Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccine breakthrough infections: A single metro-based testing network experience.

Objectives: Understanding the incidence and characteristics that influence severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine breakthrough infections (VBIs) is imperative for developing public health policies to mitigate the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We examined these factors and post-vaccination mitigation practices in individuals partially and fully vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Materials and methods: Adults >18 years old were voluntarily enrolled from a single metro-based SARS-CoV-2 testing network from January to July 2021. Participants were categorized as asymptomatic or symptomatic, and as unvaccinated, partially vaccinated, or fully vaccinated. All participants had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection based on standard of care (SOC) testing with nasopharyngeal swabs. Variant analysis by rRT-PCR was performed in a subset of time-matched vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. A subgroup of partially and fully vaccinated individuals with a positive SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR was contacted to assess disease severity and post-vaccination mitigation practices. Results: Participants (n = 1,317) voluntarily underwent testing for SARS-CoV-2 during the enrollment period. A total of 29.5% of the population received at least one SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (n = 389), 12.8% partially vaccinated (n = 169); 16.1% fully vaccinated (n = 213). A total of 21.3% of partially vaccinated individuals tested positive (n = 36) and 9.4% of fully vaccinated individuals tested positive (n = 20) for SARS-CoV-2. Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA-1273 was the predominant vaccine received (1st dose = 66.8%, 2nd dose = 67.9%). Chronic liver disease and immunosuppression were more prevalent in the vaccinated (partially/fully) group compared to the unvaccinated group (p = 0.003, p = 0.021, respectively). There were more asymptomatic individuals in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated group [n = 6 (10.7%), n = 16 (4.1%), p = 0.045]. CT values were lower for the unvaccinated group (median 24.3, IQR 19.1-30.5) compared to the vaccinated group (29.4, 22.0-33.7, p = 0.004). In the vaccinated group (n = 56), 18 participants were successfully contacted, 7 were lost to follow-up, and 2 were deceased. A total of 50% (n = 9) required hospitalization due to COVID-19 illness. Adherence to nationally endorsed mitigation strategies varied post-vaccination. Conclusion: The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at this center was 21.3% in the partially vaccinated group and 9.4% in the fully vaccinated group. Chronic liver disease and immunosuppression were more prevalent in the vaccinated SARS-CoV-2 positive group, suggesting that these may be risk factors for VBIs. Partially and fully vaccinated individuals had a higher incidence of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 and higher CT values compared to unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals.

Don't forget about human factors: Lessons learned from COVID-19 point-of-care testing.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the development of point-of-care (POC) diagnostic testing accelerated in an unparalleled fashion. As a result, there has been an increased need for accurate, robust, and easy-to-use POC testing in a variety of non-traditional settings (i.e., pharmacies, drive-thru sites, schools). While stakeholders often express the desire for POC technologies that are "as simple as digital pregnancy tests," there is little discussion of what this means in regards to device design, development, and assessment. The design of POC technologies and systems should take into account the capabilities and limitations of the users and their environments. Such "human factors" are important tenets that can help technology developers create POC technologies that are effective for end-users in a multitude of settings. Here, we review the core principles of human factors and discuss lessons learned during the evaluation process of SARS-CoV-2 POC testing.

Emergency physicians in critical care: where are we now?

OBJECTIVE: Prior to 2011, emergency physicians who completed critical care (CC) fellowship were unable to obtain board certification in the United States. Three pathways for CC board certification have since been established. This study explores the training, practice, and perceived challenges of emergency medicine/critical care fellows and emergency medicine/critical care physicians in the United States. METHODS: Anonymous institutional review board-approved survey distributed via email through an online survey engine from April to December 2016. Participants were recruited through national organizations and independent interest groups. Emergency physicians who were in CC fellowship or had completed a CC fellowship and were in practice in the United States participated voluntarily. RESULTS: Of the 162 respondents, 152 were included (92 physicians, 60 fellows). Eighty-nine percent ranged from 31-50 years old. Among fellows, 90% desired a dual discipline practice. Among physicians, 63% split their time between the emergency department and ICU. Seventy-one percent of physicians reported working in academic institutions. Among physicians engaged in a dual practice, mean full-time equivalent (±SD) devoted to the ED was 0.37 (±0.22), mean full-time equivalent for ICU was 0.47 (±0.22), and mean full-time equivalent for protected academic time was 0.28 (±0.19). Emergency medicine/critical care fellows and emergency medicine/critical care physicians identified numerous challenges associated with duality. CONCLUSIONS: Since the advent of critical care board certification for emergency physicians in the United States, there has been an increasing number of emergency physicians pursuing CC fellowships and achieving CC board certification. Emergency medicine/critical care physicians are venturing into a variety of practice models, demonstrating that the employment landscape remains plastic. Not unexpectedly, emergency medicine/critical care fellows and emergency medicine/critical care physicians are encountering challenges intrinsic to their duality.

