Effectiveness of a Program to Raise Awareness About Pneumococcal Vaccination Among Physicians and Patients with Chronic Respiratory Diseases: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: There is a need to increase patient and clinician awareness on the effectiveness of pneumococcal vaccination in at-risk groups. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of reminders for physicians and patients using the vaccination tracking system created in the hospital information management system (HIMS) on the vaccination rate, and the effect of pneumococcal vaccination on pneumonia-related hospitalization and mortality over a 12-month period. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective observational cohort study was undertaken during a 2-year period in 3 tertiary care centers. Patients were followed up for 12 months following vaccination, and hospital admissions and mortality were recorded via HIMS. During the campaign, HIMS transmitted pneumococcal immunization reminder messages in accordance with guideline recommendations to physicians' computers and patients' mobile phones. Educational posters on pneumococcal vaccination were posted in outpatient clinics. Regular seminars on the evidence for pneumococcal vaccination were organized. All patients who were hospitalized during the follow-up period for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, lung cancer, or pneumonia were analyzed in relation to their vaccination history regarding clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 29530 patients were included in the study. During the study period, the annual vaccination rate increased by 74.4% and reached 4.8% in 3 hospitals (P = .001). The rates were 3.9% in patients older than 65 years without comorbidities and 5.2% in those with COPD and asthma (P = .002). In pneumococcal vaccine recipients, pneumonia-related hospital mortality was lower (relative risk (RR) = 0.19, CI 0.09-0.35, P < .001). CONCLUSION: It is possible to raise the rate of pneumococcal vaccination through awareness campaigns. Individuals with COPD and asthma are more willing to receive pneumococcal vaccination. Among patients hospitalized for pneumonia, prior pneumococcal vaccination is associated with lower mortalit.

Does Pneumococcal Vaccination Have an Effect on Hospital Costs?

OBJECTIVE: It is known that inpatient hospital costs are much higher than outpatient services. It was aimed to investigate the effect of pneumococcal vaccination on hospitalizations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The direct hospitalization costs, length of stay, and factors of the vaccinated and unvaccinated patients in the same hospital during the 12-month follow-up of the patients who received pneumococcal vaccine between November 15, 2018, and November 15, 2020, in 3 chest diseases and thoracic surgery training and research hospitals were analyzed by obtaining Hospital Information Management System records. Data were collected with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 23 program (IBM Corp.; Armonk, NY, USA) , and statistical evaluation was made. RESULTS: The mean age of 800 hospitalized patients, of whom 400 were unvaccinated and 400 were vaccinated, was 68.48 ± 11.97. There was no significant difference in the mean age of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients (P > .05). Five hundred sixty-six patients (70.8%) were aged 65 and over. Two hundred eighty (51.2%) of men were vaccinated and 120 (47.2%) of women were vaccinated, and there was no significant difference (P > .05). The mean hospital stay of these patients was 11.01 days, and those in the vaccinated group had an average mean hospital stay of 9.11 days and those in the unvaccinated group had a mean hospital stay less than 12.91 days (P < .001). Total 1-year hospitalization costs were $501.653.53 and the cost per person was calculated as $627.07. The cost per capita for the vaccinated group was $550.52, which was lower than the average cost of the unvaccinated group ($703.62) (P < .05). When comparing the status of being vaccinated, comorbidity, mortality, mean length of stay, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and heart disease were found to be statistically significant (P < .05). CONCLUSION: In our study, it was revealed that vaccination of patients hospitalized in chest disease hospitals with the pneumococcal vaccine reduced the average length of hospital stay by 41.7% and the cost of hospitalization by 27.8%.

Comparison of two scores for short-term outcomes in patients with COPD exacerbation in the emergency department: the Ottawa COPD Risk Scale and the DECAF score.

