Background Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with dysregulated inflammation. The effects of combination treatment with baricitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, plus remdesivir are not known. Methods We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating baricitinib plus remdesivir in hospitalized adults with Covid-19. All the patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (≤14 days) or placebo (control). The primary outcome was the time to recovery. The key secondary outcome was clinical status at day 15. Results A total of 1033 patients underwent randomization (with 515 assigned to combination treatment and 518 to control). Patients receiving baricitinib had a median time to recovery of 7 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 6 to 8), as compared with 8 days (95% CI, 7 to 9) with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.32; P=0.03), and a 30% higher odds of improvement in clinical status at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.6). Patients receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation at enrollment had a time to recovery of 10 days with combination treatment and 18 days with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.08). The 28-day mortality was 5.1% in the combination group and 7.8% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.09). Serious adverse events were less frequent in the combination group than in the control group (16.0% vs. 21.0%; difference, −5.0 percentage points; 95% CI, −9.8 to −0.3; P=0.03), as were new infections (5.9% vs. 11.2%; difference, −5.3 percentage points; 95% CI, −8.7 to −1.9; P=0.003). Conclusions Baricitinib plus remdesivir was superior to remdesivir alone in reducing recovery time and accelerating improvement in clinical status among patients with Covid-19, notably among those receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation. The combination was associated with fewer serious adverse events. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04401579 .)

IMPORTANCE Latinx individuals, particularly immigrants, are at higher risk than non-Latinx White individuals of contracting and dying from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Little is known about Latinx experiences with COVID-19 infection and treatment. OBJECTIVE To describe the experiences of Latinx individuals who were hospitalized with and survived COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The qualitative study used semistructured phone interviews of 60 Latinx adults who survived a COVID-19 hospitalization in public hospitals in San Francisco, California, and Denver, Colorado, from March 2020 to July 2020. Transcripts were analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis. Data analysis was conducted from May 2020 to September 2020. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Themes and subthemes that reflected patient experiences. RESULTS Sixty people (24 women and 36 men; mean [SD] age, 48 [12] years) participated. All lived in low-income areas, 47 participants (78%) had more than 4 people in the home, and most (44 participants [73%]) were essential workers. Four participants (9%) could work from home, 12 (20%) had paid sick leave, and 21 (35%) lost their job because of COVID-19. We identified 5 themes (and subthemes) with public health and clinical care implications: COVID-19 was a distant and secondary threat (invincibility, misinformation and disbelief, ingrained social norms); COVID-19 was a compounder of disadvantage (fear of unemployment and eviction, lack of safeguards for undocumented immigrants, inability to protect self from COVID-19, and high-density housing); reluctance to seek medical care (worry about health care costs, concerned about ability to access care if uninsured or undocumented, undocumented immigrants fear deportation); health care system interactions (social isolation and change in hospital procedures, appreciation for clinicians and language access, and discharge with insufficient resources or clinical information); and faith and community resiliency (spirituality, Latinx COVID-19 advocates). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In interviews, Latinx patients with COVID-19 who survived hospitalization described initial disease misinformation and economic and immigration fears as having driven exposure and delays in presentation. To confront COVID-19 as a compounder of social disadvantage, public health authorities should mitigate COVID-19-related misinformation, immigration fears, and challenges to health care access, as well as create policies that provide work protection and address economic disadvantages.

No abstract

BACKGROUND Gender disparities still exist for women in academic medicine but may be less evident in younger cohorts. Hospital medicine is a new field, and the majority of hospitalists are <41 years of age. OBJECTIVE To determine whether gender disparities exist in leadership and scholarly productivity for academic hospitalists and to compare the findings to academic general internists. DESIGN Prospective and retrospective observational study. SETTING University programs in the United States. MEASUREMENTS Gender distribution of (1) academic hospitalists and general internists, (2) division or section heads for both specialties, (3) speakers at the 2 major national meetings of the 2 specialties, and (4) first and last authors of articles from the specialties' 2 major journals RESULTS We found equal gender representation of hospitalists and general internists who worked in university hospitals. Divisions or sections of hospital medicine and general internal medicine were led by women at 11/69 (16%) and 28/80 (35%) of university hospitals, respectively (P = 0.008). Women hospitalists and general internists were listed as speakers on 146/557 (26%) and 291/580 (50%) of the presentations at national meetings, respectively (P < 0.0001), first authors on 153/464 (33%) and 423/895 (47%) publications, respectively (P < 0.0001), and senior authors on 63/305 (21%) and 265/769 (34%) articles, respectively (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS Despite hospital medicine being a newer field, gender disparities exist in leadership and scholarly productivity. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2015;10:481–485. © 2015 Society of Hospital Medicine

