Human coronaviruses (HCoVs) are a well-known cause of respiratory infections but their role in gastrointestinal infections is unclear. The objective of our study was to assess the significance of HCoVs in the etiology of acute gastroenteritis (AGE) in children <6 years of age.

Aim: Study's objective was to identify risk factors associated with bronchiolitis severity.Methods: A retrospective chart review of all children <2 years old diagnosed with bronchiolitis at the University Medical Centre Ljubljana between May 2014 and April 2015, who were treated as outpatients (paediatric emergency department, PED group) or as inpatients in the standard hospital setting (WARD group) or in the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU group). Detection of respiratory viruses in nasopharyngeal swab was accomplished by RT‐PCR. Severity was assessed by Wang Respiratory Score and hospitalization longer than 24 hours.Results: The study included 761 children. The three most frequently detected viruses were respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), human rhinovirus (hRV) and human bocavirus (hBoV) (57.5%, 272/473; 25.6%, 121/473; 18.4%, 87/473). Patient groups differed in Wang Respiratory Score for the severity of bronchiolitis (P < 0.001). No differences regarding the causative viruses were found. There was a lower proportion of children with the presence of more than one virus in PICU group compared to other two groups (P = 0.017). The three groups significantly differed in age, birthweight, comorbidities, bronchodilator treatment and antibiotic usage. However, multiple regression analysis revealed that younger age and the use of antibiotics were associated with bronchiolitis severity defined as hospitalization for >24 hours.Conclusions: Respiratory syncytial virus, hRV and hBoV were the most frequently detected viruses. The majority of patients admitted to the PICU had only one virus detected. Younger age and the use of antibiotics were associated with bronchiolitis severity.

Background: Group B Streptococcus (GBS) is the leading cause of invasive neonatal disease in the industrialized world. We aimed to genomically and phenotypically characterise invasive GBS isolates in Slovenia from 2001 to 2018 and contemporary colonising GBS isolates from screening cultures in 2018. Methods: GBS isolates from 101 patients (invasive isolates) and 70 pregnant women (colonising isolates) were analysed. Basic clinical characteristics of the patients were collected from medical records. Antimicrobial susceptibility and phenotypic capsular serotype were determined. Whole-genome sequencing was performed to assign multilocus sequence types (STs), clonal complexes (CCs), pathogenicity/virulence factors, including capsular genotypes, and genome-based phylogeny. Results: Among invasive neonatal disease patients, 42.6% (n = 43) were females, 41.5% (n = 39/94) were from preterm deliveries (< 37 weeks gestation), and 41.6% (n = 42) had early-onset disease (EOD). All isolates were susceptible to benzylpenicillin with low minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs; ≤0.125 mg/L). Overall, 7 serotypes were identified (Ia, Ib, II-V and VIII); serotype III being the most prevalent (59.6%). Twenty-eight MLST STs were detected that clustered into 6 CCs. CC-17 was the most common CC overall (53.2%), as well as among invasive (67.3%) and non-invasive (32.9%) isolates (p < 0.001). CC-17 was more common among patients with late-onset disease (LOD) (81.4%) compared to EOD (47.6%) (p < 0.001). The prevalence of other CCs was 12.9% (CC-23), 11.1% (CC-12), 10.5% (CC-1), 8.2% (CC-19), and 1.8% (CC-498). Of all isolates, 2.3% were singletons. Conclusions: A high prevalence of hypervirulent CC-17 isolates, with low genomic diversity and characteristic profile of pathogenicity/virulence factors, was detected among invasive neonatal and colonising GBS isolates from pregnant women in Slovenia. This is the first genomic characterisation of GBS isolates in Slovenia and provides valuable microbiological and genomic baseline data regarding the invasive and colonising GBS population nationally. Continuous genomic surveillance of GBS infections is crucial to analyse the impact of IND prevention strategies on the population structure of GBS locally, nationally, and internationally.

Background:Advances in intensive care medicine have enormously improved ability to successfully treat seriously ill patients. However, intensive treatment and prolongation of life is not always in the patient’s best interest, and many ethical dilem...

Healthcare professionals (HCPs), patients and families are often faced with ethical dilemmas. The role of healthcare ethics committees (HECs) is to offer support in these situations. The primary objective was to study how often HCPs encounter ethical dilemmas. The secondary objective was to identify the main types of ethical dilemmas encountered and how HCPs solve them. We conducted a cross-sectional, survey-based study among HCPs in 14 Slovenian hospitals. A questionnaire was designed and validated by HCPs who were selected by proportional stratified sampling. Data collection took place between April 2015 and April 2016. The final sample size was n = 485 (385 or 79.4%, female). The response rates for HCPs working in secondary and tertiary level institutions were 45% and 51%, respectively. Three hundred and forty (70.4%) of 485 HCPs (very) frequently encountered ethical dilemmas. Frequent ethical dilemmas were waiting periods for diagnostics or treatment, suboptimal working conditions due to poor interpersonal relations on the ward, preserving patients’ dignity, and relations between HCPs and patients. Physicians and nurses working in secondary level institutions, compared to their colleagues working in tertiary level institutions, more frequently encountered ethical dilemmas with respect to preserving patients’ dignity, protecting patients’ information, and relations between HCPs and patients. In terms of solutions, all HCPs most frequently discussed ethical dilemmas with co-workers (colleagues), and with the head of the department. According to HCPs, the most important role of HECs is staff education, followed by improving communication, and reviewing difficult ethical cases. Waiting periods for diagnostics and treatment and suboptimal working conditions due to poor interpersonal relations are considered to be among the most important ethical issues by HCPs in Slovenian hospitals. The most important role of HECs is staff education, improving communication, and reviewing difficult ethical cases.