Objective: We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination against post-COVID conditions (long COVID) among fully vaccinated individuals. Design: Systematic literature review/meta-analysis. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Web of Science from December 1, 2019, to June 2, 2023, for studies evaluating the COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against post-COVID conditions among fully vaccinated individuals who received two doses of COVID-19 vaccine. A post-COVID condition was defined as any symptom that was present four or more weeks after COVID-19 infection. We calculated the pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) (95% confidence interval) for post-COVID conditions between fully vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated as 100% x (1-DOR). Results: Thirty-two studies with 775,931 individuals evaluated the effect of vaccination on post-COVID conditions, of which, twenty-four studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled DOR for post-COVID conditions among fully vaccinated individuals was 0.680 (95% CI: 0.523–0.885) with an estimated VE of 32.0% (11.5%–47.7%). Vaccine effectiveness was 36.9% (23.1%–48.2%) among those who received two doses of COVID-19 vaccine before COVID-19 infection and 68.7% (64.7%–72.2%) among those who received three doses before COVID-19 infection. The stratified analysis demonstrated no protection against post-COVID conditions among those who received COVID-19 vaccination after COVID-19 infection. Conclusions: Receiving a complete COVID-19 vaccination prior to contracting the virus resulted in a significant reduction in post-COVID conditions throughout the study period, including during the Omicron era. Vaccine effectiveness demonstrated an increase when supplementary doses were administered.

There is ample literature available on the association between both time to antibiotics and appropriateness of antibiotics and clinical outcomes from sepsis. In fact, the current state of debate surrounds the balance to be struck between prompt empirical therapy and care in the choice of appropriate antibiotics (both in terms of the susceptibility of infecting organism and minimizing resistance arising from use of broad-spectrum agents). The objective of this study is to determine sepsis bundle compliance and the appropriateness of antimicrobial therapy in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock and its impact on outcomes. This study was conducted in the ICU of a tertiary care, private hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. A retrospective cohort study was conducted from July 2005 to December 2012 in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. A total of 1,279 patients were identified with severe sepsis and septic shock, of which 358 (32.1%) had bloodstream infection (BSI). The inpatient mortality rate was 29%. In evaluation of the sepsis bundle, over time there was a progressive increase in serum arterial lactate collection, obtaining blood cultures prior to antibiotic administration, administration of broad-spectrum antibiotics within 1 hour, and administration of appropriate antimicrobials, with statistically significant differences in the later years of the study. We also observed a significant decrease in mortality. In patients with bloodstream infection, after adjustment for other covariates the administration of appropriate antimicrobial therapy was associated with a decrease in mortality in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock (p = 0.023). The administration of appropriate antimicrobial therapy was independently associated with a decline in mortality in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock due to bloodstream infection. As protocol adherence increased over time, the crude mortality rate decreased, which reinforces the need to implement institutional guidelines and monitor appropriate antimicrobial therapy compliance.

Compliance with hand hygiene is a good quality indicator for hospital patient safety programmes. Hand hygiene is a major infection control prevention intervention, but in many medical centres compliance rates are only c. 50%. Given the enormous number of hand hygiene opportunities in hospitals, direct observation to monitor compliance is very inefficient. However, technologies are emerging to obviate the need for direct observation. These new technologies for monitoring hand hygiene compliance are discussed in this article.

Nosocomial bloodstream infections (nBSIs) are an important cause of morbidity and mortality and are the most frequent type of nosocomial infection in pediatric patients. We identified the predominant pathogens and antimicrobial susceptibilities of nosocomial bloodstream isolates in pediatric patients (≤16 years of age) in the Brazilian Prospective Surveillance for nBSIs at 16 hospitals from 12 June 2007 to 31 March 2010 (Br SCOPE project). In our study a total of 2,563 cases of nBSI were reported by hospitals participating in the Br SCOPE project. Among these, 342 clinically significant episodes of BSI were identified in pediatric patients (≤16 years of age). Ninety-six percent of BSIs were monomicrobial. Gram-negative organisms caused 49.0% of these BSIs, Gram-positive organisms caused 42.6%, and fungi caused 8.4%. The most common pathogens were Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) (21.3%), Klebsiella spp. (15.7%), Staphylococcus aureus (10.6%), and Acinetobacter spp. (9.2%). The crude mortality was 21.6% (74 of 342). Forty-five percent of nBSIs occurred in a pediatric or neonatal intensive-care unit (ICU). The most frequent underlying conditions were malignancy, in 95 patients (27.8%). Among the potential factors predisposing patients to BSI, central venous catheters were the most frequent (66.4%). Methicillin resistance was detected in 37 S. aureus isolates (27.1%). Of the Klebsiella spp. isolates, 43.2% were resistant to ceftriaxone. Of the Acinetobacter spp. and Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates, 42.9% and 21.4%, respectively, were resistant to imipenem. In our multicenter study, we found a high mortality and a large proportion of gram-negative bacilli with elevated levels of resistance in pediatric patients.