The risk perception of COVID-19 and practice of precautionary measures amongst healthcare workers in the National Health Insurance Scheme Clinic of a tertiary hospital in Nigeria.

INTRODUCTION: the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), the causative virus for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), was identified following the report of a cluster of cases of viral (atypical) pneumonia in Wuhan City of China. Healthcare workers are at high risk of contracting the infection from COVID-19 patients and also spreading it unknowingly to their families, especially if they do not take adequate precautionary measures. This study assessed the risk perception of COVID-19 and practice of precautionary measures against its spread amongst healthcare workers practicing in the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) Clinic of a tertiary hospital in Nigeria. METHODS: this was a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted amongst healthcare workers in the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) Clinic of a tertiary hospital in Nigeria. It employed the use of a pre-tested semi-structured questionnaire to obtain data from the participants. Data analysis was done using the IBM SPSS statistics version 22.0 (Chicago, IL, USA) statistical software. RESULTS: there were 49 study participants with all of them aware of COVID-19. Only 11(22.4%) respondents reported receiving training on infection prevention and control against COVID-19. Most of them received training from their workplace/hospital (12.2%), while 10.2% were trained via webinars. More of the respondents had moderate risk perception (n=17, 34.7%) while a majority of them had good practice of precautionary measures against COVID-19 (n=28, 57.1%). Conclusion: most of the study participants had moderate risk perception and good practice of precautionary measures. Risk perception was not a significant predictor of practice of precautionary measures.

Considerations for fair prioritization of COVID-19 vaccine and its mandate among healthcare personnel.

With current COVID-19 vaccine demand outweighing supply and the emergency authorization/rollout of three novel vaccines in the United States, discussions continue regarding fair prioritization among various groups for this scarce resource. The US federal government's recommended vaccination schedule, meant to assist states with vaccine allocation, demonstrates fair ethical considerations; however, difficulties remain comparing various groups to determine fair vaccine access and distribution. Although strides have been taken to analyze risks versus benefits of early vaccination across certain high-risk populations, prioritizing vulnerable populations versus essential workers remains challenging for multiple reasons. Similarly, as COVID-19 vaccine allocation and distribution continues in the US and in other countries, topics that require continued consideration include sub-prioritization among currently prioritized groups, prioritization among vulnerable groups disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, like ethnic minorities, and holistic comparisons between groups who might receive various and disparate benefits from vaccination. Although all current COVID-19 vaccines are emergency authorization use only and a vaccine mandate would be considered only once these vaccines are licensed by the US Food and Drug Administration, future vaccination policies require time and deliberation. Similarly, given current vaccine hesitancy, mandatory vaccination of certain groups, like healthcare personnel, may need to be considered when these vaccines are licensed, especially if voluntary vaccination proves insufficient. Continued discussions regarding risks versus benefits of mandatory COVID-19 vaccination and the unique role of healthcare personnel in providing a safe healthcare environment could lead to better deliberation regarding potential policies. This commentary aims to address both questions of fair prioritization and sub-prioritization of various groups, as well as ethical considerations for mandatory COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare personnel.

Safety in the use of ultrasound in rheumatology during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Spanish Society of Rheumatology positioning paper. / Seguridad en el uso de la ecografía en reumatología durante la pandemia COVID-19. Documento de posicionamiento de la Sociedad Española de Reumatología.

Ultrasound is a widely implemented imaging modality in rheumatology practice that implies a great interaction between patient and professional. The COVID-19 pandemic requires a change in our clinical practice, through the adoption of new strategies that allow comprehensive care for our patients, guaranteeing the safety of both patients and healthcare professionals. OBJETIVE: Our objective was to develop practical recommendations, agreed among a panel of experts, on the use and safety of rheumatological ultrasound during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We performed a narrative review of the available literature. Based on the literature review, we produced preliminary recommendations that were subsequently agreed among a panel of experts using the Delphi methodology with a 1-5 Likert scale. Agreement for each recommendation was considered if 75% of the panel members scored the item ≥4 on the Likert scale. RESULTS: 5 overarching principles and 28 recommendations were issued and agreed among the panel. Group consensus was achieved in 100% of items. CONCLUSIONS: The document provides useful information about preventive measures in the practice of ultrasound in rheumatology in times of a COVID-19 pandemic based on the experience and literature available to date.

