The novel coronavirus disease, COVID-19, is a highly contagious infectious disease declared by the World Health Organization to be a pandemic and a global public health emergency. During outbreaks, health care workers are submitted to an enormous emotional burden as they must balance the fundamental “duty to treat” with their parallel duties to family and loved ones. The aims of our study were to evaluate disease perceptions, levels of stress, emotional distress, and coping strategies among medical staff (COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 departments) in a tertiary pulmonology teaching hospital in the first month after the outbreak of COVID-19. One hundred and fifteen health care workers completed four validated questionnaires (the brief illness perception questionnaire, perceived stress scale, the profile of emotional distress emotional, and the cognitive coping evaluation questionnaire) that were afterwards interpreted by one psychologist. There was a high level of stress and psychological distress among health care workers in the first month after the pandemic outbreak. Interestingly, there were no differences between persons that worked in COVID-19 departments versus those working in non-COVID-19 departments. Disease perceptions and coping mechanisms were similar in the two groups. As coping mechanisms, refocusing on planning and positive reappraisal were used more than in the general population. There is no difference in disease perceptions, levels of stress, emotional distress, and coping strategies in medical staff handling COVID-19 patients versus those staff who were not handling COVID-19 patients in the first month after the pandemic outbreak.

Inflammation has an important role in the progression of various viral pneumonia, including COVID-19. Circulating biomarkers that can evaluate inflammation and immune status are potentially useful in diagnosing and prognosis of COVID-19 patients. Even more so when they are a part of the routine evaluation, chest CT could have even higher diagnostic accuracy than RT-PCT alone in a suggestive clinical context. This study aims to evaluate the correlation between inflammatory markers such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelets-to-lymphocytes ratio (PLR), and eosinophils with the severity of CT lesions in patients with COVID-19. The second objective was to seek a statically significant cut-off value for NLR and PLR that could suggest COVID-19. Correlation of both NLR and PLR with already established inflammatory markers such as CRP, ESR, and those specific for COVID-19 (ferritin, D-dimers, and eosinophils) were also evaluated. One hundred forty-nine patients with confirmed COVID-19 disease and 149 age-matched control were evaluated through blood tests, and COVID-19 patients had thorax CT performed. Both NLR and PLR correlated positive chest CT scan severity. Both NLR and PLR correlated positive chest CT scan severity. When NLR value is below 5.04, CT score is lower than 3 with a probability of 94%, while when NLR is higher than 5.04, the probability of severe CT changes is only 50%. For eosinophils, a value of 0.35% corresponds to chest CT severity of 2 (Se = 0.88, Sp = 0.43, AUC = 0.661, 95% CI (0.544; 0.779), p = 0.021. NLR and PLR had significantly higher values in COVID-19 patients. In our study a NLR = 2.90 and PLR = 186 have a good specificity (0.89, p = 0.001, respectively 0.92, p<0.001). Higher levels in NLR, PLR should prompt the clinician to prescribe a thorax CT as it could reveal important lesions that could influence the patient’s future management.

Background and objectives: The aims of the study were to evaluate the utility of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) as inflammation markers and prognostic factors in patients with known interstitial lung disease secondary to connective tissue diseases (CTD-ILD) compared with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Materials and Methods: Forty-two patients with known interstitial lung disease (21 with IPF and 21 with CTD-ILD) and 42 control matched healthy patients were included. The NLR was calculated as the absolute neutrophil count divided by the absolute lymphocyte count, and the SII was calculated as follows: SII = platelets × neutrophils/lymphocytes, with the data being obtained from the patients data charts at admission, before any treatment. Results: our hypothesis was that in patients with interstitial lung disease NLR and SII would have higher values compared with patients with CTD-ILD or control healthy patients. The mean NLR value was 3.01 (±1.35) among patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, and 2.38 (±1.08) among patients with CTD-ILD without significant statistical difference (p = 0.92). There was however a clinically significant statistical difference when compared with the control group, where NLR was 2.00 (±1.05) (p = 0.003). SII values were 619.37 (±329.51) in patients with IPF, 671.55 (±365.73) in CTD-ILD group and 569.73 (±326.67) in healthy subjects (p = 0.13) Conclusions: A mean NLR value of 2.8 and a SII value over 500 in patients with connective diseases can become a marker of pulmonary interstitial involvement. In the context of non-exacerbated interstitial lung disease, NLR and SII have reduced numerical values, without being statistically correlated with prognosis when we compared with patients with connective tissue diseases without exacerbation or with healthy people, the cut off being of 2.4. However subsequent studies in larger patient samples might provide changes in these cut-off values.

Chest high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) is considered the “gold” standard radiological method in interstitial lung disease (ILD) patients. The objectives of our study were to evaluate the correlation between two transthoracic lung ultrasound (LUS) scores (total number of B-lines score = the total sum of B-lines in 10 predefined scanning sites and total number of positive chest areas score = intercostal spaces with ≥3 B-lines) and the features in HRCT simplified scores, in different interstitial disorders, between LUS scores and symptoms, as well as between LUS scores and pulmonary function impairment. We have evaluated 58 consecutive patients diagnosed with ILD. We demonstrated that there was a good correlation between the total number of B-lines score and the HRCT simplified score (r = 0.784, p < 0.001), and also a good correlation between the total number of positive chest areas score and the HRCT score (r = 0.805, p < 0.005). The results confirmed the value of using LUS as a diagnostic tool for the assessment of ILD compared to HRCT. The use of LUS in ILD patients can be a useful, cheap, accessible and radiation-free investigation and can play a complementary role in the diagnosis and monitoring of these patients.

The absence or late initiation of palliative care (PC) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is multidimensional. To provide palliative care from the moment of COPD diagnosis remains utopic. Even the advanced forms or the end-oflife stages benefit late or never from these services. In this context, the research questions for the present systematic review were focused on the prognosis variables or multicomponent indices in COPD patients alongside the symptoms and unmet needs, which may be useful for the palliative care initiation. The aim was to help clinicians to identify not only the tools reliable to predict poor survival in COPD patients but also to identify the criteria for appropriateness for early palliative care onset. The search included systematic reviews and reviews published in English in the PUBMED database from Jan 1, 2015 to Jan 6, 2020. From a total of 202 findings, after applying filters, using additional sources, and eliminating duplicates, the search strategy screened 16 articles, out of which 10 were selected and included. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) flow diagram was constructed. The main domains identified as barriers in providing palliative care in COPD patients were complex: from the prognosis difficulties to the prognostic variables and scores proposed for initiating PC; from the troublesome symptoms or the unidimensional symptom tools to the unmet needs of COPD patients. The review concluded that none of the existing prognostic variables and multicomponent indices are reliable enough to exclusively predict poor survival in COPD patients and the decision to initiate PC should be rather based on the presence of refractory symptoms and patients' unmet needs and preferences. Despite the current advances, the ideal model to initiate palliative care from the moment COPD is diagnosed is a goal for clinicians trained in, and capable of providing palliative care in any COPD patient.