Background A remarkably high incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been reported among critically ill patients with COVID‐19 assisted in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, VTE burden among non‐ICU patients hospitalized for COVID‐19 that receive guideline‐recommended thromboprophylaxis is unknown. Objectives To determine the incidence of VTE among non‐ICU patients hospitalized for COVID‐19 that receive pharmacological thromboprophylaxis. Methods We performed a systematic screening for the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) by lower limb vein compression ultrasonography (CUS) in consecutive non‐ICU patients hospitalized for COVID‐19, independent of the presence of signs or symptoms of DVT. All patients were receiving pharmacological thromboprophylaxis with either enoxaparin or fondaparinux. Results The population that we screened consisted of 84 consecutive patients, with a mean age of 67.6 ± 13.5 years and a mean Padua Prediction Score of 5.1 ± 1.6. Seventy‐two patients (85.7%) had respiratory insufficiency, required oxygen supplementation, and had reduced mobility or were bedridden. In this cohort, we found 10 cases of DVT, with an incidence of 11.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.98‐18.82). Of these, 2 were proximal DVT (incidence rate 2.4%, 95% CI −0.87‐5.67) and 8 were distal DVT (incidence rate 9.5%, 95% CI 3.23‐5.77). Significant differences between subjects with and without DVT were D‐dimer > 3000 µg/L (P < .05), current or previous cancer (P < .05), and need of high flow nasal oxygen therapy and/or non‐invasive ventilation (P < .01). Conclusions DVT may occur among non‐ICU patients hospitalized for COVID‐19, despite guideline‐recommended thromboprophylaxis.

An 18-year-old man presented to our hospital with muscular pain, diffuse petechiae, spontaneous thigh ecchymosis, edema and pain of the right knee, bilateral pretibial subcutaneous nodules, and gingival hypertrophy and hemorrhage. His history was positive for a mixed anxiety-depressive disorder and a restrictive diet caused by self-diagnosed food allergies. Skin lesions appeared like hyperkeratotic papules with coiled hairs and perifollicular hemorrhages. A diagnosis of scurvy was made upon demonstration of low serum levels of ascorbic acid. An allergy evaluation found cross-reactivity between pollens and food, related to the presence of panallergens. Moreover, we found that our patient was also affected by celiac disease. In conclusion, scurvy should be considered in the differential diagnosis of patients with petechiae and ecchymosis, especially when food restriction, malabsorption, or psychiatric disorders are present.

Background and aims:The COVID-19 pandemic represents a source of stress and potential burnout for many physicians. This single-site survey aimed at assessing perceived stress and risk to develop burnout syndrome among physicians operating in COVID wards.Methods: This longitudinal survey evaluated stress and burnout in 51 physicians operating in the COVID team of Gemelli Hospital, Italy.Participants were asked to complete the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) and the Perceived Stress Questionnaire on a short run (PSQs) (referring to the past 7 days) at baseline (T0) and then for four weeks (T1-T4). Perceived Stress Questionnaire on a long run (PSQl) (referring to the past 2 years) was completed only at T0. Results:Compared with physicians board-certified in internal medicine, those boardcertified in other disciplines showed higher scores for the Emotional Exhaustion (EE) score of the MBI scale (P < .001). Depersonalisation (DP) score showed a reduction over time (P = .002). Attending physicians scored lower than the resident physicians on the DP scale (P = .048) and higher than resident physicians on the Personal Accomplishment (PA) scale (P = .04). PSQl predicted higher scores on the EE scale (P = .003), DP scale (P = .003) and lower scores on the PA scale (P < .001). PSQs showed a reduction over time (P = .03). Attending physicians had a lower PSQs score compared with the resident physicians (P = .04).

Introduction: Although pulmonary embolism (PE) is a frequent complication of the clinical course of COVID-19, there is a lack of explicit indications regarding the best algorithm for diagnosing PE in these patients. In particular, it is not clear how to identify subjects who should undergo computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA), rather than simply X-ray and/or high resolution computed tomography (HRCT) of the chest.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed COVID-19 patients who presented to the Emergency Department (ED) of our University hospital with acute respiratory failure, or that developed acute respiratory failure during hospital stay, to determine how many of them had a theoretical indication to undergo CTPA for suspected PE according to current guidelines. Next, we looked for differences between patients who underwent CTPA and those who only underwent X-ray and/or HRCT of the chest. Finally, we determined whether patients with a confirmed diagnosis of PE had specific characteristics that made them different from those with a CTPA negative for PE.Results: Out of 93 subjects with COVID-19 and acute respiratory failure, 73 (78.4%) had an indication to undergo CTPA according to the revised Geneva and Wells scores and the PERC rule-out criteria, and 54 (58%) according to the YEARS algorithm. However, in contrast with these indications, only 28 patients (30.1%) underwent CTPA. Of note, they were not clinically different from those who underwent X-ray and/or HRCT of the chest. Among the 28 subjects who underwent CTPA, there were 10 cases of PE (35.7%). They were not clinically different from those with CTPA negative for PE.Conclusions: COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure undergo CTPA, X-ray of the chest, or HRCT without an established criterion. Nonetheless, when CTPA is performed, the diagnosis of PE is anything but rare. Validated tools for identifying COVID-19 patients who require CTPA for suspected PE are urgently needed.