long-term consequences on endothelium are still lacking. Our study aimed to evaluate if COVID-19 severity could significantly affect the endothelial function after three months from the acute phase. METHODS: We assessed endothelial function in outpatients with previous COVID-19 three months after negative SARS-CoV-2 molecular test by measuring flow-mediated dilation (FMD) in patients categorized according to a four-variable COVID-19 severity scale ("home care"; "hospital, no oxygen"; "hospital, oxygen"; "hospital requiring high-flow nasal canula, non-invasive ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation"). FMD difference among COVID-19 severity categories was assessed with analysis of variance; we further clarified the relationship between FMD and previous COVID-19 severity with multivariate logistic models. RESULTS: Among 658 consecutive COVID-19 subjects, we observed a significant linear trend of FMD reduction with the increase of the COVID-19 category (p < 0.0001). The presence of endothelial dysfunction was more frequent among hospitalized patients (78.3%) with respect to home-care patients (21.7%; p < 0.0001). COVID-19 severity was associated with increased endothelial dysfunction risk (OR: 1.354; 95% CI: 1.06-1.71; p = 0.011) at multivariate binary logistic analysis. FMD showed a significant direct correlation with PaO2 (p = 0.004), P/F ratio (p = 0.004), FEV1 (p = 0.008), and 6MWT (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized COVID-19 subjects showed an impaired endothelial function three months after the acute phase that correlated with pulmonary function impairment. Further studies are needed to evaluate if these subjects are at higher risk of developing pulmonary disease or future cardiovascular events.
ABSTRACT
Background: Endothelial dysfunction has a role in acute COVID-19, contributing to systemic inflammatory syndrome, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and vascular events. Evidence regarding COVID-19 middle- and long-term consequences on endothelium are still lacking. Our study aimed to evaluate if COVID-19 severity could significantly affect the endothelial function after three months from the acute phase. Methods: We assessed endothelial function in outpatients with previous COVID-19 three months after negative SARS-CoV-2 molecular test by measuring flow-mediated dilation (FMD) in patients categorized according to a four-variable COVID-19 severity scale ('home care';;'hospital, no oxygen';;'hospital, oxygen';;'hospital requiring high-flow nasal canula, non-invasive ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation';). FMD difference among COVID-19 severity categories was assessed with analysis of variance;we further clarified the relationship between FMD and previous COVID-19 severity with multivariate logistic models. Results: Among 658 consecutive COVID-19 subjects, we observed a significant linear trend of FMD reduction with the increase of the COVID-19 category (p < 0.0001). The presence of endothelial dysfunction was more frequent among hospitalized patients (78.3%) with respect to home-care patients (21.7%;p < 0.0001). COVID-19 severity was associated with increased endothelial dysfunction risk (OR: 1.354;95% CI: 1.06–1.71;p = 0.011) at multivariate binary logistic analysis. FMD showed a significant direct correlation with PaO2 (p = 0.004), P/F ratio (p = 0.004), FEV1 (p = 0.008), and 6MWT (p = 0.0001). Conclusions: Hospitalized COVID-19 subjects showed an impaired endothelial function three months after the acute phase that correlated with pulmonary function impairment. Further studies are needed to evaluate if these subjects are at higher risk of developing pulmonary disease or future cardiovascular events.
ABSTRACT
Background and Objectives: bedside cardiac ultrasound is a widely adopted method in Emergency Departments (ED) for extending physical examination and refining clinical diagnosis. However, in the setting of hemodynamically-stable pulmonary embolism, the diagnostic role of echocardiography is still the subject of debate. In light of its high specificity and low sensitivity, some authors suggest that echocardiographic signs of right ventricle overload could be used to rule-in pulmonary embolism. In this study, we aimed to clarify the diagnostic role of echocardiographic signs of right ventricle overload in the setting of hemodynamically-stable pulmonary embolism in the ED. Materials and Methods: we performed a systematic review of literature in PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane databases, considering the echocardiographic signs for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in the ED. Studies considering unstable or shocked patients were excluded. Papers enrolling hemodynamically stable subjects were selected. We performed a diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis for each sign, and then performed a critical evaluation according to pretest probability, assessed with Wells' score for pulmonary embolism. Results: 10 studies were finally included. We observed a good specificity and a low sensitivity of each echocardiographic sign of right ventricle overload. However, once stratified by the Wells' score, the post-test probability only increased among high-risk patients. Conclusions: signs of echocardiographic right ventricle overload should not be used to modify the clinical behavior in low- and intermediate- risk patients according to Wells' score classification. Among high-risk patients, however, echocardiographic signs could help a physician in detecting patients with the highest probability of pulmonary embolism, necessitating a confirmation by computed tomography with pulmonary angiography. However, a focused cardiac and thoracic ultrasound investigation is useful for the differential diagnosis of dyspnea and chest pain in the ED.