RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Children are important stakeholders in discussions about regulation of smoking and protection from secondhand smoke, but are rarely acknowledged as such. We explored the opinion of pediatric patients and other key stakeholders regarding the planned smoke-free zone around the Erasmus MC, a large university hospital in the Netherlands. METHODS: In 2019, we conducted a survey among pediatric patients and their parents, Erasmus MC employees, visitors, and adult patients, before implementation of the outdoor smoke-free zone, to assess their opinions on smoking and the planned smoke-free policy. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected and analyzed mostly using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. RESULTS: In all, 91 parent-child dyads and 563 employees, visitors, patients and students filled in the questionnaires. Over 90% of children reported that they were regularly exposed to tobacco smoke, most often on the streets. Many underlined the exemplary role of healthcare providers, and 89% felt that nobody should be allowed to smoke near the hospital. Among parents, 89% were (very) positive towards the planned implementation of the smoke-free zone. In addition, 70% of adult patients, 81% of employees, 65% of visitors, 89% of students and 75% of 'others' were (very) positive about the new smoke-free policy. Smokers and former smokers generally were less positive about the policy. CONCLUSIONS: Children generally disapproved smoking around a hospital and felt that healthcare providers should be a good example concerning not smoking. The majority of adult patients, employees and visitors support a smoke-free zone surrounding the hospital, and virtually all pediatric patients and their parents do. Children should be acknowledged as important stakeholders in smoke-free policies and should be involved in planning and implementation.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 has spread globally. Currently, literature of SARS-CoV-2 in neonates is scarce. We present a case of a neonate with a high viral load and prolonged virus shedding. METHODS: Epidemiology, clinical characteristics, treatment, laboratory data and follow-up information and the treatment of a neonate with COVID-19 were recorded. RESULTS: A 7-day-old boy was admitted to the hospital with fever, lethargy and apnoea. He was found SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive with an exceptionally high viral load in nasopharyngeal swab and stool. The father and two maternity nurses at home had detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA as well. Sequencing showed all strains belonged to the same cluster. The father was asymptomatic and the maternity nurses developed symptoms after visiting. In the mother, no SARS-CoV-2 RNA could be found. Six days after admission, the neonate was discharged after clinical improvement with oral antibiotics because of a possible pyelonephritis. Monitoring the course of this infection showed that SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detectable in the nasopharynx until day 19 and in stool until day 42 after symptom onset. CONCLUSIONS: This case shows that neonates can have a high viral load of SARS-CoV-2 and can shed the virus for over one month in stool. Despite the high viral load in the neonate, the mother and a sibling did not get infected.