Background: While clinical decision rules have been developed to evaluate exacerbations and decisions on hospitalisation and discharge in emergency departments (EDs) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), these rules are not widely used in EDs. In this study, we compare the predictive efficacy of the Ottawa Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Risk Scale (OCRS) and the Dyspnea, Eosinopenia, Consolidation, Acidemia, and Atrial Fibrillation (DECAF) score in estimating the short-term poor outcome of patients in our ED with exacerbations of COPD. Methods: This single-centre prospective observational study was conducted over 6 months. Patients with acute exacerbations of COPD admitted to the ED during the study period were included in the study. A poor outcome was defined as any of the following: readmission and requiring hospitalisation within 14 days of discharge, requiring mechanical ventilation on the first admission, hospitalisation for longer than 14 days on the first admission, or death within 30 days. The sensitivity and specificity of the OCRS and the DECAF score for a poor outcome and for mortality were calculated. Results: Of the 385 patients who participated in the study, 85 were excluded based on the exclusion criteria. 66% of the patients were male, and the mean age was 70.15±10.36 years. A total of 20.7% of all patients (n=62) experienced poor outcomes. The sensitivity of an OCRS score <1 for predicting a poor outcome in patients was 96.8% (95% CI 88.8-99.6%) and the specificity was 18.5% (95% CI 13.8-24.0%). The sensitivity and specificity of an OCRS score <2 were 83.3% (95% CI 35.9-99.6%) and 65.5% (95% CI 59.6-70.7%), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of a DECAF score <1 were 88.7% (95% CI 78.1-95.3%) and 34.5% (95% CI 28.4-40.9%), respectively. When the DECAF score was <2, sensitivity and specificity were 69.3% (95% CI 56.4-80.4%) and 74.8% (95% CI 68.8-80.2%), respectively. Conclusion: Our physicians achieved high specificity but low sensitivity in predicting a poor outcome. The OCRS is the more sensitive of the two tools, while the DECAF score is more specific in predicting a poor outcome when all threshold values are evaluated. While both tools may results in unnecessary hospitalisation, they can reduce the incidence of hospital discharge of patients with exacerbations of COPD who will develop poor outcomes in the ED.

The presence of symptoms within 6 months after COVID-19: a single-center longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: Characterizing the post-COVID health conditions is helpful to direct patients to appropriate healthcare. AIMS: To describe the presence of symptoms in COVID-19 patients within 6 months after diagnosis and to investigate the associated factors in terms of reporting symptoms. METHODS: Data of DEU-COVIMER (a telephone interview-based COVID-19 follow-up center established in a tertiary care hospital) was analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive participants aged ≥ 18 years from November 1st, 2020, to May 31st, 2021. Symptom frequencies were stratified by demographic and clinical characteristics at one, three, and 6 months after diagnosis. With the patients who had symptoms at baseline, generalized estimating equations were applied to identify the factors associated with reporting of symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 5610 patients agreed to participate in the study. Symptom frequency was 37.2%, 21.8%, and 18.2% for the first, third, and sixth months. Tiredness/fatigue, muscle or body aches, and dyspnea/difficulty breathing were the most common symptoms in all time frames. In multivariate analysis, older age, female gender (odds ratio OR 1.74, 95% confidence interval 1.57-1.93), bad economic status (OR 1.37, 1.14-1.65), current smoking (OR 1.15, 1.02-1.29), being fully vaccinated before COVID-19 (OR 0.53, 0.40-0.72), having more health conditions (≥ 3 conditions, OR 1.78, 1.33-2.37), having more symptoms (> 5 symptoms, OR 2.47, 2.19-2.78), and hospitalization (intensive care unit, OR 2.18, 1.51-3.14) were associated with reporting of symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies risk factors for patients who experience post-COVID-19 symptoms. Healthcare providers should appropriately allocate resources prioritizing the patients who would benefit from post-COVID rehabilitation.

Smoking Cessation Success and Affecting Factors in Geriatric Patients.

