Post recovery manifestations have become another concern in patients who have recovered from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Numerous reports have shown that COVID‐19 has a variety of long‐term effects on almost all systems including respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, neurological, psychiatric, and dermatological systems. We aimed to investigate the prevalence and characteristics of the post‐COVID syndrome among COVID‐19 survivors and to determine the factors associated with persistent symptoms. This prospective study enrolled in patients with COVID‐19 followed in hospital or outpatient clinics in Ankara City Hospital. We performed a special questionnaire to inquire about the presence of persistent symptoms beyond 12 weeks from the first diagnosis. Demographic data, comorbid diseases, characteristics of acute COVID‐19, presence of persistent symptoms by systems, and knowledge about outpatient clinic visits after recovery were assessed. Of a total of 1007 participants, 39.0% had at least one comorbidity, and 47.5% had persistent symptoms. Fatigue/easy fatigability, myalgia, and loss of weight were the most frequent persistent symptoms (overall 29.3%) followed by respiratory symptoms (25.4%). A total of 235 participants had visited outpatient clinics due to several reasons during the post‐COVID‐19 period, and 17 of them were hospitalized. Severe acute COVID‐19, hospitalization, and presence of comorbidity were independent factors for the development of persistent symptoms. Fully understanding the spectrum of the post‐COVID syndrome is essential for appropriate management of all its long‐term effects. Our study once again underlined the fact that the prevalence of post‐COVID syndrome is higher than expected and concerns many systems, and a multidisciplinary follow‐up should be provided to COVID‐19 survivors in the post recovery period.

Objective:The increased risk of infection for patients caused by construction and renovation near hematology inpatient clinics is a major concern. The use of high-efficiency particulate absorption (HEPA) filters can reduce the risk of infection. However, there is no standard protocol indicating the use of HEPA filters for patients with hematological malignancies, except for those who have undergone allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. This quasi-experimental study was designed to measure the efficacy of HEPA filters in preventing infections during construction.Materials and Methods:Portable HEPA filters were placed in the rooms of patients undergoing treatment for hematological malignancies because of large-scale construction taking place near the hematology clinic. The rates of infection during the 6 months before and after the installation of the portable HEPA filters were compared. A total of 413 patients were treated during this 1-year period.Results:There were no significant differences in the antifungal prophylaxis and treatment regimens between the groups. The rates of infections, clinically documented infections, and invasive fungal infections decreased in all of the patients following the installation of the HEPA filters. When analyzed separately, the rates of invasive fungal infections were similar before and after the installation of HEPA filters in patients who had no neutropenia or long neutropenia duration. HEPA filters were significantly protective against infection when installed in the rooms of patients with acute lymphocytic leukemia, patients who were undergoing consolidation treatment, and patients who were neutropenic for 1-14 days.Conclusion:Despite the advent of construction and the summer season, during which environmental Aspergillus contamination is more prevalent, no patient or patient subgroup experienced an increase in fungal infections following the installation of HEPA filters. The protective effect of HEPA filters against infection was more pronounced in patients with acute lymphocytic leukemia, patients undergoing consolidation therapy, and patients with moderate neutropenia.

Objective:Neutropenia is a critical risk factor for invasive fungal infections (IFIs). We retrospectively performed this study to assess the performance of the D-index, a new test that combines both the duration and the severity of neutropenia, in predicting IFIs among patients with acute myelogenous leukemia.Materials and Methods:Fifteen patients with IFIs and 28 patients who did not develop IFIs were enrolled in the study. The D-index was defined as the area over the neutrophil curve, whereas the cumulative-D-index (c-D-index) was the area over the neutrophil curve from the start of neutropenia until the first clinical manifestation of IFI.
Results:The D-index and the c-D-index tended to be significantly higher in patients with IFIs, with medians of 10,150 (range: 4000-22,000) and 5300 (range: 2300-22,200), respectively (p=0.037 and p=0.003, respectively). The receiver operating characteristic analyses showed that there was a cutoff point of 3875 for the D-index in predicting IFI; the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were 100%, 67.9%, 35.4%, and 100%, respectively. There was also a cutoff point of 4225 for the c-D-index in predicting IFI; the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the c-D-index were 93.3%, 71.4%, 36.6%, and 98.4%.Conclusion:The D-index and especially the c-D-index could be useful tools with high negative predictive value to exclude as well as to predict IFIs in the management of neutropenic patients.