Antimicrobial mouthwashes (gargling) and nasal sprays administered to patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection to improve patient outcomes and to protect healthcare workers treating them.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 infection poses a serious risk to patients and - due to its contagious nature - to those healthcare workers (HCWs) treating them. If the mouth and nose of patients with infection are irrigated with antimicrobial solutions, this may help the patients by killing any coronavirus present at those sites. It may also reduce the risk of the active infection being passed to HCWs through droplet transmission or direct contact. However, the use of such antimicrobial solutions may be associated with harms related to the toxicity of the solutions themselves or alterations in the natural microbial flora of the mouth or nose. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of antimicrobial mouthwashes and nasal sprays administered to patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection to both the patients and the HCWs caring for them. SEARCH METHODS: Information Specialists from Cochrane ENT and Cochrane Oral Health searched the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2020, Issue 6); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 1 June 2020.  SELECTION CRITERIA: This is a question that urgently requires evidence, however at the present time we did not anticipate finding many completed RCTs. We therefore planned to include the following types of studies: randomised controlled trials (RCTs); quasi-RCTs; non-randomised controlled trials; prospective cohort studies; retrospective cohort studies; cross-sectional studies; controlled before-and-after studies. We set no minimum duration for the studies.   We sought studies comparing antimicrobial mouthwash and/or nasal spray (alone or in combination) at any concentration, delivered with any frequency or dosage to suspected/confirmed COVID-19 patients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were: 1) RECOVERY* (www.recoverytrial.net) outcomes in patients (mortality; hospitalisation status; use of ventilation; use of renal dialysis or haemofiltration); 2) incidence of symptomatic or test-positive COVID-19 infection in HCWs; 3) significant adverse event: anosmia (or disturbance in sense of smell). Our secondary outcomes were: 4) change in COVID-19 viral load in patients; 5) COVID-19 viral content of aerosol (when present); 6) other adverse events: changes in microbiome in oral cavity, nasal cavity, oro- or nasopharynx; 7) other adverse events: allergy, irritation/burning of nasal, oral or oropharyngeal mucosa (e.g. erosions, ulcers, bleeding), long-term staining of mucous membranes or teeth, accidental ingestion. We planned to use GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We found no completed studies to include in this review. We identified 16 ongoing studies (including 14 RCTs), which aim to enrol nearly 1250 participants. The interventions included in these trials are ArtemiC (artemisinin, curcumin, frankincense and vitamin C), Citrox (a bioflavonoid), cetylpyridinium chloride, chlorhexidine, chlorine dioxide, essential oils, hydrogen peroxide, hypertonic saline, Kerecis spray (omega 3 viruxide - containing neem oil and St John's wort), neem extract, nitric oxide releasing solution, povidone iodine and saline with baby shampoo.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We identified no studies for inclusion in this review. This is not surprising given the relatively recent emergence of COVID-19 infection. It is promising that the question posed in this review is being addressed by a number of RCTs and other studies. We are concerned that few of the ongoing studies specifically state that they will evaluate adverse events such as changes in the sense of smell or to the oral and nasal microbiota, and any consequences thereof. Very few interventions have large and dramatic effect sizes. If a positive treatment effect is demonstrated when studies are available for inclusion in this review, it may not be large. In these circumstances in particular it may be a challenge to weigh up the benefits against the harms if the latter are of uncertain frequency and severity.

An infection-oriented approach for thoracic endovascular aortic repair in a SARS-CoV-2 positive patient. A case report.

