Search

Introduction Since their release in 2017, standing electric motorized scooters (eScooters) have risen in popularity as an alternative mode of transportation. We sought to examine the incidence of injury, injury patterns, prevalence of helmet and drug and alcohol use in eScooter trauma.Methods This was a multi-institutional retrospective case series of patients admitted for injuries related to operation of an eScooter following the widespread release of these devices in September 2017 (September 1, 2017 to October 31, 2018). Demographics, drug and alcohol use, helmet use, admission vitals, injuries, procedures, hospital and intensive care unit length of stay (LOS), death, and disposition were analyzed.Results 103 patients were admitted during the study period, and monthly admissions increased significantly over time. Patients were young men (mean age 37.1 years; 65% male), 98% were not wearing a helmet. Median LOS was 1 day (IQR 1–3). 79% of patients were tested for alcohol and 48% had a blood alcohol level >80 mg/dL. 60% of patients had a urine toxicology screen, of which 52% were positive. Extremity fractures were the most frequent injury (42%), followed by facial fractures (26%) and intracranial hemorrhage (18%). Median Injury Severity Score was 5.5 (IQR 5–9). One-third of patients (n=34) required an operative intervention, the majority of which were open fixations of extremity and facial fractures. No patients died during the study. The majority of patients were discharged home (86%).Conclusion eScooter-related trauma has significantly increased over time. Alcohol and illicit substance use among these patients was common, and helmet use was extremely rare. Significant injuries including intracranial hemorrhage and fractures requiring operative intervention were present in over half (51%) of patients. Interventions aimed at increasing helmet use and discouraging eScooter operation while intoxicated are necessary to reduce the burden of eScooter-related trauma.Level of evidence Level IV.

Lymphopenia has been consistently reported as associated with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Several studies have described a profound decline in all T-cell subtypes in hospitalized patients with severe and critical COVID-19. The aim of this study was to assess the role of T-lymphocyte subset absolute counts measured at ward admission in predicting 30-day mortality in COVID-19 hospitalized patients, validating a new prognostic score, the T-Lymphocyte Subset Index (TLSI, range 0−2), based on the number of T-cell subset (CD4+ and CD8+) absolute counts that are below prespecified cutoffs. These cutoff values derive from a previously published work of our research group at Policlinico Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy: CD3+CD4+ < 369 cells/μL, CD3+CD8+ < 194 cells/μL. In the present single-center retrospective study, T-cell subsets were assessed on admission to the infectious diseases ward. Statistical analysis was performed using JASP (Version 0.16.2. JASP Team, 2022, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) and Prism8 (version 8.2.1. GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA). Clinical and laboratory parameters of 296 adult patients hospitalized because of COVID-19 were analyzed. The overall mortality rate was 22.3% (66/296). Survivors (S) had a statistically significant lower TLSI score compared to non-survivors (NS) (p < 0.001). Patients with increasing TLSI scores had proportionally higher rates of 30-day mortality (p < 0.0001). In the multivariable logistic analysis, the TLSI was an independent predictor of in-hospital 30-day mortality (OR: 1.893, p = 0.003). Survival analysis showed that patients with a TLSI > 0 had an increased risk of death compared to patients with a TLSI = 0 (hazard ratio: 2.83, p < 0.0001). The TLSI was confirmed as an early and independent predictor of COVID-19 in-hospital 30-day mortality.

Background: to evaluate whether prior SARS-CoV-2 infection affects side effects and specific antibody production after vaccination with BNT162b2. Methods: We included 1106 health care workers vaccinated with BNT162b2. We assessed whether prior SARS-CoV-2 infection affects the number and type of side effects and performed a nested case−control analysis comparing plasma levels of specific IgG titers between SARS-CoV-2-naïve and previously infected subjects after the first and the second vaccine doses. Results: After the first dose, SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects experienced side effects more often than SARS-CoV-2 naïve subjects. Individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection more often reported pain at the injection site, weakness, and fever than SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects. After the second dose, the frequency of side effects was similar in the two groups. All subjects with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection developed either a high (>100 AU/mL) or intermediate (10−100 AU/mL) antibody titer. Among SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects, the majority developed an intermediate titer. After the second dose, a high (>2000 AU/mL) antibody titer was more common among subjects with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Conclusions: vaccine-related side effects and a higher anti-SARS-CoV-2-RBD IgG titer were more common in subjects with previous infection than in SARS-CoV-2-naïve after the first, but not after the second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine.