An Update on Gender Disparity in Critical Care Conferences.

This commentary's objective was to identify whether female representation at critical care conferences has improved since our previous publication in 2018. We audited the scientific programs from three international (International Symposium on Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine [ISICEM], European Society of Intensive Care Medicine [ESICM], and Society of Critical Care Medicine [SCCM]) and two national (State of the Art [SOA] and Critical Care Canada Forum) critical care conferences from the years 2017 to 2022. We collected data on the number of female faculty members and categorized them into physicians, nurses, allied health professions (AHPs), and other. Across all conferences, there was an increased representation of females as speakers and moderators over the 6 years. However, at each conference, male speakers outnumbered female speakers. Only two conferences achieved gender parity in speakers, SCCM in 2021 (48% female) and 2022 and SOA in 2022 (48% female). These conferences also had the highest representation of female nursing and AHP speakers (25% in SCCM, 2021; 19% in SOA, 2022). While there was a statistically significant increase in female speakers (p < 0.01) in 2022 compared with 2016, there was a persistent gender gap in the representation of men and female physicians. While the proportion of female moderators increased in each conference every year, the increase was statistically only significant for ISICEM, ESICM, and SCCM (p < 0.05). The proportion of female nurses and AHP speakers increased in 2022 compared with 2016 (p < 0.0001) but their overall representation was low with the highest proportion (25%) in the 2022 SCCM conference and the lowest (0.5%) in the 2017 ISICEM conference. This follow-up study demonstrates a narrowing but persisting gender gap in the studied critical care conferences. Thus, a commitment toward minimizing gender inequalities is warranted.

Severity of COVID-19 after Vaccination among Hemodialysis Patients: An Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients receiving hemodialysis are at high risk from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and demonstrate impaired immune responses to vaccines. There have been several descriptions of their immunologic responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination, but few studies have described the clinical efficacy of vaccination in patients on hemodialysis. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: In a multicenter observational study of the London hemodialysis population undergoing surveillance PCR testing during the period of vaccine rollout with BNT162b2 and AZD1222, all of those positive for SARS-CoV-2 were identified. Clinical outcomes were analyzed according to predictor variables, including vaccination status, using a mixed effects logistic regression model. Risk of infection was analyzed in a subgroup of the base population using a Cox proportional hazards model with vaccination status as a time-varying covariate. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 infection was identified in 1323 patients of different ethnicities (Asian/other, 30%; Black, 38%; and White, 32%), including 1047 (79%) unvaccinated, 86 (7%) after first-dose vaccination, and 190 (14%) after second-dose vaccination. The majority of patients had a mild course; however, 515 (39%) were hospitalized, and 172 (13%) died. Older age, diabetes, and immune suppression were associated with greater illness severity. In regression models adjusted for age, comorbidity, and time period, prior two-dose vaccination was associated with a 75% (95% confidence interval, 56 to 86) lower risk of admission and 88% (95% confidence interval, 70 to 95) fewer deaths compared with unvaccinated patients. No loss of protection was seen in patients over 65 years or with increasing time since vaccination, and no difference was seen between vaccine types. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate a substantially lower risk of severe COVID-19 after vaccination in patients on dialysis who become infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Outcome and effect of vaccination in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection in hemodialysis patients: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Hemodialysis patients are at high risk of Covid-19, though vaccination has significant efficacy in preventing and reducing the severity of infection. Little information is available on disease severity and vaccine efficacy since the dissemination of the Omicron variant. METHODS: In a multi-center study, during a period of the epidemic driven by the Omicron variant, all hemodialysis patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 were identified. Outcomes were analyzed according to predictor variables including vaccination status. Risk of infection was analyzed using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 infection was identified in 1126 patients including 200 (18%) unvaccinated, 56 (5%) post first dose, 433 (38%) post second dose, and 437 (39%) at least 7 days beyond their third dose. The majority of patients had a mild course but 160 (14%) were hospitalized and 28 (2%) died. In regression models adjusted for age and comorbidity, two-dose vaccination was associated with a 39% (95%CI: 2%-62%) reduction in admissions, but third doses provided additional protection, with a 51% (95%CI: 25%-69%) further reduction in admissions. Among 1265 patients at risk at the start of the observation period, SARS-CoV-2 infection was observed in 211 (17%). Two-dose vaccination was associated with a 41% (95%CI: 3%-64%) reduction in the incidence of infection, with no clear additional effect provided by third doses. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination in dialysis patients during an Omicron dominant period of the epidemic. Among those developing infection, severe illness was less common with prior vaccination, particularly after third vaccine doses.