Prediction of unfavorable outcomes in community-acquired bacteremia by SIRS, SOFA and qSOFA scores.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis diagnostic and prognostic scoring systems have changed over time. It remains uncertain which scoring system is the best predictor of unfavorable outcomes. We aimed to evaluate prediction of community-acquired bacteremia (CAB) outcomes using on-admission systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) and quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA). METHODS: We present a retrospective observational cohort study of consecutive adult patients hospitalized with CAB over ten years. SIRS, qSOFA and SOFA scores calculated on admission were dichotomized as ≥2 or 0-1. Raw and adjusted incidence of a composite unfavorable outcome (death, septic shock, invasive mechanical ventilation, extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation, renal replacement therapy) over 35 days were compared. RESULTS: Among 1930 patients, 1221 (63.3%) had SIRS, 196 (10.2%) had qSOFA, and 1117 (57.9%) had SOFA≥2. Respective raw and adjusted probabilities of the outcome were similar. Incidence for qSOFA≥2 was high (41.3%) and still considerable for qSOFA 0-1 (5.4%). SOFA≥2 indicated higher risk than SIRS≥2 (14.7% vs. 12.4%), while SOFA 0-1 indicated lower risk than SIRS 0-1 (1.2% vs. 3.1%). This relationship between SOFA and SIRS was also observed in patients with qSOFA 0-1. CONCLUSIONS: qSOFA≥2 was associated with highest probability of unfavorable outcome, but dichotomized SOFA was more precise at high vs. low-risk distinction. Consecutive use of dichotomized qSOFA and SOFA on admission of adults with CAB enables fast and reliable identification of patients at high (qSOFA≥2, risk ~≥35%), moderate (qSOFA 0-1, SOFA≥2, risk ~10%), and low risk (qSOFA 0-1, SOFA 0-1, risk 1-2%) of subsequent unfavorable events.

Decline of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG Antibody Levels 6 Months after Complete BNT162b2 Vaccination in Healthcare Workers to Levels Observed Following the First Vaccine Dose.

Research on post-vaccination antibody dynamics has become pivotal in estimating COVID-19 vaccine efficacy. We studied anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike RBD IgG levels in 587 healthcare workers (2038 sera) who completed BNT162b2 vaccination. Average antibody titer 3 weeks after the first dose in COVID-19-naïve participants (median 873.5 AU/mL) was 18-fold higher than the test threshold, with a significant increase 1 month (median 9927.2 AU/mL) and an exponential decrease 3 (median 2976.7 AU/mL) and 6 (median 966.0 AU/mL) months after complete vaccination. Participants with a history of COVID-19 prior to vaccination showed significantly higher antibody levels, particularly after the first dose (median 14,280.2 AU/mL), with a slight decline 1 month (median 12,700.0 AU/mL) and an exponential decline in antibody titers 3 (median 4831.0 AU/mL) and 6 (median 1465.2 AU/mL) months after vaccination. Antibody levels of COVID-19-naïve subjects after the first dose were moderately correlated with age (r = -0.4). Multivariate analysis showed a strong independent correlation between IgG levels 6 months after vaccination and both IgG titers after the first dose and 1 month after vaccination (R2 = 0.709). Regardless of pre-vaccination COVID-19 history, IgG levels 6 months after vaccination were comparable to antibody levels reached by COVID-19-naïve participants after the first vaccine dose.

[Guidelines on hand hygiene in health care institutions]. / Smjernice za higijenu ruku u zdravstvenim ustanovama.

Healthcare associated infections (HCAI) are huge problem all over the world, and 5-10% of all hospitalized patients will develop infection during hospitalization. From the times of I. P. Semelweiss we know that clean hands are the most important single factor that can decrease the number of HCAI. World Health Organization (WHO) has recognised this problem and developed Guidelines for hand hygiene in healthcare institutions. This also was the reason of developing Croatian national Guidelines. The main goal of the Guidelines was to decrease number of HCAI associated with the hands of healthcare workers. These Guidelines are meant for all healthcare workers and other hospital staff who come to the direct contact with patients. An interdisciplinary team of experts developed these Guidelines using WHO Guidelines, other existing guidelines and literature reviews for hand hygiene. Grades of evidence for specific recommendations were determined using CDC/HICPAC grading system. Categorization is based on existing data, theoretical basis, applicability and economic impact. After a broad discussion in different professional societies, Guidelines were accepted. Guidelines include recommendations for hand hygiene indications, hand hygiene technique, surgical hand preparation, choosing hand hygiene preparations, skin care, nails, glove use, patients and visitors hand hygiene, role of education, as well as role of healthcare institution and role of government. Furthermore, in the Guidelines the concept of "Five moments for hand hygiene" is explained in detail, and main literature data are presented.