Highlights SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was high compared to community in a cohort of health care workers at a single institution in the Bronx after the surge. Symptomatic participants had a higher rate of seroconversion compared to those without symptoms. Health care workers with anosmia and ageusia had increased odds of seroconversion in comparison to those without these symptoms. It is likely that a combination of healthcare and community exposure contributed to the seroprevalence.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) but it is unknown whether prone positioning improves outcomes in mechanically ventilated patients with moderate to severe ARDS due to COVID-19. Methods: A cohort study at a New York City hospital at the peak of the early pandemic in the United States, under crisis conditions. The aim was to determine the benefit of prone positioning in mechanically ventilated patients with ARDS due to COVID-19. The primary outcome was in-hospital death. Secondary outcomes included changes in physiologic parameters. Fine-Gray competing risks models with stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting (sIPTW) were used to determine the effect of prone positioning on outcomes. In addition, linear mixed effects models (LMM) were used to assess changes in physiology with prone positioning. Results: Out of 335 participants who were intubated and mechanically ventilated, 62 underwent prone positioning, 199 met prone positioning criteria and served as controls and 74 were excluded. The intervention and control groups were similar at baseline. In multivariate-adjusted competing risks models with sIPTW, prone positioning was significantly associated with reduced mortality (SHR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46-0.80, P < 0.005). Using LMM to evaluate the impact of positioning maneuvers on physiological parameters, the oxygenation-saturation index was significantly improved during days 1-3 ( P < 0.01) whereas oxygenation-saturation index (OSI), oxygenation-index (OI) and arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen (PaO2: FiO2) were significantly improved during days 4-7 (P < 0.05 for all). Conclusions: Prone positioning in patients with moderate to severe ARDS due to COVID-19 is associated with reduced mortality and improved physiologic parameters. One in-hospital death could be averted for every 8 patients treated. Replicating results and scaling the intervention are important, but prone positioning may represent an additional therapeutic option in patients with ARDS due to COVID-19.

A bstract Background Sepsis remains a leading cause of death worldwide despite advances in management strategies. Preclinical and observational studies have found mortality benefit with high-dose vitamin C in sepsis. Our study aims to prospectively evaluate the effect of intravenous hydrocortisone, vitamin C [ascorbic acid (AA)], and thiamine (HAT) administration in reducing inpatient all-cause mortality among patients with septic shock. Materials and methods Our single-center, prospective, open-label, randomized controlled trial recruited patients with admitting diagnosis of septic shock and assigned eligible patients (1:1) into either intervention (HAT) or control group (routine). The HAT group received intravenous combination of vitamin C (1.5 g every 6 hours), thiamine (200 mg every 12 hours), and hydrocortisone (50 mg every 6 hours) within 6 hours of onset of septic shock admission. The treatment was continued for at least 4 days, in addition to the routine standard of care provided to the control group. Thiamine and hydrocortisone use in control arm was not restricted. Vitamin C levels were estimated at baseline and at the end of the 4 days of treatment for both groups. The primary outcome evaluated was mortality during inpatient stay. Results Among 90 patients enrolled, 88 patients completed the study protocol. The baseline characteristics between the HAT ( n = 45) and the routine ( n = 43) groups were comparable. The all-cause mortality in the HAT cohort was 57% (26/45) compared to 53% (23/43) in the routine care group ( p = 0.4, OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.51–2.76). The time to reversal of septic shock was significantly lower in the HAT (34.58 ± 22.63 hours) in comparison to the routine care (45.42 ± 24.4 hours) ( p = 0.03, mean difference −10.84, 95% CI −20.8 to −0.87). No significant difference was observed between the HAT and the routine care with respect to changes in sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores at 72 hours (2.23 ± 2.4 vs 1.38 ± 3.1), the use of mechanical ventilation (48% vs 46%), and mean Vasoactive Inotropic Score (7.77 ± 12.12 vs 8.86 ± 12.5). Conclusion Intravenous administration of vitamin C, thiamine, and hydrocortisone did not significantly improve the inpatient all-cause mortality among patients with septic shock. Clinical significance HAT protocol does not reduce hospital mortality but decreases time to shock reversal in septic shock. How to cite this article Mohamed ZU, Prasannan P, Moni M, Edathadathil F, Prasanna P, Menon A, et al. Vitamin C Therapy for Routine Care in Septic Shock (ViCTOR) Trial: Effect of Intravenous Vitamin C, Thiamine, and Hydrocortisone Administration on Inpatient Mortality among Patients with Septic Shock. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(8...

