BackgroundAntibiotics are some of the most commonly prescribed drugs in the Emergency Department (ED) and yet data describing the overall appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in the ED is scarce.ObjectivesTo describe the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in the ED.MethodsA retrospective, observational study of current practice. All patients who presented to the ED during the study period and were prescribed at least one antibiotic were included. Specialists from Infectious Disease, Microbiology and Emergency Medicine and a Senior Pharmacist assessed antibiotic appropriateness against evidence-based guidelines.ResultsA total of 1019 (13.6%) of patient presentations involved the prescription of at least one antibiotic. Of these, 640 (62.8%) antibiotic prescriptions were assessed as appropriate, 333 (32.7%) were assessed as inappropriate and 46 (4.5%) were deemed to be not assessable. Adults were more likely to receive an inappropriate antibiotic prescription than children (36.9% versus 22.9%; difference 14.1%, 95% CI 7.2%–21.0%). Patients who met quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) criteria were more likely to be prescribed inappropriate antibiotics (56.7% versus 36.1%; difference 20.5%, 95% CI, 2.4%–38.7%). There was no difference in the incidence of appropriate antibiotic prescribing based on patient gender, disposition (admitted/discharged), reason for antibiotic administration (treatment/prophylaxis) or time of shift (day/night). ConclusionsInappropriate administration of antibiotics can lead to unnecessary adverse events, treatment failure and antimicrobial resistance. With over one in three antibiotic prescriptions in the ED being assessed as inappropriate, there is a pressing need to develop initiatives to improve antibiotic prescribing to prevent antibiotic-associated patient and community harms.

ObjectiveTo determine the effect of covid-19 vaccination, given before and after acute infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, or after a diagnosis of long covid, on the rates and symptoms of long covid.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane covid-19 trials, and Europe PubMed Central (Europe PMC) for preprints, from 1 January 2020 to 3 August 2022.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesTrials, cohort studies, and case-control studies reporting on patients with long covid and symptoms of long covid, with vaccination before and after infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, or after a diagnosis of long covid. Risk of bias was assessed with the ROBINS-I tool.Results1645 articles were screened but no randomised controlled trials were found. 16 observational studies from five countries (USA, UK, France, Italy, and the Netherlands) were identified that reported on 614 392 patients. The most common symptoms of long covid that were studied were fatigue, cough, loss of sense of smell, shortness of breath, loss of taste, headache, muscle ache, difficulty sleeping, difficulty concentrating, worry or anxiety, and memory loss or confusion. 12 studies reported data on vaccination before infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and 10 showed a significant reduction in the incidence of long covid: the odds ratio of developing long covid with one dose of vaccine ranged from 0.22 to 1.03; with two doses, odds ratios were 0.25-1; with three doses, 0.16; and with any dose, 0.48-1.01. Five studies reported on vaccination after infection, with odds ratios of 0.38-0.91. The high heterogeneity between studies precluded any meaningful meta-analysis. The studies failed to adjust for potential confounders, such as other protective behaviours and missing data, thus increasing the risk of bias and decreasing the certainty of evidence to low.ConclusionsCurrent studies suggest that covid-19 vaccines might have protective and therapeutic effects on long covid. More robust comparative observational studies and trials are needed, however, to clearly determine the effectiveness of vaccines in preventing and treating long covid.Protocol registrationOpen Science Frameworkhttps://osf.io/e8jdy.

Background: The impact of COVID-19 vaccination on preventing or treating long COVID is unclear. We aim to assess the impact of COVID vaccinations administered (i) before and (ii) after acute COVID-19, including vaccination after long COVID diagnosis, on the rates or symptoms of long COVID. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane COVID-19 trials, and Europe PMC for preprints from 1 Jan 2020 to 16 Feb 2022. We included trials, cohort, and case control studies reporting on long COVID cases and symptoms with vaccine administration both before and after COVID-19 diagnosis as well as after long COVID diagnosis. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I. Results: We screened 356 articles and found no trials, but 6 observational studies from 3 countries (USA, UK, France) that reported on 442,601 patients. The most common long COVID symptoms studied include fatigue, cough, loss of smell, shortness of breath, loss of taste, headache, muscle ache, trouble sleeping, difficulty concentrating, worry or anxiety, and memory loss or confusion. Four studies reported data on vaccination before SARS-CoV-2 infection, of which three showed statistically significant reduction in long COVID: the odds ratio of developing long COVID with one dose of vaccine ranged between OR 0.22 to 1.03; with two doses OR 0.51 to 1; and with any dose OR 0.85 to 1.01. Three studies reported on post-infection vaccination with odds ratios between 0.38 to 0.91. The high heterogeneity between studies precluded any meaningful meta-analysis. Studies failed to adjust for potential confounders such as other protective behaviours, and missing data, thus increasing the risk of bias, and decreasing the certainty of evidence to low. Discussion: Current studies suggest that COVID-19 vaccinations may have protective and therapeutic effects on long COVID. However, more robust comparative observational studies and trials are urgently needed to clearly determine effectiveness of vaccines in prevention and treatment of long COVID.

