COVID-19 vaccines reduce mortality in hospitalized patients with oxygen requirements: Differences between vaccine subtypes. A multicontinental cohort study.

The aim of this study was to analyze whether the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine reduces mortality in patients with moderate or severe COVID-19 disease requiring oxygen therapy. A retrospective cohort study, with data from 148 hospitals in both Spain (111 hospitals) and Argentina (37 hospitals), was conducted. We evaluated hospitalized patients for COVID-19 older than 18 years with oxygen requirements. Vaccine protection against death was assessed through a multivariable logistic regression and propensity score matching. We also performed a subgroup analysis according to vaccine type. The adjusted model was used to determine the population attributable risk. Between January 2020 and May 2022, we evaluated 21,479 COVID-19 hospitalized patients with oxygen requirements. Of these, 338 (1.5%) patients received a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and 379 (1.8%) were fully vaccinated. In vaccinated patients, mortality was 20.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 17.9-24), compared to 19.5% (95% CI: 19-20) in unvaccinated patients, resulting in a crude odds ratio (OR) of 1.07 (95% CI: 0.89-1.29; p = 0.41). However, after considering the multiple comorbidities in the vaccinated group, the adjusted OR was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.56-0.95; p = 0.02) with a population attributable risk reduction of 4.3% (95% CI: 1-5). The higher risk reduction for mortality was with messenger RNA (mRNA) BNT162b2 (Pfizer) (OR 0.37; 95% CI: 0.23-0.59; p < 0.01), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca) (OR 0.42; 95% CI: 0.20-0.86; p = 0.02), and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) (OR 0.68; 95% CI: 0.41-1.12; p = 0.13), and lower with Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik) (OR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.6-1.45; p = 0.76). COVID-19 vaccines significantly reduce the probability of death in patients suffering from a moderate or severe disease (oxygen therapy).

Initial accuracy of bedside ultrasound performed by emergency physicians for multiple indications after a short training period.

PURPOSES: Emergency physician-performed ultrasonography holds promise as a rapid and accurate method to diagnose multiple diseases in the emergency department (ED). Our objective was to assess the initial diagnostic accuracy (first 55 explorations) of emergency physician-performed ultrasonography for multiple categories of ultrasound use after a short training period. BASIC PROCEDURES: This was a prospective observational study conducted at an urban ED from June 2010 to March 2011 in patients with suspected cholecystitis, hydronephrosis, deep vein thrombosis, and different cardiovascular problems. Five physicians had a 10-hour training session before enrolling patients. The test characteristics of bedside ultrasonography were determined with the final radiologist/cardiologist interpretation. MAIN FINDINGS: A total of 275 ultrasonographic examinations were performed (78 abdominal explorations, 80 renal explorations, 76 2-point compression ultrasonographic examinations in patients with suspected deep vein thrombosis, and 41 echocardiograms in patients with different acute cardiovascular problems). Radiologists/cardiologists detected 28 cases of cholecystitis, 26 cases of deep vein thrombosis, 49 cases of hydronephrosis, and 15 cases of significant cardiovascular alterations. The overall diagnostic accuracy of ED ultrasonograms yielded a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 92.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90%-99%), 89% (95% CI, 84%-94%), 86.2 % (95% CI, 82%-93%), and 94.2% (95% CI, 92%-99%), respectively. Nineteen (6.9%) false-positive results and 6 false-negative results (2.1%) were obtained. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: Emergency physicians in our institution attained reasonably high initial accuracy in the performance of ultrasonography for a variety of clinical problems after a 10-hour training period.