Objectives: Convalescent plasma (CP) as a passive source of neutralizing antibodies and immunomodulators is a century-old therapeutic option used for the management of viral diseases. We investigated its effectiveness for the treatment of COVID-19. Design: Open-label, parallel-arm, phase II, multicentre, randomized controlled trial. Setting: Thirty-nine public and private hospitals across India. Participants: Hospitalized, moderately ill confirmed COVID-19 patients (PaO2/FiO2: 200-300 or respiratory rate > 24/min and SpO2 ≤ 93% on room air). Intervention: Participants were randomized to either control (best standard of care (BSC)) or intervention (CP + BSC) arm. Two doses of 200 mL CP was transfused 24 hours apart in the intervention arm. Main Outcome Measure: Composite of progression to severe disease (PaO2/FiO2<100) or all-cause mortality at 28 days post-enrolment. Results: Between 22 nd April to 14 th July 2020, 464 participants were enrolled; 235 and 229 in intervention and control arm, respectively. Composite primary outcome was achieved in 44 (18.7%) participants in the intervention arm and 41 (17.9%) in the control arm [aOR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.67, 1.77]. Mortality was documented in 34 (13.6%) and 31 (14.6%) participants in intervention and control arm, respectively [aOR) 1.06 95% CI: -0.61 to 1.83]. Interpretation: CP was not associated with reduction in mortality or progression to severe COVID-19. This trial has high generalizability and approximates real-life setting of CP therapy in settings with limited laboratory capacity. A priori measurement of neutralizing antibody titres in donors and participants may further clarify the role of CP in management of COVID-19.

Since its inception in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2, the etiological agent for coronavirus disease 2019 , is spreading rapidly both locally and internationally, and became certified as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) in March 2020. Working in an environment of high risk, coupled with adherence to quarantine and stressors related to the job, has been found to exacerbate the psychological health of frontline healthcare workers. AimsTo assess the perceived stressors, combat strategies, and motivating factors among health care service providers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Setting and designA cross-sectional study was conducted among healthcare workers at a tertiary care hospital in the northcentral region of India from May to September 2020. Methods and materialsA convenience sample of 150 health care workers was taken. A self-reported pretested structured "COVID 19 staff questionnaire" was used as a study tool. The health care workers (HCWs) included nurses, physicians, laboratory technicians, and radiology technicians who worked in high-risk areas (isolation ward, COVID intensive care unit, emergency department, and outpatient cough outdoor walk-in clinics) during the outbreak constituted our study population. Statistical analysis usedThe varying levels of stress or effectiveness of measures were reported as mean and standard deviation, as appropriate. Descriptive statistics were used for data presentation. A Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyse differences between two groups of non-normally distributed data. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. ResultsAs compared to doctors, paramedical staffs were more stressed with frequent protocol changes (88%), emotional exhaustion (68%), and conflicts with duties (62.7%). The factors like seeing colleague getting better (78.7%) and hoping for financial compensation (49.3%) were reported as stress busters; family compensation in case of death at the workplace and disability benefits in case of disease-related disability development were more effective motivational factors for paramedical staff in case of future outbreaks (pvalue <0.05). ConclusionsIt is needful that secondarily traumatized team members should be always observed, educated, and properly handled. Certain personal coping strategies adopted by health workers should be well addressed and motivated if scientifically sustainable. We have to include psychiatric preparedness and stress monitoring also for health care teams along with emphasizing hygiene, temperature monitoring, and fever management, in planning to fight the pandemic.

Liquid hydrocarbons derived from petroleum are widely used in household and industry. Many hydrocarbons in kerosene, such as hexane, naphthalene, octane and phenanthrene, are toxic to humans. Pulmonary toxicity is the major cause of morbidity and mortality followed by central nervous-system and cardiovascular complications. 1 As kerosene is a mixture of chemicals, there is no definitive absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion. The major route of exposure is by inhalation of liquid (aspiration). Kerosene vapours may be mildly irritating to the respiratory system and spray applications of kerosene may provoke signs of pulmonary irritation such as coughing and dyspnoea. Kerosene aspiration leads to inflammation and loss of surfactant. Secondary effects in the lungs include pneumothorax, pneumatocele or bronchopleural fistula. Here, we are presenting a case of pyopneumothorax after kerosene consumption.

No abstract

The use of continuous positive airway pressures (CPAP) is considered standard treatment of moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Treatment of the disease poses a great challenge not only for its diagnostic purpose but also for its treatment part. In about 29-83% of the patients, treatment is difficult because of non-compliance resulting due to high pressures, air leaks and other related issues. In such situations, alternative methods of treatment need to be looked for so as to ascertain better management. Mandibular advancement devices along with CPAP may show better treatment outcome in specific situations.