Introduction: New York City is one of the areas most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Healthcare workers are among those at high risk of contracting the virus, and a vital source of information and trust in vaccines to the community. Methods: This study was conducted about attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers at a public hospital in New York City during the beginning of COVID-19 vaccination. 428 hospital employees responded. Results: Several factors were significantly associated with vaccine attitudes, including demographics such as gender (p = 0.002), age (p = 0.005), race (p < 0.001) and home location (p < 0.001), role within the hospital (p < 0.001), knowledge about the virus (p < 0.001) and confidence in and expectations about personal protective equipment and behaviors (p < 0.001). Structural equation modeling revealed that the most predictive factors were prior vaccine attitudes and concern with the speed of testing and approval of the vaccines (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis reinforced these, while also identifying perceived personal risk as significant (p = 0.033). Conclusions: Several modifiable factors that reflect confidence in science, scientific knowledge, personal risk perception, experience and medical authority are correlated with vaccine attitudes, indicating that a holistic educational approach to improve trust in science is likely to be effective in long-term reduction in vaccine hesitancy.

Candida species frequently cause blood stream infections and are reported to be the third to tenth most commonly isolated pathogens. Guidelines and standardised treatment algorithms provided by professional organisations aim to facilitate decision-making regarding diagnosis, management and treatment of candidaemia. In routine clinical practise, however, it may be challenging to comply with these guidelines. The reasons include lack of familiarity or feasibility to adherence, but also their length and complexity. There is no tool to measure guideline adherence currently. To provide such a tool, we reviewed the current guidelines provided by the European Society for Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) and by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), and selected the strongest recommendations for management quality as the bases for our scoring tool. Factors incorporated were diagnostic (blood cultures, echocardiography, ophthalmoscopy, species identification) and follow-up procedures (repeat blood cultures until negative result) as well as key treatment parameters (echinocandin treatment, step down to fluconazole depending on susceptibility result, CVC removal). The EQUAL Candida Score weighs and aggregates factors recommended for the ideal management of candidaemia and provides a tool for antifungal stewardship as well as for measuring guideline adherence.

Background Antimicrobial resistance is a major public health threat internationally but, particularly in India. A primary contributing factor to this rise in resistance includes unregulated access to antimicrobials. Implementing antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) in the acute hospital setting will help curb inappropriate antibiotic use in India. Currently, ASPs are rare in India but are gaining momentum. This study describes ASP implementation in a large, academic, private, tertiary care center in India. Methods An ASP was established in February 2016 consisting of an administrative champion, hospitalist, microbiologist, intensivist, and pharmacists. Antimicrobial stewardship program interventions included postprescriptive audit and establishment of institutional guidelines. The ASP tracked appropriate drug selection including loading dose, maintenance dose, frequency, route, duration of therapy, de-escalation, and compliance with ASP recommendations. Defined daily dose (DDD) of drugs and cost of antimicrobials were compared between the pre-implementation phase (February 2015–January 2016) and post-implementation phase (February 2016–January 2017). Results Of 48 555 patients admitted during the post-implementation phase, 1020 received 1326 prescriptions for restricted antibiotics. Antibiotic therapy was appropriate in 56% (742) of the total patient prescriptions. A total of 2776 instances of “inappropriate” antimicrobial prescriptions were intervened upon by the ASP. Duration (806, 29%) was the most common reason for inappropriate therapy. Compliance with ASP recommendations was 54% (318). For all major restricted drugs, the DDD/1000 patient days declined, and there was a significant reduction in mean monthly cost by 14.4% in the post-implementation phase. Conclusions Implementation of a multidisciplinary antibiotic stewardship program in this academic, large, Indian hospital demonstrated feasibility and economic benefits.

Background The open-label RECOVERY study reported improved survival in hospitalized, SARS-CoV-2 seronegative patients treated with casirivimab and imdevimab (CAS + IMD). Methods In this phase I/II/III, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted prior to widespread circulation of Delta and Omicron, hospitalized COVID-19 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to 2.4 g or 8.0 g CAS + IMD or placebo, and characterized at baseline for viral load and SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. Results 1336 patients on low-flow or no supplemental (low-flow/no) oxygen were treated. The primary endpoint was met: in seronegative patients, the least-squares mean difference (CAS + IMD versus placebo) for time-weighted average change from baseline in viral load through day 7 was –0.28 log10 copies/mL (95% CI, –0.51 to –0.05; P = .0172). The primary clinical analysis of death or mechanical ventilation (death/MV) from day 6–29 in patients with high viral load had a strong positive trend but did not reach significance. CAS + IMD numerically reduced all-cause mortality in seronegative patients through day 29 (relative risk reduction, 55.6%; 95% CI, 24.2–74.0). No safety concerns were noted. Conclusions In hospitalized COVID-19 patients on low-flow/no oxygen, CAS + IMD reduced viral load and likely improves clinical outcomes in the overall population, with the benefit driven by seronegative patients, and no harm observed in seropositive patients.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text