CASE REPORT: A 64-year-old woman presented to our emergency department during the outbreak of the covid-19 emergency in Italy with syncope, anosmia, mild dyspnoea and atypical chest and dorsal pain. A chest CT scan showed an acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD) and bilateral lung involvement with ground-glass opacity, compatible with interstitial pneumonia. Nasopharyngeal swabs resulted positive for SARS-CoV-2. For the persistence of chest pain, despite the analgesic therapy, we decided to treat her with a TEVAR. Patient's chest and back pain resolved during the first few days after the procedure. No surgical or respiratory complications occurred and the patient was discharged 14 days after surgery. DISCUSSION: By performing the operation under local anesthesia, it was possible to limit both the staff inside the operatory room and droplet/aerosol release. Since we had to perform the operation in a hemodynamics room, thanks to the limited extension of the endoprosthesis and the good caliber of the right vertebral artery we were able to reduce the risk of spinal cord ischemia despite the lack of a revascularization of the left subclavian artery. CONCLUSIONS: A minimally invasive total endovascular approach allows, through local anesthesia and percutaneous access, to avoid surgical cut down and orotracheal intubation. This, combined with a defined management protocol for infected patients, seems to be a reasonable way to perform endovascular aortic procedures in urgent setting, even in a SARSCoV- 2 positive patient. KEY WORDS: COVID-19, Dissection, TEVAR.

Subarachnoid hemorrhage guidance in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic - An opinion to mitigate exposure and conserve personal protective equipment.

Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) patients require frequent neurological examinations, neuroradiographic diagnostic testing and lengthy intensive care unit stay. Previously established SAH treatment protocols are impractical to impossible to adhere to in the current COVID-19 crisis due to the need for infection containment and shortage of critical care resources, including personal protective equipment (PPE). Centers need to adopt modified protocols to optimize SAH care and outcomes during this crisis. In this opinion piece, we assembled a multidisciplinary, multicenter team to develop and propose a modified guidance algorithm that optimizes SAH care and workflow in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic. This guidance is to be adapted to the available resources of a local institution and does not replace clinical judgment when faced with an individual patient.

A cross-sectional study of immune seroconversion to SARS-CoV-2 in frontline maternity health professionals.

COVID-19, the respiratory disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, is thought to cause a milder illness in pregnancy with a greater proportion of asymptomatic carriers. This has important implications for the risk of patient-to-staff, staff-to-staff and staff-to-patient transmission among health professionals in maternity units. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of previously undiagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection in health professionals from two tertiary-level maternity units in London, UK, and to determine associations between healthcare workers' characteristics, reported symptoms and serological evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. In total, 200 anaesthetists, midwives and obstetricians, with no previously confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, were tested for immune seroconversion using laboratory IgG assays. Comprehensive symptom and medical histories were also collected. Five out of 40 (12.5%; 95%CI 4.2-26.8%) anaesthetists, 7/52 (13.5%; 95%CI 5.6-25.8%) obstetricians and 17/108 (15.7%; 95%CI 9.5-24.0%) midwives were seropositive, with an overall total of 29/200 (14.5%; 95%CI 9.9-20.1%) of maternity healthcare workers testing positive for IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Of those who had seroconverted, 10/29 (35.5%) were completely asymptomatic. Fever or cough were only present in 6/29 (21%) and 10/29 (35%) respectively. Anosmia was the most common symptom occurring in 15/29 (52%) seropositive participants and was the only symptom that was predictive of positive seroconversion (OR 18; 95%CI 6-55). Of those who were seropositive, 59% had not self-isolated at any point and continued to provide patient care in the hospital setting. This is the largest study of baseline immune seroconversion in maternity healthcare workers conducted to date and reveals that one out of six were seropositive, of whom one out of three were asymptomatic. This has significant implications for the risk of occupational transmission of SARS-CoV-2 for both staff and patients in maternity units. Regular testing of staff, including asymptomatic staff should be considered to reduce transmission risk.

