Search

Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are common and potentially severe medical conditions that occur regularly in both military and nonmilitary populations. Military members, however, have a 21% higher incidence [...]

Background The long-term effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on physical fitness are unclear, and the impact of vaccination on that relationship is uncertain. Methods We compared survey responses in a 1-year study of US military service members with (n = 1923) and without (n = 1591) a history of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We fit Poisson regression models to estimate the association between history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and fitness impairment, adjusting for time since infection, demographics, and baseline health. Results The participants in this analysis were primarily young adults aged 18–39 years (75%), and 71.5% were male. Participants with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to report difficulty exercising (38.7% vs 18.4%; P <.01), difficulty performing daily activities (30.4% vs 12.7%; P <.01), and decreased fitness test (FT) scores (42.7% vs 26.2%; P <.01) than those without a history of infection. SARS-CoV-2-infected participants were at higher risk of these outcomes after adjusting for other factors (unvaccinated: exercising: adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 3.99; 95% CI, 3.36–4.73; activities: aRR, 5.02; 95% CI, 4.09–6.16; FT affected: aRR, 2.55; 95% CI, 2.19–2.98). Among SARS-CoV-2-positive participants, full vaccination before infection was associated with a lower risk of post-COVID-19 fitness impairment (fully vaccinated: exercise: aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70–0.95; activities: aRR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64–0.91; FT: aRR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76–1.00; boosted: exercise: aRR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51–0.74; activities: aRR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.41–0.65; FT: aRR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.49–0.70). Conclusions In this study of generally young, healthy military service members, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with lower self-reported fitness and exercise capacity; vaccination and boosting were associated with lower risk of self-reported fitness loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Patient-reported outcomes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are an important measure of the full burden of coronavirus disease (COVID). Here, we examine how (1) infecting genotype and COVID-19 vaccination correlate with inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) Plus score, including by symptom domains, and (2) FLU-PRO Plus scores predict return to usual activities and health. Methods The ep idemiology, i mmunology, and c linical c haracteristics of pandemic infectious diseases (EPICC) study was implemented to describe the short- and long-term consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a longitudinal, observational cohort. Multivariable linear regression models were run with FLU-PRO Plus scores as the outcome variable, and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models evaluated effects of FLU-PRO Plus scores on return to usual health or activities. Results Among the 764 participants included in this analysis, 63% were 18–44 years old, 40% were female, and 51% were White. Being fully vaccinated was associated with lower total scores (β = −0.39; 95% CI, −0.57 to −0.21). The Delta variant was associated with higher total scores (β = 0.25; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.45). Participants with higher FLU-PRO Plus scores were less likely to report returning to usual health and activities (health: hazard ratio [HR], 0.46; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.57; activities: HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.67). Fully vaccinated participants were more likely to report returning to usual activities (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.48). Conclusions Full SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is associated with decreased severity of patient-reported symptoms across multiple domains, which in turn is likely to be associated with earlier return to usual activities. In addition, infection with the Delta variant was associated with higher FLU-PRO Plus scores than previous variants, even after controlling for vaccination status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs are the standard for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. If less invasive alternatives to NP swabs (eg, oropharyngeal [OP] or nasal swabs [NS]) are comparably sensitive, the use of these techniques may be preferable in terms of comfort, convenience, and safety. Methods This study compared the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in swab samples collected on the same day among participants with at least one positive PCR test. Results Overall, 755 participants had at least one set of paired swabs. Concordance between NP and other swab types was 75% (NS), 72% (OP), 54% (rectal swabs [RS]), and 78% (NS/OP combined). Kappa values were moderate for the NS, OP, and NS/OP comparisons (0.50, 0.45, and 0.54, respectively). Highest sensitivity relative to NP (0.87) was observed with a combination of NS/OP tests (positive if either NS or OP was positive). Sensitivity of the non-NP swab types was highest in the first week postsymptom onset and decreased thereafter. Similarly, virus RNA quantity was highest in the NP swabs as compared with NS, OP, and RS within two weeks postsymptom onset. OP and NS performance decreased as virus RNA quantity decreased. No differences were noted between NS specimens collected at home or in clinic. Conclusions NP swabs detected more SARS-CoV-2 cases than non-NP swabs, and the sensitivity of the non-NP swabs decreased with time postsymptom onset. While other swabs may be simpler to collect, NP swabs present the best chance of detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA, which is essential for clinical care as well as genomic surveillance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome Plus (FLU-PRO Plus) is a patient-reported outcome data collection instrument assessing symptoms of viral respiratory tract infections across 8 body systems. This study evaluated the measurement properties of FLU-PRO Plus in a study enrolling individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods Data from a prospective cohort study (EPICC) in US Military Health System beneficiaries evaluated for COVID-19 was utilized. Adults with symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with FLU-PRO Plus survey information within 1 week of symptom onset were included. Reliability of FLU-PRO Plus was estimated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC; 2 days' reproducibility). Known-groups validity was assessed using patient global assessment (PGA) of disease severity. Patient report of return to usual health was used to assess responsiveness (day 1–6/7). Results Two hundred twenty-six SARS-CoV-2–positive participants were included in the analysis. Reliability among those who reported no change in their symptoms from one day to the next was high for most domains (ICC range, 0.68–0.94 for day 1 to day 2). Construct validity was demonstrated by moderate to high correlation between the PGA rating of disease severity and domain and total scores (eg, total scores correlation: 0.69 [influenza-like illness severity], 0.69 [interference in daily activities], and –0.58 [physical health]). In addition, FLU-PRO Plus demonstrated good known-groups validity, with increasing domain and total scores observed with increasing severity ratings. Conclusions FLU-PRO Plus performs well in measuring signs and symptoms in SARS-CoV-2 infection with excellent construct validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness to change. Standardized data collection instruments facilitate meta-analyses, vaccine effectiveness studies, and other COVID-19 research activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Behavioral observations of communication interaction patterns were gathered for traditional and ''poster paper'' presentations at the 89th Meeting of the Society (7-11 April 1975, Austin, Texas). Affective reactions of poster paper authors and audience members were also surveyed. The overall response to poster sessions was very positive, suggesting continuation of the new mode of technical communication. Poster paper authors were somewhat more positive in their responses than other participants. Although poster sessions produced much more verbal interaction, patterns of interaction did not appear to differ from those observed in traditional presentations. Several problems particular to poster sessions were identified and suggestions for improvement are offered. Subject Classification: [43]05.50; [43]10.85. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Previous research has shown that vaccination reduces risk of post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) venous thrombosis or embolism (VTE), but the effect of vaccine boosting on post-COVID-19 VTE risk reduction is unclear. We sought to estimate the effect of COVID-19 vaccination on the risk of post-COVID-19 VTE and to examine if the magnitude of this association differed among variant eras., Methods: We performed a case-control study of Military Health System (MHS) beneficiaries who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 2020-2022. Cases were defined as those with medically attended VTE within 90 days after their first positive SARS-CoV-2 test; controls were defined as SARS-CoV-2 infections without incident VTE by 90 days. Multivariate logistic regression estimated the odds of post-SARS-CoV-2 VTE based on pre-COVID-19 vaccine status, adjusting for other VTE risk factors., Results: A total of 4646 MHS beneficiaries were included in this analysis; 1370 received a primary vaccine series and a further 790 received at least 1 booster at time of infection; 71 had VTE within 90 days of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Those who were vaccinated had lower odds of VTE (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval]) compared to the unvaccinated following infection (primary series: 0.28 [.13-.62]; booster dose: 0.06 [.01-.46]). Post-COVID-19 VTE risk was lowest during the Omicron era, but VTEs were too rare to examine for an interaction of variant era and vaccine effect., Conclusions: Among MHS beneficiaries, COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a reduced risk of post-COVID-19 VTE diagnosis; estimated risk reduction was larger among those who received a booster., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. S. D. P., T. H. B., D. R. T., and M. P. S. report that the Uniformed Services University (USU) IDCRP, a US DOD institution, and HJF were funded under a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement to conduct an unrelated phase 3 COVID-19 monoclonal antibody immunoprophylaxis trial sponsored by AstraZeneca. The HJF, in support of the USU IDCRP, was funded by the DOD Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Defense to augment the conduct of an unrelated phase 3 vaccine trial sponsored by AstraZeneca. Both trials were part of the US government COVID-19 response. Neither is related to the work presented here. R. C. M. receives research support paid to his institution from Sound Pharmaceuticals for an investigational COVID-19 therapeutic and from GeoVax for an investigational COVID-19 vaccine candidate, both unrelated to the work presented here. All other authors report no potential conflicts of interest., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2024.)

