Search

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has exposed disproportionate health inequities among underserved populations, including refugees. Public safety net healthcare systems play a critical role in facilitating access to care for refugees and informing coordinated public health prevention and mitigation efforts during a pandemic., Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence ratios of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection between refugee women and nonrefugee parturient patients admitted to the hospital for delivery. Here, we suspected that the burden of infection was disproportionately distributed across refugee communities that may act as sentinels for community outbreaks., Study Design: A cross-sectional study was conducted examining parturient women admitted to the maternity unit between May 6, 2020, and July 22, 2020, when universal testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was first employed. Risk factors for severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 positivity were ascertained, disaggregated by refugee status, and other clinical and sociodemographic variables examined. Prevalence ratios were calculated and comparisons made to county-level community prevalence over the same period., Results: The positive test percentage at the county-level during this study period was 21.6%. Of 350 women admitted to the hospital for delivery, 33 (9.4%) tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome 2. When refugee status was determined, 45 women (12.8%) were identified as refugees. Of the 45 refugee women, 8 (17.8%) tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 compared with 25 nonrefugee patients (8.19%) who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 (prevalence ratio, 2.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-4.51). In addition, 7 of the refugee women who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 were from Central Africa., Conclusion: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 outbreak has disproportionately affected refugee populations. This study highlighted the utility of universal screening in mounting a rapid response to an evolving pandemic and how we can better serve refugee communities. Focused response may help achieve more equitable care related to severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 among vulnerable communities. The identification of such populations may help mitigate the spread of the disease and facilitate a timely, culturally, and linguistically enhanced public health response., (© 2021 Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The ojective of this study was to describe the reasons for admission to the burn center of patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD), identify their clinical characteristics, and assess their outcomes relative to the non-ARD patients. We conducted a retrospective study of ARD patients admitted to a burn center from 2011 to 2018, and they were compared with a non-ARD group of patients. Medical records were reviewed for patients' clinical characteristics, including demographics, ARD diagnosis, laboratory studies, and APACHE II score. Additionally, we evaluate the reason for admission in the burn center, management during the burn center stay, complications, outcomes including length of stay, and mortality during the hospital stay. Among the 1094 adult patients admitted during the study period, 30 (2.7%) had a new or prior diagnosis of ARD. The most common ARD associated with admission in the burn center was rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (37%, n = 11) followed by systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (33%, n = 10). Burn injuries (47%, n = 14), and Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN) (30%, n = 9) were the most frequent admission reasons. Compared with the non-ARD group (n = 52), ARD patients were more likely to be females (60% vs. 24%, P = 0.004), to receive glucocorticoids (50% vs. 6.9%; P < 0.05), require renal replacement (20% vs. 5%, P < 0.05) and enteral nutrition (63% vs. 24%; P < 0.05) during their burn stay. The non-ARD group was more likely to be admitted for burn injuries (81% vs 46%, P < 0.01). RA and SLE were the most common ARD, and burn injuries, followed by SJS/TEN, the most frequent causes associated with burn admissions. ARD patients were more likely to be female, received glucocorticoids, require renal replacement, and enteral nutrition during the burn stay.

Background and Aims: To assess whether aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and alkaline phosphatase (AP) levels can predict the diagnosis of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) or any other diagnoses and whether PBC occurs either simultaneously or independently of other liver diseases among antimitochondrial antibody (AMA)-positive patients., Methods: Demographic and clinical variables were assessed in 90 AMA-positive patients with and without liver biopsies. These patients were further categorised as having a diagnosis of PBC, overlap syndrome or 'not established with a diagnosis of PBC'. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to determine the thresholds of liver enzymes that predict these three diagnoses., Results: The 48 patients with liver biopsies were more frequently female and had significantly higher AP levels compared with the non-liver biopsy group. Based on liver biopsy findings, 12, 12 and 22 patients were assigned a diagnosis of PBC, overlap syndrome with autoimmune hepatitis and PBC and 'not established diagnosis of PBC', respectively. Seven of 12 patients classified as PBC had AP level of ˂200 IU. AST, ALT and AP levels were significant predictors of a diagnosis of overlap syndrome compared with the rest of the patients; however, these tests were not discriminatory between diagnoses of PBC and 'not established with PBC'. Findings of fatty liver and bile duct injury on liver biopsies were not significantly associated with any liver test pattern., Conclusions: As the liver test pattern did not correlate with the liver biopsy findings of PBC or other non-PBC diagnoses in AMA-positive patients at risk for other disease, a liver biopsy and/or non-invasive liver assessment along with serum liver tests should be interpreted to complete liver evaluation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.