Background and Objectives: Spontaneous pneumothorax (SP) and spontaneous pneumomediastinum (SPM) have frequently been cited as complications associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia, with especially poor prognosis in mechanically ventilated patients. The current literature is controversial regarding the potential risk factors for developing SP or SPM (SP-SPM) in non-ventilated COVID-19 patients. Our research addressed a twofold objective: (a) to investigate the characteristics of patients with SP-SPM (both with and without COVID-19) and compare them to patients with sole COVID-19; (b) to quantify the risk of in-hospital mortality associated with SP-SPM and COVID-19. Patients and Methods: A retrospective case–control study was conducted in the emergency departments (ED) of two tertiary hospitals in Timisoara, Romania, over one year (1st April 2020‒31st March 2021; 64,845 records in total) and 70 cases of SP-SPM were identified (both SARS-CoV-2 positives and negatives). The control group comprised COVID-19 patients with no SP-SPM, included at a 2:1 ratio. Logistic regression was employed to quantify the in-hospital mortality risk associated with age, SP-SPM, and COVID-19. Results: SP-SPM and COVID-19 were connected with prolonged hospitalization, a higher percentage of intensive care admission, and a higher mortality. SP-SPM increased the odds of death by almost four times in patients of the same age, gender, smoking status, and SARS-CoV-2 infection: OR = 3.758, 95% CI (1.443– 9.792). Each additional year of age added 9.4% to the mortality risk: OR = 1.094, 95% CI (1.054– 1.135). Conclusion: ED physicians should acknowledge these potential risks when attending COVID-19 patients with SP-SPM.

Background and objectives: Although the intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) has been shown to be effective in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS), only a small proportion of stroke patients receive this drug. The low administration rate is mainly due to the delayed presentation of patients to the emergency department (ED) or the lack of a stroke team/unit in most of the hospitals. Thus, the aim of this study is to analyze ED time targets and the rate of rt-PA intravenous administration after the initial admission of patients with AIS in an ED from a traditional healthcare center (without a neurologist or stroke team/unit). Methods: To analyze which factors influence the administration of rt-PA, we split the general sample (n = 202) into two groups: group No rt-PA (n = 137) and group rt-PA (n = 65). This is based on the performing or no intravenous thrombolysis. Results: Analyzing ED time targets for all samples, we found that the median onset-to-ED door time was 180 min (IQR, 120–217.5 min), door-to-physician time was 4 min (IQR, 3–7 min), door-to-CT time was 52 min (IQR, 48–55 min), and door-in-door-out time was 61 min (IQR, 59–65 min). ED time targets such as door-to-physician time (p = 0.245), door-to-CT time (p = 0.219), door-in-door-out time (p = 0.24), NIHSS at admission to the Neurology department (p = 0.405), or NIHSS after 24 h (p = 0.9) did not have a statistically significant effect on the administration or no rt-PA treatment in patients included in our study. Only the highest door-to-CT time was statistically significantly correlated with the death outcome. Conclusion: In our study, the iv rt-PA administration rate was 32.18%. A statistically significant correlation between the highest door-to-CT time and death outcome was found.

