Objective: To characterize associations between exposures within and outside the medical workplace with healthcare personnel (HCP) SARS-CoV-2 infection, including the effect of various forms of respiratory protection. Design: Case-control study. Setting: Data collected via online survey from international participants. Participants: 1130 HCP (244 cases with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, 886 controls healthy throughout the pandemic) from 67 countries not meeting pre-specified exclusion (healthy but not working, missing workplace exposure data, COVID symptoms without lab confirmation). Methods: Respondents were queried regarding workplace exposures, respiratory protection, and extra-occupational activities. Odds ratios for HCP infection were calculated with multivariable logistic regression and sensitivity analyses controlling for confounders and known biases. Results: HCP infection was associated with non-aerosol-generating contact with COVID-19 patients (adjusted OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.04–1.9, p=0.03) and extra-occupational exposures including gatherings of ten or more, patronizing restaurants or bars, and public transportation (adjusted ORs ranging 3.1-16.2). Respirator use during aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) was associated with lower odds of HCP infection (adjusted OR 0.4, 0.2 to 0.8, p=0.005), as was exposure to intensive care and dedicated COVID units, negative pressure rooms, and personal protective equipment (PPE) observers (adjusted ORs ranging 0.4-0.7). Conclusions: COVID-19 transmission to HCP was associated with medical exposures currently considered lower-risk and multiple extra-occupational exposures, while exposures associated with proper use of appropriate PPE were protective. Closer scrutiny of infection control measures surrounding healthcare activities and medical settings considered lower risk, and continued awareness of the risks of public congregation, may reduce the incidence of HCP infection.

Adherence to medical therapies is a growing issue, so much so that the World Health Organization defined it as “a new pharmacological problem”. The main factors affecting compliance are: frequency of administration, rapid onset of action, role of device. The most severe consequence of non-adherence is the increased risk of poor clinical outcome, associated with worsening of the quality of life and increase in health-care expenditure. It appears crucial to identify those COPD patients who are “poorly or not at all compliant with their treatment”. In order to evaluate adherence to the medical therapy, several methods were proposed, the most effective of which turned out to be self-reports, i.e. simple, brief questionnaires (e.g. Morisky test). To increase the likelihood of quickly identifying non-compliant patients, it may be useful to administer a simple questionnaire to naïve subjects (for example, in the waiting room before an examination) including six specific items allowing to identify the patient’s key characteristics. Depending on the answers, patients who do not comply with their pharmacological treatment may be classified as belonging to 6 phenotypes. For patients who are already under treatment it might be useful to administer another short questionnaire during follow up examination. Once the risk of non-compliance is identified, four possible types of measures can be taken: prescription-related, educational, behavioral and complex combined measures (combination of two or more actions).Therefore, while it is clear that adherence in COPD is a critical issue, it is also obvious that raising awareness on the disease and improving cooperation among specialists, general practitioners, health-care professionals, and patients is the starting point at which this evolution should immediately begin. Each medication is able to foster good compliance with the therapy, and consequently to maximize the efficacy, by virtue of its specific inhaler and its own active ingredient.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/2049-6958-9-60) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Systematic assessment of lymph node status by endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is indicated in (suspected) lung cancer. Sampling is herein guided by nodal size and FDG-PET characteristics. Ultrasound strain elastography (SE) might further improve risk stratification. By imaging tissue deformation over time, SE computes relative tissue strain. In several tissues, a lower strain (deformation) has been associated with a higher likelihood of malignancy. Objectives: To assess if EBUS-SE can independently help predict malignancy, and when combined with size and FDG uptake information. Methods: This multicenter (n = 5 centers) prospective trial included patients with suspected or proven lung cancer using a standardized measurement protocol. Cytopathology combined with surgery or follow-up imaging (> 6 months) were used as reference standard. Results: Between June 2016 and July 2018, 327 patients and 525 lymph nodes were included (mean size 12.3 mm, malignancy prevalence 0.48). EBUS-SE had an overall AUC of 0.77. A mean strain < 115 (range 0-255) showed 90% sensitivity, 43% specificity, 60% positive predictive value, and 82% negative predictive value. Combining EBUS-SE (< 115) with size (< 8 mm) and FDG-PET information into a risk stratification algorithm increased the accuracy. Combining size and SE showed that the 48% a priori chance of malignancy changed to 11 and 70% in double negative or positive nodes, respectively. In the subset where FDG-PET was available (n = 370), triple negative and positive nodes went from a 42% a priori chance of malignancy to 9 and 73%, respectively. Conclusions: EBUS-SE can help predict lymph node malignancy and may be useful for risk stratification when combined with size and PET information.

Adherence to medical therapies is a growing issue, so much so that the World Health Organization defined it as “a new pharmacological problem”. The main factors affecting compliance are: frequency of administration, rapid onset of action, role of device. The most severe consequence of non-adherence is the increased risk of poor clinical outcome, associated with worsening of the quality of life and increase in health-care expenditure. It appears crucial to identify those COPD patients who are “poorly or not at all compliant with their treatment”. In order to evaluate adherence to the medical therapy, several methods were proposed, the most effective of which turned out to be self-reports, i.e. simple, brief questionnaires (e.g. Morisky test). To increase the likelihood of quickly identifying non-compliant patients, it may be useful to administer a simple questionnaire to naïve subjects (for example, in the waiting room before an examination) including six specific items allowing to identify the patient’s key characteristics. Depending on the answers, patients who do not comply with their pharmacological treatment may be classified as belonging to 6 phenotypes. For patients who are already under treatment it might be useful to administer another short questionnaire during follow up examination. Once the risk of non-compliance is identified, four possible types of measures can be taken: prescription-related, educational, behavioral and complex combined measures (combination of two or more actions). Therefore, while it is clear that adherence in COPD is a critical issue, it is also obvious that raising awareness on the disease and improving cooperation among specialists, general practitioners, health-care professionals, and patients is the starting point at which this evolution should immediately begin. Each medication is able to foster good compliance with the therapy, and consequently to maximize the efficacy, by virtue of its specific inhaler and its own active ingredient.

In this series, smears were unevaluable as a result of inadequate samples, cell overlapping or lack of fixation performed immediately after FNA.