Response of Practicing Chiropractors during the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Descriptive Report.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has strained all levels of healthcare and it is not known how chiropractic practitioners have responded to this crisis. The purpose of this report is to describe responses by a sample of chiropractors during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We used a qualitative-constructivist design to understand chiropractic practice during the COVID-19 pandemic, as described by the participants. A sample of chiropractic practitioners (doctors of chiropractic, chiropractors) from various international locations were invited to participate. Each described the public health response to COVID-19 in their location and the actions that they took in their chiropractic practices from April 20 through May 4, 2020. A summary report was created from their responses and common themes were identified. RESULTS: Eighteen chiropractic practitioners representing 17 locations and 11 countries participated. A variety of practice environments were represented in this sample, including, solo practice, mobile practice, private hospital, US Veterans Administration health care, worksite health center, and group practice. They reported that they recognized and abided by changing governmental regulations. They observed their patients experience increased stress and mental health concerns resulting from the pandemic. They adopted innovative strategies, such as telehealth, to do outreach, communicate with, and provide care for patients. They abided by national and World Health Organization recommendations and they adopted creative strategies to maintain connectivity with patients through a people-centered, integrated, and collaborative approach. CONCLUSION: Although the chiropractors in this sample practiced in different cities and countries, their compliance with local regulations, concern for staff and patient safety, and people-centered responses were consistent. This sample covers all 7 World Federation of Chiropractic regions (ie, African, Asian, Eastern Mediterranean, European, Latin American, North American, and Pacific) and provides insights into measures taken by chiropractors during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. This information may assist the chiropractic profession as it prepares for different scenarios as new evidence about this disease evolves.

The structural vulnerability of healthcare workers during COVID-19: Observations on the social context of risk and the equitable distribution of resources.

Healthcare workers have emerged as a vulnerable population group during COVID-19, and securing supply chains of personal protective equipment (PPE) has been identified as a critical issue to protect healthcare workers and to prevent health system overwhelm. While securing PPE is a complex logistical challenge facing many countries, it is vital to recognise the social and health systems issues that structure the differential degrees of risk faced by various subgroups of healthcare workers. As an illustrative case study, the author identifies two key social factors that are likely to face the degrees of risk faced by midwives in the Special Region of Yogyakarta, Indonesia, if and when COVID-19 takes hold in Indonesia. Healthcare workers in both high and low resource-settings globally are likely to face particular risks and vulnerabilities that are shaped by localized social and health systems factors. Qualitative social and health systems research can and should be utilized proactively in order to protect healthcare workers, to inform more equitable program design, and to create a foundation for health equity within the future of global health that emerges from the pandemic.

Providing uninterrupted care during COVID-19 pandemic: experience from Beijing Tiantan Hospital.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has already stressed the healthcare system in the world. Many hospitals have been overwhelmed by the large number of patients with COVID-19. Due to the shortage of equipment and personnel and the highly contagious nature of COVID-19, many other healthcare services are on hold. However, at Beijing Tiantan Hospital, a rapid response system has been in place so that routine care is not interrupted. We, therefore, would like to share our hospital-wide prevention and management policy during this pandemic to help other healthcare systems to function in this crisis. METHOD: Tiantan hospital is one of the leading neuroscience institutions in the world. With 1650 beds, its annual inpatient admission exceeds 30 000 patients. Its COVID-19 rapid response policy was reviewed for its functionality. RESULTS: There are nine key components of this policy: an incident management system; a comprehensive infection prevention and control, outpatient triage and flow system; a designated fever clinic; patient screening and administration; optimised surgical operations, enhanced nucleic acid testing; screening of returning employees; and a supervision and feedback system. In addition, a specific protocol was designed for treating patients with acute stroke. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive policy is helpful to protect the employee from infection and to provide quality and uninterrupted care to all who need these, including patients with acute ischaemic stroke.

Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Guidance on Behalf of the International Fetal Medicine and Surgery Society.