A quality assurance investigation of CLABSI events: are there exceptions to never?

BACKGROUND: In the USA, central line associated blood stream infections (CLABSIs) have been designated as 'never events', prompting initiatives towards a 'zero CLABSIs' standard. We propose that there are cascading risk factors predisposing certain patient cohorts to higher CLABSIs rates. METHODS: A retrospective review of all CLABSI infections over a 12-month period was undertaken. Risk factors examined included catheter type, insertion site and parenteral nutrition (PN) status. Additional factors analysed included acute kidney injury (AKI), chronic kidney disease (CKD) and hospital-acquired infections (HAIs). RESULTS: Thirty-four CLABSIs were identified in 33 adult patients (median age = 57 years). Temporary central venous catheters accounted for 12 (35%), peripherally inserted central catheters for five (14.7%), and permanent catheters for 17 CLABSIs (50%); the median duration from insertion was 15 days (interquartile range = 9-26). Among patient factors, immunosuppression and hyperglycaemia were the most common (n = 19, 55%), followed by PN and CKD (n = 17, 50.0%), AKI (n = 16, 47.1%) and HAIs (n = 13, 38.2%). A majority of patients with CLABSIs (n = 20 58.8%) had at least three risk factors. DISCUSSION: These findings reflect the complexity of CLABSIs with multiple patient and hospital factors influencing incidence. It suggests the need for further studies to re-calibrate the zero CLABSI model towards one with greater relevance.

Protein stability and surface electrostatics: a charged relationship.

Engineering proteins to withstand a broad range of conditions continues to be a coveted objective, holding the potential to advance biomedicine, industry, and our understanding of disease. One way of achieving this goal lies in elucidating the underlying interactions that define protein stability. It has been shown that the hydrophobic effect, hydrogen bonding, and packing interactions between residues in the protein interior are dominant factors that define protein stability. The role of surface residues in protein stability has received much less attention. It has been believed that surface residues are not important for protein stability particularly because their interactions with the solvent should be similar in the native and unfolded states. In the case of surface charged residues, it was sometimes argued that solvent exposure meant that the high dielectric of the solvent will further decrease the strength of the charge-charge interactions. In this paper, we challenge the notion that the surface charged residues are not important for protein stability. We computationally redesigned sequences of five different proteins to optimize the surface charge-charge interactions. All redesigned proteins exhibited a significant increase in stability relative to their parent proteins, as experimentally determined by circular dichroism spectroscopy and differential scanning calorimetry. These results suggest that surface charge-charge interactions are important for protein stability and that rational optimization of charge-charge interactions on the protein surface can be a viable strategy for enhancing protein stability.

Lateral epicondylitis: a comparative study of open and arthroscopic lateral release.

In this article, we retrospectively review cases of resistant lateral epicondylitis (tennis elbow) and compare treatment with open release versus arthroscopic release. From 1997 to 2002, 87 patients were treated: 54 with open procedures and 33 with arthroscopic procedures. Seventy-five patients were available for follow-up. Mean duration of preoperative symptoms was 16 months for open cases and 22 months for arthroscopic cases. All patients had a minimum of 6 months of conservative treatment before surgery. Results showed no significant difference in outcomes. For example, 69% of open cases and 72% of arthroscopic cases had good or excellent outcomes. Notably, patients treated with arthroscopic release returned to work earlier than patients treated with open release did, and they required less postoperative therapy.