Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has afflicted tens of millions of people, fostering and unprecedent effort in vaccine development and distribution. Healthcare workers (HCW) play a key role in vaccine promotion and patient guidance, and it is likely that hesitancy among this population will have a major impact on the adoption of a successful immunization policy. To investigate HCW attitudes towards anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) vaccination, we developed an anonymous online cross-sectional survey. 1723 Italian HCW responded. Overall, 1155 (67%) intended to be vaccinated, while 443 (26%) were not sure and 125 (7%) declared refusal. In multivariate analysis, factors associated with hesitancy were using Facebook as the main information source and being a non-physician HCW, while predictors of acceptance included younger age, being in close contact with high-risk groups and having received flu vaccination during the 2019–2020 season. Reasons for hesitancy included lack of trust in vaccine safety (85%) and receiving little (78%) or conflicting (69%) information about vaccines. According to our results, adequate investment in vaccine education for healthcare personnel appears to be urgently needed, prioritizing non-physicians and information quality spread through social media. We hope that our data could help governments and policy-makers to target communication in the ongoing COVID-19 vaccination campaign.

In our study population, CMV/HIV coinfection was associated with the risk of severe non-AIDS-defining events/non-AIDS-related death, especially with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, independently of other prognostic factors. This finding supports a potential independent role of CMV coinfection in vascular/degenerative organ disorders in HIV-infected subjects.

Background A growing body of observational evidence supports the value of ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) in managing infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE). Methods We retrospectively analyzed observational data on the use and outcomes of CAZ-AVI therapy for infections caused by KPC-producing K. pneumoniae (KPC-Kp) strains. Multivariate regression analysis was used to identify variables independently associated with 30-day mortality. Results were adjusted for propensity score for receipt of CAZ-AVI combination regimens vs. CAZ-AVI monotherapy. Results The cohort comprised 577 adults with bloodstream infections (BSIs) (n=391) or non-bacteremic infections (nBSIs) involving mainly the urinary tract, lower respiratory tract, intra-abdominal structures. All received treatment with CAZ-AVI alone (n=165) or with one or more other active antimicrobials (n=412). The all-cause mortality rate 30 days after infection onset was 25% (146/577). There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between patients managed with CAZ-AVI alone and those treated with combination regimens (26.1% vs. 25.0%, P=0.79). In multivariate analysis, mortality was positively associated with the presence at infection onset of septic shock (P=0.002), neutropenia (P <0.001), or an INCREMENT score >8 (P=0.01); with LRTI (P=0.04); and with CAZ-AVI dose adjustment for renal function (P=0.01). Mortality was negatively associated with CAZ-AVI administration by prolonged infusion (P=0.006). All associations remained significant after propensity score adjustment. Conclusions CAZ-AVI is an important option for treating serious KPC-Kp infections, even when used alone. Further study is needed to explore the drug’s seemingly more limited efficacy in LRTIs and the potential survival benefits of prolonging CAZ-AVI infusions to 3 hours or more.

These data demonstrate a higher than expected prevalence of premature carotid lesions in the PI-treated compared with PI-naive patients. If confirmed, a periodic ultrasonographic study of the vascular wall should be included in the follow-up of HIV infected patients.

Objectives We aimed to develop and validate a risk score to predict severe respiratory failure (SRF) among patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Methods We performed a multicentre cohort study among hospitalized (>24 hours) patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from 22 February to 3 April 2020, at 11 Italian hospitals. Patients were divided into derivation and validation cohorts according to random sorting of hospitals. SRF was assessed from admission to hospital discharge and was defined as: Sp o 2 <93% with 100% Fi o 2 , respiratory rate >30 breaths/min or respiratory distress. Multivariable logistic regression models were built to identify predictors of SRF, β-coefficients were used to develop a risk score. Trial Registration NCT04316949 . Results We analysed 1113 patients (644 derivation, 469 validation cohort). Mean (±SD) age was 65.7 (±15) years, 704 (63.3%) were male. SRF occurred in 189/644 (29%) and 187/469 (40%) patients in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. At multivariate analysis, risk factors for SRF in the derivation cohort assessed at hospitalization were age ≥70 years (OR 2.74; 95% CI 1.66–4.50), obesity (OR 4.62; 95% CI 2.78–7.70), body temperature ≥38°C (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.30–2.29), respiratory rate ≥22 breaths/min (OR 3.75; 95% CI 2.01–7.01), lymphocytes ≤900 cells/mm 3 (OR 2.69; 95% CI 1.60–4.51), creatinine ≥1 mg/dL (OR 2.38; 95% CI 1.59–3.56), C-reactive protein ≥10 mg/dL (OR 5.91; 95% CI 4.88–7.17) and lactate dehydrogenase ≥350 IU/L (OR 2.39; 95% CI 1.11–5.11). Assigning points to each variable, an individual risk score (PREDI-CO score) was obtained. Area under the receiver-operator curve was 0.89 (0.86–0.92). At a score of >3, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were 71.6% (65%–79%), 89.1% (86%–92%), 74% (67%–80%) and 89% (85%–91%), respectively. PREDI-CO score showed similar prognostic ability in the validation cohort: area under the receiver-operator curve 0.85 (0.81–0.88). At a score of >3, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were 80% (73%–85%), 76% (70%–81%), 69% (60%–74%) and 85% (80%–89%), respectively. Conclusion PREDI-CO score can be useful to allocate resources and prioritize treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic.