Citations

Abstract Introduction During the Coronavirus (COVID‐19) pandemic, healthcare providers have overcome difficult experiences such as workplace violence. Nurses are particularly vulnerable to workplace violence. The objective of this study was to characterize violence and aggression against nurses during the COVID‐19 pandemic in Latin America. Methods An electronic cross‐sectional survey was conducted in 19 Latin American countries to characterize the frequency and type of violent actions against front‐line healthcare providers. Results Of the original 3544 respondents, 16% were nurses ( n = 567). The mean age was 39.7 ± 9.0 years and 79.6% ( n = 2821) were women. In total, 69.8% ( n = 2474) worked in public hospitals and 81.1% ( n = 2874) reported working regularly with COVID‐19 patients. Overall, about 68.6% ( n = 2431) of nurses experienced at least one episode of workplace aggression during the pandemic. Nurses experienced weekly aggressions more frequently than other healthcare providers (45.5% versus 38.1%, p < .007). Nurses showed a trend of lower reporting rates against the acts of aggression suffered ( p = .076). In addition, nurses were more likely to experience negative cognitive symptoms after aggressive acts (33.4% versus 27.8%, p = .028). However, nurses reported considering changing their work tasks less frequently compared to other healthcare providers after an assault event ( p = .005). Conclusion Workplace violence has been a frequent problem for all healthcare providers during COVID‐19 pandemic in Latin America. Nurses were a particularly vulnerable subgroup, with higher rates of aggressions and cognitive symptoms and lower rate of complaints than other healthcare providers who suffered from workplace violence. It is imperative to develop strategies to protect this vulnerable group from aggressions during their tasks.

Abstract Rationale In addition to rare genetic variants and the MUC5B locus, common genetic variants contribute to idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) risk. The predictive power of common variants outside the MUC5B locus for IPF and interstitial lung abnormalities (ILAs) is unknown. Objectives We tested the predictive value of IPF polygenic risk scores (PRSs) with and without the MUC5B region on IPF, ILA, and ILA progression. Methods We developed PRSs that included (PRS-M5B) and excluded (PRS-NO-M5B) the MUC5B region (500-kb window around rs35705950-T) using an IPF genome-wide association study. We assessed PRS associations with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) metrics for IPF, ILA, and ILA progression. Measurements and Main Results We included 14,650 participants (1,970 IPF; 1,068 ILA) from six multi-ancestry population-based and case–control cohorts. In cases excluded from genome-wide association study, the PRS-M5B (odds ratio [OR] per SD of the score, 3.1; P = 7.1 × 10−95) and PRS-NO-M5B (OR per SD, 2.8; P = 2.5 × 10−87) were associated with IPF. Participants in the top PRS-NO-M5B quintile had ∼sevenfold odds for IPF compared with those in the first quintile. A clinical model predicted IPF (AUC, 0.61); rs35705950-T and PRS-NO-M5B demonstrated higher AUCs (0.73 and 0.7, respectively), and adding both genetic predictors to a clinical model yielded the highest performance (AUC, 0.81). The PRS-NO-M5B was associated with ILA (OR, 1.25) and ILA progression (OR, 1.16) in European ancestry participants. Conclusions A common genetic variant risk score complements the MUC5B variant to identify individuals at high risk of interstitial lung abnormalities and pulmonary fibrosis.

Abstract Objectives We investigated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine safety in pregnant and breastfeeding women with autoimmune diseases (AID) in the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study. Methods Delayed-onset (&gt;7 days) vaccine-related adverse events (AE), disease flares and AID-related treatment modifications were analysed upon diagnosis of AID vs healthy controls (HC) and the pregnancy/breastfeeding status at the time of at least one dose of vaccine. Results Among the 9201 participants to the self-administered online survey, 6787 (73.8%) were women. Forty pregnant and 52 breastfeeding patients with AID were identified, of whom the majority had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine (100% and 96.2%, respectively). AE were reported significantly more frequently in pregnant than in non-pregnant patients (overall AE 45% vs 26%, P = 0.01; minor AE 40% vs 25.9%, P = 0.03; major AE 17.5% vs 4.6%, P &lt; 0.01), but no difference was found in comparison with pregnant HC. No difference was observed between breastfeeding patients and HC with respect to AE. Post-vaccination disease flares were reported by 17.5% of pregnant and 20% of breastfeeding patients, and by 18.3% of age- and disease-matched non-pregnant and non-breastfeeding patients (n = 262). All pregnant/breastfeeding patients who experienced a disease flare were managed with glucocorticoids; 28.6% and 20% of them required initiation or change in immunosuppressants, respectively. Conclusion This study provides reassuring insights into the safety of COVID-19 vaccines administered to women with AID during the gestational and post-partum periods, helping overcome hesitant attitudes, as the benefits for the mother and for the fetus by passive immunization appear to outweigh potential risks.

