COVID-19 vaccines have demonstrated efficacy in reducing the prevalence of serious illnesses. The relative risk of hospitalization and mortality for patients who get breakthrough infections after immunization versus those who develop reinfections after a prior spontaneous infection is examined in this correspondence. Based on a study on U.S. Veterans who were not vaccinated and experienced reinfections had a much higher risk of experiencing severe illness outcomes compared to those who had received immunizations and experienced breakthrough infections, even if the rates of reinfection and breakthrough infection were similar. Our findings highlight the value of immunization in reducing severe COVID-19 outcomes, even in the presence of reinfections.

Background: Severe COVID-19 patients who received ventilator management were not very rare even when the omicron variant became dominant, but the clinical characteristics of these patients are still unclear. Methods: The clinical characteristics of severe COVID-19 patients requiring ventilator management were retrospectively investigated from January 2023 to December 2023. Results: Severe COVID-19 patients who received ventilator management accounted for 11 of 275 (4.2%) patients during the omicron variant period. Their mean age was 70.7 (51-85) years, and males were predominant. Ten of eleven (91.7%) patients were managed in the emergency department and had underlying diseases, including chronic lung/heart/kidney diseases and neurological diseases. However, only 4 of 11 (36.4%) had a clear history of vaccination. The patients showed a positive SARS-CoV-2 antigen titer of 3305.7 (12.9-20912). All 11 patients were treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone, and 5 (45.5%) also received sotrovimab. Pathogenic bacteria were isolated from 7 of 11 (63.6%) patients, and all 11 patients were treated with antibiotics. Only 3 of 11 (27.3%) patients were managed using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), but 9 of 11(81.8%) patients survived. Conclusions: These data suggest that severe COVID-19 patients who required ventilator management were less-vaccinated, elderly patients with underlying disease. These patients were treated successfully using antiviral agents, steroids, neutralizing antibodies, and antibiotics, with a few also treated using ECMO in the omicron era.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic posed significant psychological challenges to frontline healthcare workers (HCWs), including anxiety, stress, and emotional strain. Aim: This study investigates the psychological impact on HCWs during the pandemic and explores coping strategies employed to manage distress. Methods: An integrative review was conducted using 24 studies published between January and December 2020. These studies were analyzed to identify common psychological outcomes and coping mechanisms among HCWs. Results: Healthcare workers experienced significant psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic, including anxiety, stress, insomnia, and depression. Anxiety was the most commonly reported issue, particularly among women, younger healthcare workers, and frontline staff. Stress levels were heightened by high workloads, exposure to COVID-19 patients, and inadequate protective measures. Coping strategies and self-care behaviors, such as seeking social support and utilizing institutional resources, varied in effectiveness across populations. Conclusion: The findings highlight the urgent need for targeted mental health support and resilience programs for HCWs, ensuring they are better equipped to face future health crises.

Respiratory virus co-infections have been suggested to happen frequently and exacerbate patients’ conditions, but little is known about the detailed rates and the combinations of viruses during the COVID-19 pandemic period. A total of 255 symptomatic patients who underwent multiplex PCR tests were analyzed, and it was found that 6 (6/255=2.4%) patients were infected with multiple viruses. The patients ranged in age from 1 to 38 years, and one female patient was pregnant. Of the 6 patients, 4 had fever, and 5 had human rhinovirus/enterovirus and another virus. These data suggested that the rate of respiratory virus co-infection was low, and the combination of SAS-CoV-2 and other viruses was rare even during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The titers of SARS-COV-2 antigens are frequently used as markers of viral activity and threshold for release from quarantine and treatment. COVID-19 patients were treated with several antiviral agents, including remdesivir (RDV) and ensitrelvir (ESV), which is a novel anti-SARS-CoV-2 agent recently suggested to have strong antiviral activity. Cases: We present the cases of two patients whose SARS-CoV-2 antigens were successfully decreased by oral administration of ESV after they could not be decreased by RDV drip infusion. Case 1 was a 74-year-old man who was admitted with SARS-CoV-2 infection and had been infected by the virus a month earlier and relapsed twice. He had been treated with rituximab for diffuse B cell lymphoma and not received vaccination for SARS-CoV-2. RDV was administered intravenously two weeks earlier and again 4 days earlier, but it failed to control the infection, and he was transferred to our hospital (day 1). Intravenous RDV was restarted on day 1, but viral antigens remained high until day 5. The RDV was then switched to oral ESV, and viral antigen titers were successfully decreased on days 8, 10, and 12. Case 2 was an 81-year-old man who was admitted with SARS-CoV-2 infection on day 0. He had heart failure and diabetes mellitus, and had not received vaccination for SARS-CoV-2. Intravenous RDV was started on day 1, but viral antigens were still high until day 8. He was then switched from RDV to oral ESV, and viral antigen titers were successfully decreased on day 11. Conclusions: These cases suggest that ESV might be more effective than RDV for reducing viral activity, and it is easy to administer orally.