Background: There are difficulties in the treatment of smoking cessation in elderly patients. However, elderly smokers who gave up smoking had lower rates of death from heart attack, stroke, and cancer, as well as improved cognitive function. This study aimed to investigate the affecting factors and the success of smoking cessation rate in patients aged 60 and over in Turkey. Methods: Six smoking cessation outpatient clinics from four provinces were included in the study. The records of 1,065 patients who applied to a smoking cessation outpatient clinic between 2016 and 2019 and who were 60 yr of age or older were scanned. Overall, 917 cases that could be reached after treatment were included in the study. Smoking cessation rates at the first month, 3rd month, 6th month, 9th month and 12th month were given. Results: Of the 917 cases, 65.1% were male and 34.9% were female. Smoking cessation rates were 45.6% on the first month, 39% on the third month, 35.1% on the sixth month, 31.2% on the ninth month, and 30.3% at the twelfth month. Smoking cessation success was higher in men than in women. Conclusion: Since the success of smoking cessation in the elderly was similar to that of adults. Since smoking is an independent risk factor for death in the elderly, there should be greater willingness to provide elderly patients with smoking cessation treatment to reduce physical function loss and promote healthier aging.

The association of antiviral drugs with COVID-19 morbidity: The retrospective analysis of a nationwide COVID-19 cohort.

Background and objectives: Although several repurposed antiviral drugs have been used for the treatment of COVID-19, only a few such as remdesivir and molnupiravir have shown promising effects. The objectives of our study were to investigate the association of repurposed antiviral drugs with COVID-19 morbidity. Methods: Patients admitted to 26 different hospitals located in 16 different provinces between March 11-July 18, 2020, were enrolled. Case definition was based on WHO criteria. Patients were managed according to the guidelines by Scientific Board of Ministry of Health of Turkey. Primary outcomes were length of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) requirement, and intubation. Results: We retrospectively evaluated 1,472 COVID-19 adult patients; 57.1% were men (mean age = 51.9 ± 17.7years). A total of 210 (14.3%) had severe pneumonia, 115 (7.8%) were admitted to ICUs, and 69 (4.7%) were intubated during hospitalization. The median (interquartile range) of duration of hospitalization, including ICU admission, was 7 (5-12) days. Favipiravir (n = 328), lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 55), and oseltamivir (n = 761) were administered as antiviral agents, and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ, n = 1,382) and azithromycin (n = 738) were used for their immunomodulatory activity. Lopinavir/ritonavir (ß [95% CI]: 4.71 [2.31-7.11]; p = 0.001), favipiravir (ß [95% CI]: 3.55 [2.56-4.55]; p = 0.001) and HCQ (ß [95% CI]: 0.84 [0.02-1.67]; p = 0.046) were associated with increased risk of lengthy hospital stays. Furthermore, favipiravir was associated with increased risks of ICU admission (OR [95% CI]: 3.02 [1.70-5.35]; p = 0.001) and invasive mechanical ventilation requirement (OR [95% CI]: 2.94 [1.28-6.75]; p = 0.011). Conclusion: Our findings demonstrated that antiviral drugs including lopinavir, ritonavir, and favipiravir were associated with negative clinical outcomes such as increased risks for lengthy hospital stay, ICU admission, and invasive mechanical ventilation requirement. Therefore, repurposing such agents without proven clinical evidence might not be the best approach for COVID-19 treatment.

Prevalence of Gastrointestinal Symptoms and Clinical Outcomes in Hospitalized Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients: A Single-Center Study from Turkey.

BACKGROUND: In patients with coronavirus disease 2019, the gastrointestinal symptoms have been reported increasingly in addition to the respiratory system symptoms. The studies show that the prevalence of gastrointestinal system symptoms and how the gastrointestinal system contributes to the severity and prognosis of the disease is still not clear. This study aims to find the prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms and the correlation between the gastrointestinal symptoms and the clinical results in hospitalized patients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019. METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzes patients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 and hospitalized in the pandemic unit between March 2020 and August 2020 and compares their demographic and clinical characteristics, laboratory and radiologic findings, coronavirus disease 2019 treatments received, the clinical course of the disease, and the gastrointestinal symptoms. RESULTS: In our study, we included 322 patients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 and hospitalized; 39 patients (12.1%) were admitted to the hospital with at least one gastrointestinal symptom (nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, and the loss of taste). Nausea and vomiting are the most common gastrointestinal symptoms with a prevalence of 7.1%, followed by diarrhea with 2.8%, the loss of taste with 2.2%, and abdominal pain with 1.5%. The mean age and D-dimer levels of the patients showing gastrointestinal symptoms were lower than those who did not have any gastrointestinal symptoms. We did not find a significant correlation between the presence of the gastrointestinal symptoms and the severity of the disease, treatment received, risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome and septic shock, admission to the intensive care unit, the need for mechanical ventilation, the mortality rate or the length of hospitalization in the medical floor or the intensive care unit. CONCLUSION: In this study, we observed that 12.1% of coronavirus disease 2019 patients apply to the hospital due to gastrointestinal symptoms. Furthermore, the gastrointestinal symptoms do not seem to affect the severity and the course of the disease, it is important to identify coronavirus disease 2019 patients showing unusual symptoms such as the gastrointestinal symptoms at an early stage to protect healthcare professionals from infection risk.