Background and objectives: To minimize stroke-related deaths and maximize the likelihood of cerebral reperfusion, medical professionals developed the “code stroke” emergency protocol, which allows for the prompt evaluation of patients with acute ischemic stroke symptoms in pre-hospital care and the emergency department (ED). This research will outline our experience in implementing the stroke code protocol for acute ischemic stroke patients and its impact on door-to-needle time (DTN) in the ED. Methods: Our study included patients with a “code stroke alert” upon arrival at the emergency department. The final sample of this study consisted of 258 patients eligible for intravenous (IV) thrombolysis with an onset-to-door time < 4.5 h. ED admissions were categorized into two distinct groups: “day shift” (from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.) (n = 178) and “night shift” (from 8 p.m. to 8 a.m.) (n = 80) groups. Results: An analysis of ED time targets showed an increased median during the day shift for onset-to-ED door time of 310 min (IQR, 190–340 min), for door-to-physician (emergency medicine doctor) time of 5 min (IQR, 3–9 min), for door-to-physician (emergency medicine doctor) time of 5 min (IQR, 3–9 min), and for door-to-physician (neurologist) time of 7 min (IQR, 5–10 min), also during the day shift. During the night shift, an increased median was found for door-to-CT time of 21 min (IQR, 16.75–23 min), for door-to-CT results of 40 min (IQR, 38–43 min), and for door-to-needle time of 57.5 min (IQR, 46.25–60 min). Astonishingly, only 17.83% (n = 46) of these patients received intravenous thrombolysis, and the proportion of patients with thrombolysis was significantly higher during the night shift (p = 0.044). A logistic regression analysis considering the door-to-needle time (minutes) as the dependent variable demonstrated that onset-to-ED time (p < 0.001) and door-to-physician (emergency medicine physicians) time (p = 0.021) are predictors for performing thrombolysis in our study. Conclusions: This study identified higher door-to-CT and door-to-emergency medicine physician times associated with an increased DTN, highlighting further opportunities to improve acute stroke care in the emergency department. Further, door-to-CT and door-to-CT results showed statistically significant increases during the night shift.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted many aspects of society, including medical education. In response to the pandemic, Romanian medical schools and universities have turned to online learning as a means of continuing instruction while maintaining social distancing protocols. While online learning in medical education was utilized prior to the pandemic, its widespread adoption has brought both challenges and opportunities to the field. The purpose of this study was to assess medical students’ perception towards implementing E-learning during COVID 19 pandemic. Material and Methods: This cross-sectional multicentric study comprised 611 medical students from several medical university centers from Romania. A self-developed questionnaire was online applied between January and March 2021 and used for the evaluation and analysis of perceived changes in teaching before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Most students (n = 71.5%) considered that the pandemic had an overall negative impact on their professional development. A significant negative correlation (p < 0.01, for all), was observed between during COVID-19 pandemic and the level of medical training, motivation to learn, and level of self-confidence. Conclusion: The shift to online learning during the pandemic decreased the psychological and professional development of medical students, resulting in a low perception of self-confidence, motivation, and practical involvement. However, there are many benefits brought by the use of electronic technologies for medical education both in Romania and in the world. These benefits should be systematically evaluated, and effective strategies should be developed to permanently improve the e-learning methods of these students.

Background and Objectives: Medical workshops serve as interactive learning sessions that allow medical students to apply their extensive theoretical knowledge in a structured, low-stress environment. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a self-developed multidisciplinary workshop on participants’ self-reported confidence, teamwork, leadership skills, and theoretical knowledge acquisition. Methods: The present study gathered data from 100 participants. Two surveys, each comprising three sections, were administered: a multiple-choice questionnaire (MCQ), with distinct versions for pre- and post-workshop assessment; a self-confidence questionnaire; and a non-technical skills questionnaire structured using a Likert-scale format. Results: Regarding self-assessed confidence, significant increases were observed across all workshop stations (p < 0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test), with all effect sizes classified as large (Cohen’s d > 0.8). In terms of theoretical knowledge, students demonstrated substantial improvement, with the median score increasing from 5.92 to 8.2, and no significant differences identified between study years (p = 0.895). Non-technical skills, including teamwork and leadership, were assessed using two questions each, revealing a statistically significant improvement in pre- and post-intervention (p < 0.001) with large effect sizes. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that the one-day multidisciplinary workshop increases medical students’ confidence by refining their communication skills, broadening their understanding of different roles in healthcare, and improving their ability to collaborate effectively.

Background: This investigation assesses the prognostic value of lactate levels and their clearance in septic shock patients, particularly emphasizing the comparative analysis between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients in the emergency department. This study aims to elucidate the unique prognostic implications of lactate dynamics in these distinct patient groups, thereby enhancing the management of septic shock. Methods: An observational prospective study was conducted, enrolling 114 septic shock patients from the Emergency County Hospital Resita, Romania, categorizing them into COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 groups to examine their initial lactate levels, clearance rates, and their correlation with patient outcomes. Results: This study identified significant differences in the initial lactate levels and clearance rates between the two groups, indicating higher initial lactate levels and slower clearance rates in COVID-19 patients. Survivors demonstrated significantly lower initial lactate levels (1.5 ± 0.4 mmol/L) and higher lactate clearance rates (33 ± 15%) compared to non-survivors (2.5 ± 0.5 mmol/L and 24 ± 9%, respectively; lactate levels p = 0.001, clearance rates p = 0.002). Conclusions: Lactate monitoring, particularly clearance rates, is crucial in the prognostic assessment of septic shock patients. These findings highlight the need for targeted interventions in COVID-19 patients to improve outcomes, underscoring lactate dynamics as a vital component of septic shock management in differing patient populations.