Abstract Objectives We aimed to explore current practice and interregional differences in the treatment of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs). We triangulated these observations considering countries' gross national income (GNI), disease subtypes, and symptoms using patient-reported information. Methods A cross-sectional ancillary analysis of the ‘COVID-19 vaccination in auto-immune disease’ (COVAD) e-survey containing demographic characteristics, IIM subtypes (DM, PM, IBM, anti-synthetase syndrome [ASSD], immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy [IMNM], overlap myopathies [OM]), current symptoms (surrogate for organ involvement) and treatments (corticosteroids [CS], immunomodulators [IM], i.e. antimalarials, immunosuppressants [IS], IVIG, biologic treatments and targeted-synthetic small molecules). Treatments were presented descriptively according to continents, GNI, IIM and organ involvement, and associated factors were analysed using multivariable binary logistic regressions. Results Of 18 851 respondents from 94 countries, 1418 with IIM were analysed (age 61 years, 62.5% females). DM (32.4%), IBM (24.5%) and OM (15.8%) were the most common subtypes. Treatment categories included IS (49.4%), CS (38.5%), IM (13.8%) and IVIG (9.4%). Notably, treatments varied across regions, GNI categories (IS mostly used in higher-middle income, IM in lower-middle income, IVIG and biologics largely limited to high-income countries), IIM subtypes (IS and CS associated with ASSD, IM with OM and DM, IVIG with IMNM, and biologic treatments with OM and ASSD) and disease manifestations (IS and CS with dyspnoea). Most inter-regional treatment disparities persisted after multivariable analysis. Conclusion We identified marked regional treatment disparities in a global cohort of IIM. These observations highlight the need for international consensus-driven management guidelines considering patient-centred care and available resources.

With the previous worldwide initial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a notable rise in spontaneous pneumomediastinum with/without pneumothorax (SPP) has been noted. Most cases were initially reported as complications secondary to barotrauma from mechanical ventilation (MV) with COVID-19. However, with the Delta strain, starting from December 2020, there have been multiple reports of SPP. The SPP is an uncommon complication outside use of assisted ventilation with either noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) or MV. COVID-19 has been linked to higher incidence of SPP without use of NIPPV or MV. We present a series of 5 cases with a polymerase chain reaction–confirmed COVID-19 diagnostic testing whose hospital course was complicated by SPP unrelated to the use of either NIPPV or MV.

Abstract Objectives Disease flares in the post–coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination period represent a prominent concern, though risk factors are poorly understood. We studied these flares among patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) and other autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs). Methods The COVAD-1 and -2 global surveys were circulated in early 2021 and 2022, respectively, and we captured demographics, comorbidities, AIRDs details, COVID-19 infection history and vaccination details. Flares of IIMs were defined as (a) patient self-reported, (b) immunosuppression (IS) denoted, (c) clinical sign directed and (d) with &gt;7.9-point minimal clinically significant improvement difference worsening of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) PROMISPF10a score. Risk factors of flares were analysed using regression models. Results Of 15 165 total respondents, 1278 IIMs (age 63 years, 70.3% female, 80.8% Caucasians) and 3453 AIRDs were included. Flares of IIM were seen in 9.6%, 12.7%, 8.7% and 19.6% patients by definitions (a) to (d), respectively, with a median time to flare of 71.5 (10.7–235) days, similar to AIRDs. Patients with active IIMs pre-vaccination (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.03, 1.6, P = 0.025) were prone to flares, while those receiving rituximab (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1, 0.7, P = 0.010) and AZA (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1, 0.8, P = 0.016) were at lower risk. Female gender and comorbidities predisposed to flares requiring changes in IS. Asthma (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.05, 2.50, P = 0.028) and higher pain visual analogue score (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.11, 1.27, P &lt; 0.001) were associated with disparity between self-reported and IS-denoted flares. Conclusion A diagnosis of IIMs confers an equal risk of flares in the post–COVID-19 vaccination period to AIRDs, with active disease, female gender and comorbidities conferring a higher risk. Disparity between patient- and physician-reported outcomes represents a future avenue for exploration.