Turkish Thoracic Society's Statement Report on Electronic Cigarettes and Heated Tobacco Products.

Tobacco addiction, which causes the death of more than 8.5 million people in the world every year, is a preventable global public health problem. There are 1.1 billion adult smokers worldwide and 60% of them desire or intend to quit but unfortunately, the tobacco industry continues to profit at the expense of people's lives by marketing electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products as a smoking cessation method and they continue to poison young people with new threat tobacco products, promising a "smoke-free future" Turkish Thoracic Society is actively involved in the implementation of the National Tobacco Control Program to protect public health and has warned and raised awareness of new threats to the youth, such as electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products. The purpose of this report is to provide information about electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products and to present TTJ's position on the subject.

Clinical Predictors of Response to Tocilizumab: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: A substantial number of patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) demonstrate severe infection. Cytokine storm is an underlying condition that worsens clinical outcomes. As an interleukin-6 receptor antagonist, tocilizumab is a promising treatment option for COVID-19. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical predictors of mortality for critically ill COVID-19 patients receiving tocilizumab therapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The retrospective cohort study was conducted in 4 centers' both wards and intensive care units between March 20 and May 20, 2020. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were consecutively drawn from medical records. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: In this study, 39 patients (28.2% female) were included, and the mortality rate was 25.6% (n = 10). There was statistically significant difference between survivor and non-survivor groups regarding age (53.0 (46.5-65.0) vs. 75.0 (68.25-81.25), respectively,P = .001), CALL score (8.0 (7.0-10.0) vs. 12.0 (9.75-13.0), P = .001), GRAM score (119.5 (99.5-142.0) vs. 155.0 (129.8-226.0), P = .004), and white blood cell count (k/mL) (5.6 (3.8-8.6) vs. 8.0 (7.6-9.3), P = .003). The patients who were on invasive mechanical ventilation at the time of tocilizumab administration had a higher mortality rate (100% vs. 25.9%, P < .001). Besides, arterial partial pressure of oxygen/ fraction of inspiratory oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ratio on day 7, but not on days 0, 1, and 3 of tocilizumab therapy, was associated with mortal- ity. C-reactive protein (mg/dL) tended to be lower in the survivor group; however, it was not statistically significant (68.4 (32.7-157.5) vs. 113.5 (77.7-219.0), P = .058). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that advanced age, increased leukocyte count, higher CALL and GRAM scores, and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation revealed a worse prognosis after tocilizumab treatment.

COVID-19: vaccination vs. hospitalization.

OBJECTIVE: Vaccination is the most efficient way to control the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but vaccination rates remain below the target level in most countries. This multicenter study aimed to evaluate the vaccination status of hospitalized patients and compare two different booster vaccine protocols. SETTING: Inoculation in Turkey began in mid-January 2021. Sinovac was the only available vaccine until April 2021, when BioNTech was added. At the beginning of July 2021, the government offered a third booster dose to healthcare workers and people aged > 50 years who had received the two doses of Sinovac. Of the participants who received a booster, most chose BioNTech as the third dose. METHODS: We collected data from 25 hospitals in 16 cities. Patients hospitalized between August 1 and 10, 2021, were included and categorized into eight groups according to their vaccination status. RESULTS: We identified 1401 patients, of which 529 (37.7%) were admitted to intensive care units. Nearly half (47.8%) of the patients were not vaccinated, and those with two doses of Sinovac formed the second largest group (32.9%). Hospitalizations were lower in the group which received 2 doses of Sinovac and a booster dose of BioNTech than in the group which received 3 doses of Sinovac. CONCLUSION: Effective vaccinations decreased COVID-19-related hospitalizations. The efficacy after two doses of Sinovac may decrease over time; however, it may be enhanced by adding a booster dose. Moreover, unvaccinated patients may be persuaded to undergo vaccination.

The Efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin Combination Therapy on Hospital Mortality in COVID 19 Pneumonia Patients.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Effective therapeutic approaches for SARS-CoV-2 pandemic are urgently needed. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) alone or in combination with azithromycin has been used in several countries, without any clear evidence. This study aimed to determine the effectiveness and safety of hydroxychloroquine as compared to hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin combination in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated all patients admitted to two university hospitals between 18 March and 20 May 2020 with the diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia. Out of 496 patients, 370 met the eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were time to recovery, presence of severe acute respiratory infection (SARI), the requirement for oxygen therapy, and/or mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 222 patients received hydroxychloroquine and 148 were treated with HCQ and azithromycin combination. The in-hospital mortality rates were similar in the two groups (10.8% vs. 6.8%, respectively, p=0.186). Additionally, the needs for oxygen therapy, invasive mechanic ventilation (IMV) and intensive care unit (ICU) admission were not different. The rate of the requirement of non-invasive mechanic ventilation (NIV) was higher in patients receiving HCQ plus azithromycin (10.1% vs. 4.5%, p=0.035). Time to recovery was 3.5 days in HCQ and 5.0 days in HCQ plus azithromycin group (p<0.001). The median length of hospital stay was longer in patients with the combination therapy (7.0 vs. 5.5 days, p<0.001). Amongst all patients, only 3 patients developed electrocardiographic changes needing discontinuation of therapy. LIMITATIONS: Observational design of the study is the main limitation. CONCLUSIONS: The present findings suggest that adding azithromycin to HCQ is not associated with any improvement in clinical outcome and mortality in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and supports the current knowledge not to include azithromycin in the initial treatment of COVID-19.

Effects of Oral pH Changes on Smoking Desire.

BACKGROUND: Nicotine addiction is associated with nicotine absorption from the buccal mucosa, and it is stated that the main factor that determines nicotine absorption is saliva pH. In the literature, the effects of changes in saliva pH values after eating and drinking on smoking desire in smokers were not questioned. AIM: To show the effect of saliva pH changes on smoking desire. The secondary aim was to show the impact of coffee and water drinking on saliva pH and smoking on oral-dental health (oral hygiene and gingival bleeding). STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study. METHODS: A questionnaire was administered that included "Sociodemographic Data Form" and smoking history and Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND). Oral and dental examinations were performed with mirror sonds and using oral hygiene standard Silness and Leöe plaque index and DMFT Index (Index of Decayed Missing or Filled Teeth). Untreated saliva samples were taken, and baseline saliva flow rate and pH values were measured. To assess pH changes, saliva pH was remeasured after sugar-free instant coffee and water consumption. Smoking desire was evaluated with the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). RESULTS: In this study, 24 (55.8%) females and 19 (44.2%) males were among the 43 smoking and 39 nonsmoking cases. Smoking was significantly associated with poor oral hygiene (in smokers 4.71 (±1.40), in non-smokers 2.30 (±1.59); P < .01). DMFT index was higher in smokers than in non-smokers (in smokers 6.45 (±3.69), in non-smokers 3.87 (±2.67); P < .01). Gingival bleeding was more prevalent in smokers (0.68 (±0.76)) than non-smokers (1.20 (±0.90); P = .009). Salivary flow rates were lower in smokers (in smokers 2.56 (±1.34), in non-smokers 3.00 (±1.22), P = .06). In both groups, pH values increased after coffee consumption and decreased after water; in smokers basal: 6.67 (±0.41), pH coffee: 6.93 (±0.36), pH water: 6.85 (±0.33); in non-smokers pH basal: 6.84 (±0.37), pH coffee: 7.02 (±0.37), pH water: 6.97 (±0.31), P < .01. The VAS values of smokers at basal 4.73 (±3.21); P < 0.01, after coffee consumption 4.91 (±3.08); P < .01, and after water 3.15 (±2.72); P < .01. CONCLUSION: The saliva pH increased after coffee consumption and decreased after drinking water. Besides, VAS values decreased significantly after drinking water. The results suggest that a simple behavior such as drinking water may be used in conjunction with behavioral and cognitive therapies to pursue smoking cessation.