Palladium‐catalyzed Mizoroki–Heck reactions were carried out in the presence of calcium carbonate in alcoholic solvents. Under these conditions an efficient preparation of functionalized benzalacetones was developed. The reactions were carried out at room temperature and aerobic conditions, giving the products within several minutes in up to 95% isolated yields. Furthermore, some kinetic investigations, mechanistic insights and considerations are presented.

BACKGROUND Healthcare workers' (HCWs) uniforms become contaminated with bacteria during normal use, and this may contribute to hospital‐acquired infections. Antimicrobial uniforms are currently marketed as a means of reducing this contamination. OBJECTIVE To compare the extent of bacterial contamination of uniforms and skin when HCWs wear 1 of 2 antimicrobial scrubs or standard scrubs. DESIGN Prospective, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING University‐affiliated, public safety net hospital PARTICIPANTS Hospitalist physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, housestaff, and nurses (total N = 105) working on internal medicine units. INTERVENTION Subjects were randomized to wear standard scrubs or 1 of 2 antimicrobial scrubs. MEASUREMENTS Bacterial colony counts in cultures taken from the HCWs' scrubs and wrists after an 8‐hour workday. RESULTS The median (interquartile range) total colony counts was 99 (66–182) for standard scrubs, 137 (84–289) for antimicrobial scrub type A, and 138 (62–274) for antimicrobial scrub type B (P = 0.36). Colony counts from participants' wrists were 16 (5–40) when they wore standard scrubs and 23 (4–42) and 15 (6–54) when they wore antimicrobial scrubs A and B, respectively (P = 0.92). Resistant organisms were cultured from 3 HCWs (4.3%) randomized to antimicrobial scrubs and none randomized to standard scrubs (P = 0.55). Six participants (5.7%) reported side effects to wearing scrubs, all of whom wore antimicrobial scrubs (P = 0.18). CONCLUSIONS We found no evidence that either antimicrobial scrub product decreased bacterial contamination of HCWs' uniforms or skin after an 8‐hour workday. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2013;8:380–385. © 2013 Society of Hospital Medicine

This article is one of a series on acute, severe diseases of humans caused by emerging viruses for which there are no or limited licensed medical countermeasures. We approached this summary on South American Hemorrhagic Fevers (SAHF) from a clinical perspective that focuses on pathogenesis, clinical features, and diagnostics with an emphasis on therapies and vaccines that have demonstrated potential for use in an emergency situation through their evaluation in nonhuman primates (NHPs) and/ or in humans. Methods: A standardized literature review was conducted on the clinical, pathological, vaccine, and treatment factors for SAHF as a group and for each individual virus/disease. Results: We identified 2 treatments and 1 vaccine platform that have demonstrated potential benefit for treating or preventing infection in humans and 4 other potential treatments currently under investigation. Conclusion:We provide succinct summaries of these countermeasures to give the busy clinician a head start in reviewing the literature if faced with a patient with South American Hemorrhagic Fever. We also provide links to other authoritative sources of information.

Patient experience is increasingly recognized as a measure of health care quality and patient-centered care and is currently measured through the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS). The HCAHPS survey may miss key factors important to patients, and in particular, to underserved patient populations. We performed a qualitative study utilizing semi-structured interviews with 45 hospitalized English- and Spanish-speaking patients and 6 focus groups with physicians, nurses, and administrators at a large, urban safety-net hospital. Four main themes were important to patients: (1) the hospital environment including cleanliness and how hospital policies and procedures impact patients’ perceived autonomy, (2) whole-person care, (3) communication with and between care teams and utilizing words that patients can understand, and (4) responsiveness and attentiveness to needs. We found that several key themes that were important to patients are not fully addressed in the HCAHPS survey and there is a disconnect between what patients and care teams believe patients want and what hospital policies drive in the care environment.