No abstract

Naturally acquired immunity to malaria is robust and protective against all strains of the same species of Plasmodium. This develops as a result of repeated natural infection, taking several years to develop.

Abstract Background Hemotropic mycoplasmas (hemoplasmas) infect animals and humans and can lead to clinical syndromes mainly characterized by hemolytic anemia. A novel pathogen, Candidatus Mycoplasma haemohominis, was recently associated with a case of human hemoplasmosis in Europe. Here we report the first detection of this pathogen in an Australian patient exhibiting persistent fever, hemolytic anemia, and pancytopenia over a 10-month period. Methods After exhaustive negative testing for human infectious diseases, whole genome sequencing (WGS) was performed on the patient’s bone marrow aspirate, using an Illumina NextSeq500 platform. Conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR), followed by Sanger sequencing, was then performed on blood samples using novel Mycoplasma-specific primers targeting the 16S ribosomal RNA gene. In addition, a Mycoplasma-specific fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assay was developed to differentiate Mycoplasma cells from other erythrocyte inclusions (eg, Pappenheimer and Howell-Jolly bodies) which are morphologically similar to bacterial cocci by light microscopy. Results WGS analysis revealed that approximately 0.04% of the total number of unmapped reads to human genome corresponded to Mycoplasma species. A 1-kb Mycoplasma 16S fragment was successfully amplified by conventional PCR, and sequence analyses revealed 100% identity with Candidatus Mycoplasma haemohominis. FISH confirmed that several (approximately 2%) epierythrocytic inclusions initially observed by light microscopy corresponded to Mycoplasma cells. Conclusions This represents the second report of hemolytic anemia associated with hemoplasma infection in a human, and the first report of human hemoplasmosis in Australia. This study highlights the importance of new and emerging diagnostic approaches and need for further investigations on the epidemiology of Candidatus Mycoplasma haemohominis in Australia.

No abstract

Background Clinical characteristics and outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) patients have been varied internationally but have not been studied in an Australian cohort. Aim To describe characteristics and outcomes of approximately the first 200 documented COVID‐19 cases during the first outbreak in the Gold Coast. Methods Retrospective observational cohort study of COVID‐19 patients managed by Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service (GCHHS). Demographics, clinical characteristics and outcomes data were collected. Results One hundred and ninety‐seven patients were included (mean age 45 years); 52.3% were female and 9.1% were healthcare workers. Most were overseas travellers (53.8%), contacts of a local confirmed case (25.4%) or cruise ship passengers (17.3%). The commonest comorbidities were hypertension (14.2%) and asthma (11.2%). The commonest symptoms were cough (74.1%), fever (58.9%), sore throat (48.7%), headache (48.7%) and rhinorrhoea (46.2%). Sixty‐three patients were hospitalised and the rest admitted to a ‘virtual ward’. Of 63 hospitalised patients, 5 (7.9%) required intensive care unit (ICU) admission and 3 (4.8%) required intubation. No patients died. Due to low numbers of accurate exposure dates, the incubation period could not be reliably calculated for a significant proportion of the cohort. Average duration of symptoms was 14 days, time from first symptom to hospitalisation was 5.3 days and time from first symptom to ICU admission was 11.6 days. The majority (88%) experienced mild disease and achieved complete symptom resolution (97%). Nasopharyngeal swab polymerase chain reaction was the main diagnostic method (99%). Twenty‐four patients received anti‐viral pharmacotherapy, with 87.5% getting hydroxychloroquine. Conclusions The present study provides characteristics and outcomes of the first 197 patients with COVID‐19 in the Gold Coast.