The predictors of COVID-19 mortality in a nationwide cohort of Turkish patients.

The COVID-19-related death rate varies between countries and is affected by various risk factors. This multicenter registry study was designed to evaluate the mortality rate and the related risk factors in Turkey. We retrospectively evaluated 1500 adults with COVID-19 from 26 centers who were hospitalized between March 11 and July 31, 2020. In the study group, 1041 and 459 cases were diagnosed as definite and highly probable cases, respectively. There were 993 PCR-positive cases (66.2%). Among all cases, 1144 (76.3%) were diagnosed with non-severe pneumonia, whereas 212 (14.1%) had severe pneumonia. Death occurred in 67 patients, corresponding to a mortality rate of 4.5% (95% CI:3.5-5.6). The univariate analysis demonstrated that various factors, including male sex, age ≥65 years and the presence of dyspnea or confusion, malignity, chronic obstructive lung disease, interstitial lung disease, immunosuppressive conditions, severe pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, and sepsis, were positively associated with mortality. Favipiravir, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin were not associated with survival. Following multivariate analysis, male sex, severe pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, malignancy, sepsis and interstitial lung diseases were found to be independent risk factors for mortality. Among the biomarkers, procalcitonin levels on the 3rd-5th days of admission showed the strongest associations with mortality (OR: 6.18; 1.6-23.93). This study demonstrated that the mortality rate in hospitalized patients in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic was a serious threat and that those patients with male sex, severe pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, malignancy, sepsis and interstitial lung diseases were at increased risk of mortality; therefore, such patients should be closely monitored.

COVID-19 Pandemic Action Plan of a University Hospital.

In December 2019, in Wuhan, China, scientists observed a sudden and sharp increase in the number of cases of pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome of an unknown origin. By the end of January 2020, the outbreak had spread to Asia, Europe, America, and Australia. In this article, we have outlined the pandemic action plan of our university hospital.

Clinical Outcome of PCR-Negative COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical features and outcomes of patients who were admitted with a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but who were not confirmed with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positivity. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of all patients admitted to two tertiary care centers between March 15 and May 15, 2020, with a diagnosis of COVID-19. From a common database prepared for COVID-19, we retrieved the relevant data and compared the clinical findings and outcomes of PCR-positive patients with those of PCR-negative cases who had been diagnosed on the basis of typical clinical and radiographic findings. RESULTS: A total of 349 patients were included in the analysis, of which 126 (36.1%) were PCR-negative. PCR-negative patients were younger (54.6 ± 20.8 vs. 60.8 ± 18.9 years, P = .009) but were similar to PCR-positive patients in terms of demographics, comorbidities, and presenting symptoms. They had higher lymphocyte counts (1519 ± 868 vs. 1331 ± 737/mm3, P = .02) and less frequently presented with bilateral radiographic findings (68.3% vs. 79.4%, P = .046) than PCR-positive patients. Besides, they had less severe disease and better clinical outcomes regarding admission to the intensive care unit (9.6% vs. 20.6%, P = .023), oxygen therapy (21.4% vs. 43.5%, P < .001), ventilatory support (3.2% vs. 11.2%, P = .03) and length of hospital stay (5.0 ± 5.0 vs. 9.7 ± 5.9 days, P < .001). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that about one-third of the COVID-19 patients are PCR-negative and diagnosed based on clinical and radiographic findings. These patients have a more favorable clinical course, shorter hospital stays, and are less frequently admitted to the intensive care unit.

