Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(2): 215-217, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1083571


On coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) wards, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acid was frequently detected on high-touch surfaces, floors, and socks inside patient rooms. Contamination of floors and shoes was common outside patient rooms on the COVID-19 wards but decreased after improvements in floor cleaning and disinfection were implemented.

COVID-19/transmission , Environmental Pollution/analysis , Intensive Care Units , Patients' Rooms , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19/virology , Clothing , Disinfection/methods , Equipment Contamination , Hospitals, Veterans , Humans , Ohio , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction
Front Cardiovasc Med ; 7: 598846, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1067650


Background: Recent studies revealed a high prevalence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) events in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, especially in those who are critically ill. Available studies report varying prevalence rates. Hence, the exact prevalence remains uncertain. Moreover, there is an ongoing debate regarding the appropriate dosage of thromboprophylaxis. Methods: We performed a systematic review and proportion meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched PubMed and EMBASE for studies exploring the prevalence of VTE in critically ill COVID-19 patients till 25/07/2020. We pooled the proportion of VTE. Additionally, in a subgroup analysis, we pooled VTE events detected by systematic screening. Finally, in an exploratory analysis, we compared the odds of VTE in patients on prophylactic compared with therapeutic anticoagulation. Results: The review comprised 24 studies and over 2,500 patients. The pooled proportion of VTE prevalence was 0.31 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24, 0.39; I 2 94%], of VTE utilizing systematic screening was 0.48 (95% CI 0.33, 0.63; I 2 91%), of deep venous thrombosis was 0.23 (95% CI 0.14, 0.32; I 2 96%), and of pulmonary embolism was 0.14 (95% CI 0.09, 0.20; I 2 90%). Exploratory analysis of few studies, utilizing systematic screening, VTE risk increased significantly with prophylactic, compared with therapeutic anticoagulation [odds ratio (OR) 5.45; 95% CI 1.90, 15.57; I 2 0%]. Discussion: Our review revealed a high prevalence of VTE in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Almost 50% of patients had VTE detected by systematic screening. Higher thromboprophylaxis dosages may reduce VTE burden in this patient's cohort compared with standard prophylactic anticoagulation; however, this is to be ascertained by ongoing randomized controlled trials.

IDCases ; 20: e00778, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-125237


People exposed to COVID-19 have a risk of developing disease, and health care workers are at risk at a time when they are badly needed during a health care crisis. Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have been used as treatment and are being considered as prophylaxis. Our patient developed COVID-19 while on hydroxychloroquine and although more work is needed, this calls into question the role of these medications as preventive therapy.