Background: Recently specific interactions and crosslinks between the gut microbiota and the lungs have been recognized, particularly with regard to respiratory immune and anti-microbial reactions. This is often known as the “gut-lung axis” or “a common mucosal immunological system”. Objective: The aim of the current systematic review was to evaluate evidence, from published clinical trials and cohort studies, if probiotics may have an effect in improving and managing COVID-19 symptoms. Materials and methods: The available studies were searched through a comprehensive search of electronic databases that included PubMed, Science Direct, Scirus, ISI Web of Knowledge, Google Scholar and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), using a combination of the following keywords: “COVID-19" OR "SARS-CoV-2" AND "Microbiota" OR "Probiotics” OR “Gut Lung Axis”. The literature was reviewed until August 31, 2022. Results: Only 3 studies were included. One of them evaluated the efficacy of probiotics in COVID-19 patients to obtain complete remission of all signs and symptoms. The clinical trial proves that probiotics have a significant effect on complete remission of all signs and symptoms of COVID-19 patients with statistical significant difference. Only one clinical trial out of the 3 included studies had evaluated the need for O2 therapy during the study between the probiotics and control groups, but without statistical significant difference. No statistical significant difference between the probiotics group and placebo group was observed regarding fatal prognosis during the only clinical trial that measured death as an outcome. Conclusion: We couldn’t judge on these results as they are insufficient data for pooling and meta-analysis. However, what we can say is “Most probably Probiotics have no role in treatment of COVID-19 infection”.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a newly emerging human disease caused by a novel coronavirus, causing a global pandemic crisis. Probiotics and/or colchicine may be considered as options for treatment since they have anti-viral, anti-inflammatory, and immunomodulatory effects. The aim of the current review was to assess the effectiveness of probiotic supplements and colchicine on symptoms, duration, and progression of mild and moderate cases of COVID-19 infection. Review: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in the United States with 182 participants who were randomly assigned to receive daily oral probiotic (Lactobacillus rhamnosus) LGG or placebo for 28 days. The study indicated that LGG is well-tolerated and is associated with a delay in the onset of COVID-19 infection, a reduction in the incidence of symptoms, and alterations in the structure of the gut microbiome when administered as post-exposure prophylaxis within seven days of exposure. Colchicine may lessen mortality and the need for mechanical ventilation in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients, according to a systematic review and meta-analysis. Conclusion: Probiotics and/or colchicine may be viable treatment options for COVID-19 patients. To examine the efficacy of probiotics and colchicine in the treatment of COVID-19, it is necessary to conduct additional clinical trials and provide clinicians with evidence, as there are currently insufficient studies to support this conclusion.

The pulmonary characteristics of Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) co-infection with respiratory viruses, such as SARS-CoV-2 and influenza virus, are still unclear. Case series: Two patients with methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) infection in the lungs co-infected with either SARS-CoV-2 or influenza virus are reported. Case 1 was a 66-year-old woman who was admitted with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Her chest X-ray and computed tomography (CT) showed multiple cavity formations with infiltration shadows, and MSSA was detected from her sputum and blood, suggesting COVID-19-related bacterial pneumonia and pulmonary embolism. No catheters had been used, but she had skin eruptions and a history of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Ampicillin/sulbactam (ABPC/SBT) was administered, and she finally improved. Case 2 was an 87-year-old man with a history of atopic dermatitis who was admitted with moderate pneumonia, and influenza virus co-infection was found. He showed multiple cavitary shadows, and MSSA was isolated from both his sputum and blood. He was diagnosed with influenza-related bacterial pulmonary embolism. No catheters had been used, but he had a history of influenza vaccination. He was also treated by ABPC/SBT and finally improved. Conclusions: These cases suggest that MSSA showed affinity to the lungs when co-infected with either SARS-CoV-2 or influenza virus, and it presented as septic emboli without catheter use. We should consider MSSA infection when patients have SARS-CoV-2 or influenza virus co-infection, and multiple cavity formation and skin disorders are seen, even though they were vaccinated and no catheters were used.

Background: There is paucity of data on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among Health Information Managers/Health Record Officers (HROs) in the Nigeria health system. Hence, this study investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health-related quality of life (QoL) among HROs in Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospital Complex (OAUTHC), Ile-Ife, Nigeria. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the University Hospital, where a total of 52 health record officers were purposively sampled. Relevant data were collected using the Short Form survey (SF-36v2) questionnaire. One-way ANOVA was used to determine mean group differences across the nine and the two QoL (physical and mental) summary domains based on respondents’ socio-demographics, while level of significance was set at 0.05. Results: All the QoL sections of the instrument used yielded an α-Cronbach’s score of > 0.70. Analysis of some QoL physical component dimensions showed that; Bodily pain (BP) was found to be significantly (P=0.032) associated with marital status, Physical functioning (PF) with gender (P=0.023), and general health (GH) with age group (P=00.025) and highest level of education (P=0.023). On the other hand, mental health component analysis revealed that Social Functioning (SF) was associated with age group (P=014), Role limitation (RE) with marital status (P=0.048), highest level of education (P=0.048) and years of service (P=0.015) etc. Conclusion: The QoL among HROs studied was generally above average, and demographic characteristics such as age, gender and marital status significantly influence QoL. Health managers and stakeholders should consider some of the factors identified in managing HROs.