Thromboelastometry demonstrates endogenous coagulation activation in nonsevere and severe COVID-19 patients and has applicability as a decision algorithm for intervention.

In patients with severe forms of COVID-19, thromboelastometry has been reported to display a hypercoagulant pattern. However, an algorithm to differentiate severe COVID-19 patients from nonsevere patients and healthy controls based on thromboelastometry parameters has not been developed. Forty-one patients over 18 years of age with positive qRT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 were classified according to the severity of the disease: nonsevere (NS, n = 20) or severe (S, n = 21). A healthy control (HC, n = 9) group was also examined. Blood samples from all participants were tested by extrinsic (EXTEM), intrinsic (INTEM), non-activated (NATEM) and functional assessment of fibrinogen (FIBTEM) assays of thromboelastometry. The thrombodynamic potential index (TPI) was also calculated. Severe COVID-19 patients exhibited a thromboelastometry profile with clear hypercoagulability, which was significantly different from the NS and HC groups. Nonsevere COVID-19 cases showed a trend to thrombotic pole. The NATEM test suggested that nonsevere and severe COVID-19 patients presented endogenous coagulation activation (reduced clotting time and clot formation time). TPI data were significantly different between the NS and S groups. The maximum clot firmness profile obtained by FIBTEM showed moderate/elevated accuracy to differentiate severe patients from NS and HC. A decision tree algorithm based on the FIBTEM-MCF profile was proposed to differentiate S from HC and NS. Thromboelastometric parameters are a useful tool to differentiate the coagulation profile of nonsevere and severe COVID-19 patients for therapeutic intervention purposes.

Orthotic use for CMC osteoarthritis: Variations among different health professionals in Brazil.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional descriptive study. INTRODUCTION: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent musculoskeletal disease in the adult and older adult populations. The use of orthoses to stabilize the thumb's articular complex is one of the most common conservative management strategies. Despite substantial research about this topic, there is insufficient evidence about the optimal use of orthoses to inform clinical practice, contributing to practice variations within and across health professionals. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To identify the prescription patterns, design preferences, and barriers for the use of orthotic devices among Brazilian health care professionals involved in the treatment of patients with OA of the basal thumb joint. METHODS: An electronic questionnaire was sent to occupational therapists, physiotherapists, and rheumatologists across Brazil through professional association mailing lists. Survey included questions about orthosis design, materials, and barriers to the use of orthotic interventions. Respondents indicated their use based on photographs of 25 orthoses models that were selected through bibliographic review and expert consultation. Descriptive statistics, the chi-square test for independence, and the Fisher exact test were used to compare differences among orthotic prescription preferences, barriers, and challenges observed amidst the 3 participants' professional classes. RESULTS: There was no consensus about orthotic prescription among 275 professionals who answered the survey. About 69% of participants reported the use of multiple orthosis during treatment of patients with thumb OA. Results suggest significant variations in the number of joints included and stabilization strategies adopted, with a preference for orthotics made in rigid materials and involving the wrist, carpometacarpal, and metacarpophalangeal joints (P < .001). The lack of knowledge about orthotic options, institutional regulations, and policies were the major barriers reported by respondents (P < .01). CONCLUSION: A plentiful variety of different orthoses designs were observed in this study, and the prescriptions made by 3 professional classes showed differences regarding types of stabilization, joint involvement, and positioning. Despite the existence of clinical trials suggesting benefits for specific custom-made design models, our results indicated widespread clinical variation in practices and preferences. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Not applicable.

Adele Bloch-Bauer (1881-1925): Possible diagnoses for Gustav Klimt's Lady in Gold.

One of the most famous works by the Austrian symbolist painter Gustav Klimt and one of the most widely reproduced works of art worldwide, Adele Bloch-Bauer I which portrays the beautiful wife of Austrian magnate Ferdinand Bloch-Bauer. Adele was the only woman painted by Klimt on more than one occasion. Apart from the beauty and value of the painting, the daring sea of gold that surrounds Adele and the gentle intimacy with which her fragile figure is portrayed have shrouded the history of this painting in mystery. Beyond speculation as to a special bond between artist and model, observation of the painting with a keener, clinical gaze yields evidence of potential illness in the model: facial erythema which, if not produced artificially by makeup, could represent a malar rash; pallor or cyanosis of the hands; and her draped fingers, which seemingly attempt to hide a deformity. This paper seeks to provide a biographical review both of the painter, Gustav Klimt, and of the subject, Adele Bloch-Bauer; to analyse Klimt's two portrayals of her in a search for evidence of a potential intimate relationship between artist and muse and, finally, to compile clinical evidence of possible diagnoses for the Lady in Gold.