The COVID-19 pandemic has stressed patients and healthcare givers alike and challenged our practice of antenatal care, including fetal diagnosis and therapy. This document aims to review relevant recent information to allow us to optimize prenatal care delivery. We discuss potential modifications to obstetric management and fetal procedures in SARS-CoV2-negative and SARS-CoV2-positive patients with fetal anomalies or disorders. Most fetal therapies are time sensitive and cannot be delayed. If personnel and resources are available, we should continue to offer procedures of proven benefit, acknowledging any fetal and maternal risks, including those to health care workers. There is, to date, minimal, unconfirmed evidence of spontaneous vertical transmission, though it may theoretically be increased with some procedures. Knowing a mother's preoperative SARS-CoV-2 status would enable us to avoid or defer certain procedures while she is contagious and to protect health care workers appropriately. Some fetal conditions may alternatively be managed neonatally. Counseling regarding fetal interventions which have a possibility of additional intra- or postoperative morbidity must be performed in the context of local resource availability. Procedures of unproven benefit should not be offered. We encourage participation in registries and trials that may help us to understand the impact of COVID-19 on pregnant women, their fetuses, and neonates.

A Stroke Care Model at an Academic, Comprehensive Stroke Center During the 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has required the adaptation of hyperacute stroke care (including stroke code pathways) and hospital stroke management. There remains a need to provide rapid and comprehensive assessment to acute stroke patients while reducing the risk of COVID-19 exposure, protecting healthcare providers, and preserving personal protective equipment (PPE) supplies. While the COVID infection is typically not a primary cerebrovascular condition, the downstream effects of this pandemic force adjustments to stroke care pathways to maintain optimal stroke patient outcomes. METHODS: The University of California San Diego (UCSD) Health System encompasses two academic, Comprehensive Stroke Centers (CSCs). The UCSD Stroke Center reviewed the national COVID-19 crisis and implications on stroke care. All current resources for stroke care were identified and adapted to include COVID-19 screening. The adjusted model focused on comprehensive and rapid acute stroke treatment, reduction of exposure to the healthcare team, and preservation of PPE. AIMS: The adjusted pathways implement telestroke assessments as a specific option for all inpatient and outpatient encounters and accounts for when telemedicine systems are not available or functional. COVID screening is done on all stroke patients. We outline a model of hyperacute stroke evaluation in an adapted stroke code protocol and novel methods of stroke patient management. CONCLUSIONS: The overall goal of the model is to preserve patient access and outcomes while decreasing potential COVID-19 exposure to patients and healthcare providers. This model also serves to reduce the use of vital PPE. It is critical that stroke providers share best practices via academic and vetted social media platforms for rapid dissemination of tools and care models during the COVID-19 crisis.

Technologies to Optimize the Care of Severe COVID-19 Patients for Health Care Providers Challenged by Limited Resources.

Health care systems are belligerently responding to the new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a specific condition, whose distinctive features are severe hypoxemia associated with (>50% of cases) normal respiratory system compliance. When a patient requires intubation and invasive ventilation, the outcome is poor, and the length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) is usually 2 or 3 weeks. In this article, the authors review several technological devices, which could support health care providers at the bedside to optimize the care for COVID-19 patients who are sedated, paralyzed, and ventilated. Particular attention is provided to the use of videolaryngoscopes (VL) because these can assist anesthetists to perform a successful intubation outside the ICU while protecting health care providers from this viral infection. Authors will also review processed electroencephalographic (EEG) monitors which are used to better titrate sedation and the train-of-four monitors which are utilized to better administer neuromuscular blocking agents in the view of sparing limited pharmacological resources. COVID-19 can rapidly exhaust human and technological resources too within the ICU. This review features a series of technological advancements that can significantly improve the care of patients requiring isolation. The working conditions in isolation could cause gaps or barriers in communication, fatigue, and poor documentation of provided care. The available technology has several advantages including (a) facilitating appropriate paperless documentation and communication between all health care givers working in isolation rooms or large isolation areas; (b) testing patients and staff at the bedside using smart point-of-care diagnostics (SPOCD) to confirm COVID-19 infection; (c) allowing diagnostics and treatment at the bedside through point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) and thromboelastography (TEG); (d) adapting the use of anesthetic machines and the use of volatile anesthetics. Implementing technologies for safeguarding health care providers as well as monitoring the limited pharmacological resources are paramount. Only by leveraging new technologies, it will be possible to sustain and support health care systems during the expected long course of this pandemic.