Infrared thermal screening, via the use of handheld non-contact infrared thermometers (NCITs) and thermal scanners, has been widely implemented all over the world. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate its diagnostic accuracy for the detection of fever. We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, medRxiv, bioRxiv, ClinicalTrials.gov, COVID-19 Open Research Dataset, COVID-19 research database, Epistemonikos, EPPI-Centre, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Scopus and Web of Science databases for studies where a non-contact infrared device was used to detect fever against a reference standard of conventional thermometers. Forest plots and Hierarchical Summary Receiver Operating Characteristics curves were used to describe the pooled summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio. From a total of 1063 results, 30 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, of which 19 were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.808 (95%CI 0.656–0.903) and 0.920 (95%CI 0.769–0.975), respectively, for the NCITs (using forehead as the site of measurement), and 0.818 (95%CI 0.758–0.866) and 0.923 (95%CI 0.823–0.969), respectively, for thermal scanners. The sensitivity of NCITs increased on use of rectal temperature as the reference. The sensitivity of thermal scanners decreased in a disease outbreak/pandemic setting. Changes approaching statistical significance were also observed on the exclusion of neonates from the analysis. Thermal screening had a low positive predictive value, especially at the initial stage of an outbreak, whereas the negative predictive value (NPV) continued to be high even at later stages. Thermal screening has reasonable diagnostic accuracy in the detection of fever, although it may vary with changes in subject characteristics, setting, index test and the reference standard used. Thermal screening has a good NPV even during a pandemic. The policymakers must take into consideration the factors surrounding the screening strategy while forming ad-hoc guidelines.

With the recent outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and emergency use authorization of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, reports of post-vaccine immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) have gained attention. With this systematic review, we aim to analyze the clinical characteristics, therapeutic strategies, and outcomes of patients presenting with ITP after receiving COVID-19 vaccination. Medline, Embase, and Ebsco databases were systematically explored from inception until 1 June 2022. Case reports and case series investigating the association between the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and ITP were included. We found a total of 66 patients. The mean age of presentation was 63 years with a female preponderance (60.6%). Sixteen patients had pre-existing ITP. The mean time from vaccine administration to symptom onset was 8.4 days. More ITP events were triggered by mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 (n = 29) > mRNA-1273 (n = 13)) than with adenoviral vaccines (ChAdOx1-S AstraZeneca (n = 15) > Ad26.COV2-S (n = 9)). Most of the patients were treated with steroids or IVIG, or both. The overall outcome was promising, with no reported deaths. Our review attempts to increase awareness among physicians while evaluating patients presenting with thrombocytopenia after receiving the vaccine. In our solicited opinion, the rarity of these events and excellent outcomes for patients should not change views regarding the benefits provided by immunization.

With the introduction of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines, the incidence of severe infection has significantly decreased. While the vaccines have been shown to be effective and safe, there have been few case reports of acute myocarditis within 3-5 days following the second dose of the vaccine. We report a case of an elderly man who presented with acute-onset chest pain after three months of receiving the second dose of the mRNA vaccine. He was found to have acute myocarditis on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI), which was attributed to exposure to the COVID-19 vaccine in the absence of any other risk factors. Our patient demonstrated quick resolution of symptoms and was discharged within 72 hours. We review the literature and summarize published case reports on COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis. The present case report provides new evidence regarding the possible subacute presentation of myocarditis post-COVID-19 vaccine, and further highlights the favorable outcome in this newly described clinical entity.