ObjectivesHealthcare workers (HCWs) are among the risk groups for COVID-19. Determining transmission routes and risk levels during healthcare is of great importance in preventing nosocomial outbreaks. This study aimed to investigate the frequency of nosocomial transmission and factors affecting the transmission in HCW.MethodsHCWs admitted to the infectious diseases outpatient clinic due to contact with a COVID-19 patient and diagnosed with SARS-COV-2 by reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) between 20 March 2020 and 30 June 2020 were included in the study.ResultsA total of 822 HCWs with 295 low, 284 intermediate and 243 high-risk exposures were included in the study. 27.1% of the HCWs were male, and the median age was 31.9 years (20–62). 89.5% of these patients were directly in charge of patient care. Of the index cases contacted, 72.6% were HCW, and 27.4% were non-HCW patients. Most of the risky exposure (51.7%) occurred in nurses. The occurrence frequency of high-risk exposure was lower in those assigned to direct patient care when compared with the occurrence frequency of moderate-risk or low-risk exposures (76.5%, 94.7, 95.3, respectively p<0.001). In most high-risk exposures (220/253), the index cases were HCWs (p<0.001). Symptoms were detected in 311 of the HCWs (37.8%) during the follow-up. The median time to perform SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR was 5.3 days (IQR) after the last risky exposure. In multivariate analysis, SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positivity was 5.65 times higher in HCWs not directly involved in patient care than HCWs who are not involved in patient care (95% CI 2.437 to 13.111; p<0.001).ConclusionsThis study provides particularly useful information on post-exposure COVID-19 follow-up and management of working schedules and procedures of HCWs.

Background The core components (CCs) of infection prevention and control (IPC) from World Health Organization (WHO) are crucial for the safety and quality of health care. Our objective was to examine the level of implementation of WHO infection prevention and control core components (IPC CC) in a developing country. We also aimed to evaluate health care-associated infections (HAIs) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in intensive care units (ICUs) in association with implemented IPC CCs. Methods Members of the Turkish Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology Specialization Association (EKMUD) were invited to the study via e-mail. Volunteer members of any healt care facilities (HCFs) participated in the study. The investigating doctor of each HCF filled out a questionnaire to collect data on IPC implementations, including the Infection Prevention and Control Assessment Framework (IPCAF) and HAIs/AMR in ICUs in 2021. Results A total of 68 HCFs from seven regions in Türkiye and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus participated while 85% of these were tertiary care hospitals. Fifty (73.5%) HCFs had advanced IPC level, whereas 16 (23.5%) of the 68 hospitals had intermediate IPC levels. The hospitals’ median (IQR) IPCAF score was 668.8 (125.0) points. Workload, staffing and occupancy (CC7; median 70 points) and multimodal strategies (CC5; median 75 points) had the lowest scores. The limited number of nurses were the most important problems. Hospitals with a bed capacity of > 1000 beds had higher rates of HAIs. Certified IPC specialists, frequent feedback, and enough nurses reduced HAIs. The most common HAIs were central line-associated blood stream infections. Most HAIs were caused by gram negative bacteria, which have a high AMR. Conclusions Most HCFs had an advanced level of IPC implementation, for which staffing was an important driver. To further improve care quality and ensure everyone has access to safe care, it is a key element to have enough staff, the availability of certified IPC specialists, and frequent feedback. Although there is a significant decrease in HAI rates compared to previous years, HAI rates are still high and AMR is an important problem. Increasing nurses and reducing workload can prevent HAIs and AMR. Nationwide “Antibiotic Stewardship Programme” should be initiated.