Architectural interventions to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in emergency departments.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency departments (EDs) are a critical entry gate for infectious agents into hospitals. In this interdisciplinary study, we explore how infection prevention and control (IPC) architectural interventions mitigate the spread of emerging respiratory pathogens using the example of SARS-CoV-2 in a prototypical ED. METHODS: Using an agent-based approach, we integrated data on patients' and healthcare workers' (HCWs) routines and the architectural characteristics of key ED areas. We estimated the number of transmissions in the ED by modelling the interactions between and among patients and HCWs. Architectural interventions were guided towards the gradual separation of pathogen carriers, compliance with a minimum interpersonal distance, and deconcentrating airborne pathogens (higher air exchange rates (AERs)). Interventions were epidemiologically evaluated for their mitigation effects on diverse endpoints. RESULTS: Simulation results indicated that higher AERs in the ED (compared with baseline) may provide a moderate level of infection mitigation (incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 0.95 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93-0.98)) while the overall burden decreased more when rooms in examination areas were separated (IRR of 0.78 (95% CI 0.76-0.81)) or when the size of the ED base was increased (IRR of 0.79 (95% CI 0.78-0.81)). The reduction in SARS-CoV-2-associated nosocomial transmissions was largest when architectural interventions were combined (IRR of 0.61 (95% CI 0.59-0.63)). CONCLUSIONS: These modelling results highlight the importance of IPC architectural interventions; they can be devised independently of profound knowledge of an emerging pathogen, focusing on technical, constructive, and functional components. These results may inform public health decision-makers and hospital architects on how IPC architectural interventions can be optimally used in healthcare premises.

Use of vasoactive/vasodilating drugs for systemic sclerosis (SSc)-related digital ulcers (DUs) in expert tertiary centres: results from the analysis of the observational real-life DeSScipher study.

INTRODUCTION: DeSScipher is the first European multicentre study on management of systemic sclerosis (SSc), and its observational trial 1 (OT1) evaluated the efficacy of different drugs for digital ulcer (DU) prevention and healing. The aim of this study was to assess current use of vasoactive/vasodilating agents for SSc-related DU in the expert centres by analysing the baseline data of the DeSScipher OT1. METHOD: Baseline characteristics of patients enrolled in the OT1 and data regarding DU were analysed. RESULTS: The most commonly used drugs, in both patients with and without DU, were calcium channel blockers (CCBs) (71.6%), followed by intravenous iloprost (20.8%), endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs) (20.4%) and phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE-5) inhibitors (16.5%). Of patients, 32.6% with DU and 12.8% without DU received two drugs (p < 0.001), while 11.5% with DU and 1.9% without DU were treated with a combination of three or more agents (p < 0.001). Sixty-five percent of the patients with recurrent DU were treated with bosentan and/or sildenafil. However, 64 out of 277 patients with current DU (23.1%) and 101 (23.6%) patients with recurrent DU were on CCBs alone. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that CCBs are still the most commonly used agents for DU management in SSc. The proportion of patients on combination therapy was low, even in patients with recurrent DU: almost one out of four patients with current and recurrent DU was on CCBs alone. Prospective analysis is planned to investigate the efficacy of different drugs/drug combinations on DU healing and prevention. Key Points • The analysis of DeSScipher, the first European multicentre study on management of SSc, has shown that the most commonly used vasoactive/vasodilating drugs for DU were CCBs, followed by intravenous Iloprost, ERAs and PDE-5 inhibitors. • More than half of the patients with recurrent DU received bosentan and/or sildenafil. • However, the proportion of patients on combination therapy of more than one vasoactive/vasodilating drug was low and almost one out of four patients with current and recurrent DU was on CCBs alone.

Classification, categorization and essential items for digital ulcer evaluation in systemic sclerosis: a DeSScipher/European Scleroderma Trials and Research group (EUSTAR) survey.

BACKGROUND: A consensus on digital ulcer (DU) definition in systemic sclerosis (SSc) has been recently reached (Suliman et al., J Scleroderma Relat Disord 2:115-20, 2017), while for their evaluation, classification and categorisation, it is still missing. The aims of this study were to identify a set of essential items for digital ulcer (DU) evaluation, to assess if the existing DU classification was useful and feasible in clinical practice and to investigate if the new categorisation was preferred to the simple distinction of DU in recurrent and not recurrent, in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). METHODS: DeSScipher is the largest European multicentre study on SSc. It consists of five observational trials (OTs), and one of them, OT1, is focused on DU management. The DeSScipher OT1 items on DU that reached ≥ 60% of completion rate were administered to EUSTAR (European Scleroderma Trials and Research group) centres via online survey. Questions about feasibility and usefulness of the existing DU classification (DU due to digital pitting scars, to loss of tissue, derived from calcinosis and gangrene) and newly proposed categorisation (episodic, recurrent and chronic) were also asked. RESULTS: A total of 84/148 (56.8%) EUSTAR centres completed the questionnaire. DeSScipher items scored by ≥ 70% of the participants as essential and feasible for DU evaluation were the number of DU defined as a loss of tissue (level of agreement 92%), recurrent DU (84%) and number of new DU (74%). For 65% of the centres, the proposed classification of DU was considered useful and feasible in clinical practice. Moreover, 80% of the centres preferred the categorisation of DU in episodic, recurrent and chronic to simple distinction in recurrent/not recurrent DU. CONCLUSIONS: For clinical practice, EUSTAR centres identified only three essential items for DU evaluation and considered the proposed classification and categorisation as useful and feasible. The set of items needs to be validated while further implementation of DU classification and categorisation is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Observational trial on DU (OT1) is one of the five trials of the DeSScipher project (ClinicalTrials.gov; OT1 Identifier: NCT01836263 , posted on April 19, 2013).

Travel style is a major risk factor for diarrhoea in India: a prospective cohort study.

Although some studies suggested specific foods/beverages as risk factors for travellers' diarrhoea (TD), details of transmission remain unclear. We assessed the influence of travel style (luxury/middle-class versus backpacking) on TD risk. TD attack rates were compared in a prospective study among travellers to India at the University of Zurich's Travel Clinic. Information on consumption of foods/beverages was collected. Seventy-one luxury/middle-class travellers and 21 backpackers completed the study; overall 37% suffered from TD (62% backpackers, 30% luxury/middle-class travellers, OR 4.43, p 0.022). Travel style rather than the consumption of specific foods/beverages appears to be a risk factor for TD development.