The Role of Pneumococcal Pneumonia among Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Adult Turkish Population: TurkCAP Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate of pneumococcal pneumonia (PP) among patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in Turkey and to investigate and compare features of PP and non-PP CAP patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This multicenter, non-interventional, prospective, observational study included adult CAP patients (age ≥ 18 years). Diagnosis of PP was based on the presence of at least 1 positive laboratory test result for Streptococcus pneumoniae (blood culture or sputum culture or urinary antigen test [UAT]) in patients with radiographic findings of pneumonia. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-five patients were diagnosed with CAP, of whom 59 (12.7%) had PP. The most common comorbidity was chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (30.1%). The mean age, smoking history, presence of chronic neurological disease, and CURB-65 score were significantly higher in PP patients, when compared to non-PP patients. In PP patients, 84.8% were diagnosed based ony on the UAT. The overall rate of PP patients among CAP was calculated as 22.8% considering the UAT sensitivity ratio of 63% (95% confidence interval: 45-81). The rate of intensive care treatment was higher in PP patients (P = .007). While no PP patients were vaccinated for pneumococcus, 3.8% of the non-PP patients were vaccinated (P = .235). Antibiotic use in the preceding 48 hours was higher in the non-PP group than in the PP group (31.8% vs. 11.1%, P = .002). The CURB-65 score and the rate of patients requiring inpatient treatment according to this score were higher in the PP group. CONCLUSION: The facts that PP patients were older and required intensive care treatment more frequently as compared to non-PP patients underline the burden of PP.

Facing the Pandemic: Burnout in Physicians in Turkey.

OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, physicians have been working for long hours, with the fear of contracting the disease and infecting their families. Therefore, there are great concerns about the mental health of physicians. In this research, we aimed to reveal the factors that affect the burnout among physicians working during the pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study involving physicians working during the pandemic in health institutions that admit COVID-19 patients. A questionnaire form consisting of the "Sociodemographic Data Form" and the "Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI)" was used. The questionnaire was sent to the contact numbers of physicians via the internet. The target population was reached through the communication groups of the Turkish Thoracic Society and other professional associations, the communication groups of health institutions, and also through personal correspondence. Burnout was evaluated with the scores of each participant from the 3 subscales of Emotional Exhaustion (EE), Depersonalization (DP), and Lack of Accomplishment (LA). RESULTS: Of the 1177 physicians who participated in the survey, 893 answered the survey completely. Females comprised 56.70% (n = 506) of the respondents, and the mean age was 38.63 (±11.65). The residents (41%, n = 366) and specialists (31%, n = 277) made up the majority of the physicians. Eighty-six percent (n = 768) of the physicians had difficulty in obtaining personal protective equipment (PPE). It was determined that 81.7% (n = 730) of the 893 physicians were actively working in pandemic units (outpatient clinics, emergencies, inpatient clinics, intensive care units), and burnout was significantly higher in these physicians (P < .01). After excluding other confounding factors by regression analysis, their Maslach total scores and EE scores were found to be significantly high (P = .001). CONCLUSION: Working in pandemic units and facing difficulty in accessing PPE are identified as the most important risk factors for burnout. Hence, we can say that working with PPE, and with the managers' discretion and support, the physicians' burnout can be prevented.

The Effectiveness of a Smoking Cessation Initiative Among Employees in a Textile Factory.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a smoking cessation initiative for workers who are smokers in a textile factory located in Denizli, Turkey. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort was conducted by using the occupational health and safety unit records of 821 workers who are smokers. All participants underwent cognitive behavioral therapy, and in case of need, a suitable pharmacological treatment was initiated. The status of smoking cessation was checked at the end of the third month with a carbon monoxide breath monitor. A chi-square test was performed to make comparisons between categorical variables. Logistic regression analysis (backward) was used to evaluate the factors related to the smoking cessation status. RESULTS: The ratio of participants who gave up smoking was 74.3%, and 63% of them used a pharmaceutical aid to quit smoking. Working in the department of finishing and using a pharmaceutical aid to quit smoking were related to increased success in smoking cessation. CONCLUSION: Outcomes of our study emphasize that workplace-based smoking cessation programs may create a huge impact on smoking cessation among workers. Pharmacological aid and cognitive behavioral therapy have been associated with success in quitting smoking.