Screening for Monkeypox Infection in Asymptomatic High-Risk-Behaviour Men Having Sex with Men (MSM).

Background: Since the outbreak of monkeypox in formerly non-endemic countries, we have included a screening for monkeypox in our sexually transmitted diseases (STD) routine in patients with high-risk behavior, as it is mainly transmitted through close skin to mucous membrane contact with infected individuals. Methods: Between 16 June 2022 and 14 July 2022, we screened 53 MSM with high-risk behavior for monkeypox acquisition in an observational prospective cohort trial. We complemented the throat and anal swabs for chlamydia and gonococci with monkeypox using polymerase chain reaction (PCR). In addition, all patients participated in a questionnaire survey about their risk behavior and previous STD in their medical history. Results: None of the 53 participants had tested positive for the monkeypox virus. One patient was diagnosed with syphilis and one with an oral and anorectal chlamydia infection. Conclusions: STD screening in high-risk populations is a valuable tool to detect asymptomatic patients for chlamydia, gonococci, HIV, hepatitis B and C and syphilis. Based on our small cohort, monkeypox screening in asymptomatic MSM patients in areas of low prevalence does not seem to be an appropriate approach to deal with the ongoing outbreak. Therefore, we recommend to focus more on vaccinations, targeted nonstigmatizing information and behavior recommendation for risk populations, and to engage further investigations.

Clinical characteristics and comparison of longitudinal qPCR results from different specimen types in a cohort of ambulatory and hospitalized patients infected with monkeypox virus.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing monkeypox virus outbreak includes at least 7553 confirmed cases in previously non-endemic countries worldwide as of July 2022. Clinical presentation has been reported as highly variable, sometimes lacking classically described systemic symptoms, and only small numbers of cutaneous lesions in most patients. The aim of this study was to compare clinical data with longitudinal qPCR results from lesion swabs, oropharyngeal swabs and blood in a well characterized patient cohort. METHODS: 16 male patients (5 hospitalized, 11 outpatients) were included in the study cohort and serial testing for monkeypox virus-DNA carried out in various materials throughout the course of disease. Laboratory analysis included quantitative PCR, next-generation sequencing, immunofluorescence tests and virus isolation in cell culture. RESULTS: All patients were male, between age 20 and 60, and self-identified as men having sex with men. Two had a known HIV infection, coinciding with an increased number of lesions and viral DNA detectable in blood. In initial- and serial testing, lesion swabs yielded viral DNA-loads at, or above 106 cp/ml and only declined during the third week. Oropharyngeal swabs featured lower viral loads and returned repeatedly negative in some cases. Viral culture was successful only from lesion swabs but not from oropharyngeal swabs or plasma. DISCUSSION: The data presented underscore the reliability of lesion swabs for monkeypox virus-detection, even in later stages of the disease. Oropharyngeal swabs and blood samples alone carry the risk of false negative results, but may hold value in pre-/asymptomatic cases or viral load monitoring, respectively.

Perceived inequity, professional and personal fulfillment by women intensivists in France.

BACKGROUND: The medical workforce has been feminized for the last two decades worldwide. Nonetheless, women remain under-represented among intensivists. We conducted a survey among French women intensivists to assess their professional and personal quality of life and their perception of potential gender discrimination at work. METHODS: We conducted an observational descriptive study by sending a survey, designed by the group FEMMIR (FEmmes Médecins en Médecine Intensive Réanimation), to women intensivists in France, using primarily the Société de Réanimation de Langue Française (SRLF) mailing list. The questionnaire was also available online between September 2019 and January 2020 and women intensivists were encouraged to answer through email reminders. It pertained to five main domains, including demographic characteristics, work position, workload and clinical/research activities, self-fulfillment scale, perceived discrimination at work and suggested measures to implement. RESULTS: Three hundred and seventy-one women responded to the questionnaire, among whom 16% had an academic position. Being a woman intensivist and pregnancy were both considered to increase difficulties in careers' advancement by 31% and 73% of the respondents, respectively. Almost half of the respondents (46%) quoted their quality of life equal to or lower than 6 on a scale varying from 1 (very bad quality of life) to 10 (excellent quality of life). They were 52% to feel an imbalance between their personal and professional life at the cost of their personal life. Gender discrimination has been experienced by 55% of the respondents while 37% confided having already been subject of bullying or harassment. Opportunities to adjust their work timetable including part-time work, better considerations for pregnant women including increasing the number of intensivists and the systematic replacement during maternity leave, and the respect of the law regarding the paternity leave were suggested as key measures to enable better professional and personal accomplishment by women intensivists. CONCLUSION: In this first large French survey in women intensivists, we pointed out issues felt by women intensivists that included an imbalance between professional and personal life, a perceived loss of opportunity due to the fact of being a woman, frequent reported bullying or harassment and a lack of consideration of the needs related to pregnancy and motherhood.