Bacterial and fungal co-infection is a major barrier in COVID-19 patients: A specific management and therapeutic strategy is required

Microbial co-infections are another primary concern in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet it is an untouched area among researchers. Preliminary data and systematic reviews only show the type of pathogens responsible for that, but its pathophysiology is still unknown. Studies show that these microbial co-infections are hospital-acquired/nosocomial infections, and patients admitted to intensive care units with invasive mechanical ventilation are highly susceptible to it. Patients with COVID-19 had elevated inflammatory cytokines and a weakened cell-mediated immune response, with lower CD4⁺ T and CD8⁺ T cell counts, indicating vulnerability to various co-infections. Despite this, there are only a few studies that recommend the management of co-infections.     

Education Outcomes of Children Born Late Preterm: A Retrospective Whole-Population Cohort Study

Maternal and Child Health Journal - Early life exposures can have an impact on a child’s developmental trajectory and children born late preterm (34–36 weeks gestational age)...     

Evaluierung der NEF-Fehl- und Übergabeeinsätze im Raum Innsbruck

Die Anaesthesiologie - Die Qualität eines Rettungssystems zeichnet sich auch durch den effizienten Einsatz seiner personellen und Fahrzeugressourcen aus. So können im berechtigten Fall...     

Nipple leiomyoma: A rare neoplasm with a broad spectrum of histologic appearances

Cutaneous leiomyomas are rare benign smooth‐muscle tumors. These lesions are distinguished based on their cell of origin and are subclassified as pilar leiomyoma, angioleiomyoma, and genital‐type leiomyoma. Nipple leiomyoma is the least common genital‐type leiomyoma, arising from the dartoic muscle cell of the nipple. Histologic examination of the lesion is necessary for definitive diagnosis, and these uncommon tumors can pose a diagnostic challenge. We describe herein a series of six nipple leiomyomas with a spectrum of histologic appearances.     

Comparing the rates of low-value back images ordered by physicians and nurse practitioners for Medicare beneficiaries in primary care

BackgroundLittle is known about the extent of ordering low-value services by.PurposeTo compare the rates of low-value back images ordered by primary care physicians (PCMDs) and primary care nurse practitioners (PCNPs).MethodWe used 2012 and 2013 Medicare Part B claims for all beneficiaries in 18 hospital referral ?regions (HRRs) and a measure of low-value back imaging from Choosing Wisely. Models included random clinician effect and fixed effects for beneficiary age, disability, Elixhauser comorbidities, clinician sex, the emergency department setting, back pain visit volume, organization, and region (HRR).FindingsPCNPs (N = 231) and PCMDs (N = 4,779) order low-value back images at similar rates (NP: all images: 26.5%; MRI/CT: 8.4%; MD: all images: 24.5%; MRI/CT: 7.7%), with no detectable significant difference when controlling for covariates.DiscussionPCNPs and PCMDs order low-value back images at an effectively similar rate.