We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
To evaluate the rate of coinfections and secondary infections seen in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and antimicrobial prescribing patterns.
This single-center, retrospective study included all patients aged ≥18 years admitted with COVID-19 for at least 24 hours to a 280-bed, academic, tertiary-care hospital between March 1, 2020, and August 31, 2020. Coinfections, secondary infections, and antimicrobials prescribed for these patients were collected.
In total, 331 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 were evaluated. No additional cases were identified in 281 (84.9%) patients, whereas 50 (15.1%) had at least 1 infection. In total, of 50 patients (15.1%) who were diagnosed with coinfection or secondary infection had bacteremia, pneumonia, and/or urinary tract infections. Patients who had positive cultures, who were admitted to the ICU, who required supplemental oxygen, or who were transferred from another hospital for higher level of care were more likely to have infections. The most commonly used antimicrobials were azithromycin (75.2%) and ceftriaxone (64.9%). Antimicrobials were prescribed appropriately for 55% of patients.
Coinfection and secondary infections are common in patients who are critically ill with COVID-19 at hospital admission. Clinicians should consider starting antimicrobial therapy in critically ill patients while limiting antimicrobial use in patients who are not critically ill.
Smart contracts, which were once theorised, are now somewhat realised, thanks to recent developments in distributed ledger technology. Yet, these self-executing agreements written in code are not a panacea to businesses’ and individuals’ contracting woes. It is argued that smart contracts worsen existing power asymmetries between contracting parties, thus, fallbacks must be provided for.
Health care institutions constantly must be prepared for disaster response. However, there are deficiencies in the current level of preparedness. The aim of this study was to investigate the factors affecting the perception of health care workers (HCWs) towards individual and institutional preparedness for a disaster.
A survey on disaster incident preparedness was conducted among doctors, nurses, and allied health workers over a period of two months in 2010. The survey investigated perceptions of disaster preparedness at the individual and institutional level. Responses were measured using a five-point Likert scale. The primary outcomes were factors affecting HCWs’ perception of institution and individual preparedness. Secondary outcomes were the proportions of staff willing to participate and to place importance on disaster response training and their knowledge of access to such training. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Logistic regression was performed to determine the factors that influenced the HCWs’ perception of their individual and institutional readiness. Odd ratios (ORs) of such factors were reported with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Of 1700 HCWs, 1534 (90.2%) completed the survey. 75.3% (1155/1534) felt that the institution was ready for a disaster incident, but only 36.4% (558/1534) felt that they (as individuals) were prepared. Some important factors associated with a positive perception of institution preparedness were leadership preparedness (OR = 13.19; 95% CI, 9.93-17.51), peer preparedness (OR = 6.11; 95% CI, 4.27-8.73) and availability of training opportunities (OR = 4.76; 95% CI, 3.65-6.22). Some important factors associated with a positive perception of individual preparedness were prior experience in disaster response (OR = 2.80; 95% CI, 1.99-3.93), institution preparedness (OR = 3.71; 95% CI, 2.68-5.14), peer preparedness (OR = 3.49; 95% CI, 2.75-4.26), previous training in disaster response (OR = 3.48; 95% CI, 2.76-4.39) and family support (OR = 3.22; 95% CI, 2.54-4.07). Most (80.7%, 1238/1534) were willing to participate in future disaster incident response training, while 74.5% (1143/1534) felt that being able to respond to a disaster incident constitutes part of their professional competency. However, only 27.8% (426/1534) knew how to access these training opportunities.
This study demonstrated that HCWs fare poorly in their perception of their individual preparedness. Important factors that might contribute to improving this perception at the individual and institution level have been identified. These factors could guide the review and implementation of future disaster incident response training in health care institutions.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.