Changes in arterial pH do not explain the reductions in ionised calcium observed during COVID-19 infection.

BACKGROUND: Hypocalcaemia predicts coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity and mortality. We hypothesized an association between respiratory alkalosis secondary to hypoxia and low ionised calcium (iCa) concentration in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Arterial blood gas samples taken from January 2019 to March 2021 were retrospectively matched with infection status. Principal components regression was undertaken to determine the correlation between pH, partial pressure arterial oxygen (PaO2), partial pressure arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO2), and iCa. RESULTS: We included 4056 patients (300 COVID-19 detected, 19 influenza detected), corresponding to 5960 arterial blood samples. The COVID-19 detected group had a statistically significantly lower iCa, PaO2 and PaCO2, and more alkalotic pH than infection-free groups. The influenza group had a lower iCa and PaCO2, higher PaO2, and a more alkalotic pH than infection-free groups, but these differences were non-significant. Principal components regression revealed that pH, PaCO2, and PaO2 explain just 2.72 % of the variance in iCa. An increase in pH by 1 unit was associated with an iCa reduction of 0.141 â€‹mmol/L (p â€‹< â€‹0.0001). CONCLUSION: Reduction in iCa concentration in patients with COVID-19 is not associated with pH derangement. Influenza infection was associated with a minor reduction in iCa in our small sample, a hitherto unreported finding, although statistical significance was not demonstrated.

Environmental Contamination With SARS-CoV-2 in a Hospital Setting.

Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a global concern and has changed the way we practice medicine in acute hospital settings. This is particularly true with regard to patient triage, patient risk assessment, use of personal protective equipment, and environmental disinfection. Transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is primarily through inhalation of respiratory droplets generated through talking, coughing, or sneezing. There is, however, a potential risk that respiratory droplets settling on inanimate surfaces and objects in the hospital environment could provide a reservoir for nosocomial infections in patients and pose a healthcare risk to medical staff. Indeed, there have been previous reports of healthcare-associated outbreaks in hospitals. Several authors have argued that the risk of transmission via fomites may be insignificant. It is, however, not clear what proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infections are attributable to direct contact with fomites; a few reports have indicated possible transmission via this route. Environmental contamination with SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare institutions has been shown to vary according to the function or service provided by a unit or department. Information that identifies hospital areas that have a propensity for higher environmental burden may improve the practice of infection control and environmental cleaning and decontamination in healthcare institutions. This study aimed to investigate environmental SARS-CoV-2 contamination in the clinical areas of patients with COVID-19 infection. Methodology We conducted a cross-sectional study performing swabbing of frequently touched surfaces, equipment, and ventilation ducts in five specific clinical areas of Peterborough City Hospital which is part of the North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust. The five clinical areas that were chosen for swabbing were the Emergency Department (ED), Intensive Care Unit (ICU), Isolation Ward, Respiratory Ward, and a Gastroenterology Ward that was serving as a receiving ward at the height of the second COVID-19 infection wave in the United Kingdom. Surfaces to be swabbed were divided into the patient zone, doctor zone, and nursing zone. Swabs from the chosen surfaces were collected on two consecutive days. A total of 158 surface swabs were collected during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. Results The most contaminated clinical areas were the three receiving wards where 12% (11/96) of the swabs were positive. Inside the patient rooms, these surfaces included bed rails and controls, bedside tables, television screens, remote control units, and the room ventilation system. Outside the patient room, these surfaces included mobile computers and computer desk surfaces in the doctors' offices. All swabs taken from the ED and ICU were found to be negative. Conclusions Our study confirms the potential infection risks posed by environmental contamination with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This highlights the importance of adequate environmental cleaning for proper infection control and prevention in healthcare settings.