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine breakthrough infections have been important for all circulating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant periods, but the contribution of vaccine-specific SARS-CoV-2 viral diversification to vaccine failure remains unclear. This study analyzed 595 SARS-CoV-2 sequences collected from the Military Health System beneficiaries between December 2020 and April 2022 to investigate the impact of vaccination on viral diversity. By comparing sequences based on the vaccination status of the participant, we found limited evidence indicating that vaccination was associated with increased viral diversity in the SARS-CoV-2 spike, and we show little to no evidence of a substantial sieve effect within major variants; rather, we show that rapid variant replacement constrained intragenotype COVID-19 vaccine strain immune escape. These data suggest that, during past and perhaps future periods of rapid SARS-CoV-2 variant replacement, vaccine-mediated effects were subsumed with other drivers of viral diversity due to the massive scale of infections and vaccinations that occurred in a short time frame. However, our results also highlight some limitations of using sieve analysis methods outside of placebo-controlled clinical trials., Competing Interests: The views expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy of the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USUHS), Department of the Army, Department of the Navy, the Department of the Air Force, the Department of Defense or the US Government, and the Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc. (HJF). The investigators have adhered to the policies for protection of human subjects as prescribed in 45 CFR 46. Drs Berjohn, Fries, Smith, Mody, Huprikar, Lindholm, Jones, Larson, Ewers; Ms Bazan; and Drs Saunders, Maldonado, Simons, Tribble, and Burgess are service members or employees of the US Government. This work was prepared as part of their official duties. Title 17 USC §105 provides that “Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government.” Title 17 USC §101 defines a US Government work as a work prepared by a military service member or employee of the US Government as part of that person’s official duties., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: Nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs are the standard for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. If less invasive alternatives to NP swabs (eg, oropharyngeal [OP] or nasal swabs [NS]) are comparably sensitive, the use of these techniques may be preferable in terms of comfort, convenience, and safety., Methods: This study compared the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in swab samples collected on the same day among participants with at least one positive PCR test., Results: Overall, 755 participants had at least one set of paired swabs. Concordance between NP and other swab types was 75% (NS), 72% (OP), 54% (rectal swabs [RS]), and 78% (NS/OP combined). Kappa values were moderate for the NS, OP, and NS/OP comparisons (0.50, 0.45, and 0.54, respectively). Highest sensitivity relative to NP (0.87) was observed with a combination of NS/OP tests (positive if either NS or OP was positive). Sensitivity of the non-NP swab types was highest in the first week postsymptom onset and decreased thereafter. Similarly, virus RNA quantity was highest in the NP swabs as compared with NS, OP, and RS within two weeks postsymptom onset. OP and NS performance decreased as virus RNA quantity decreased. No differences were noted between NS specimens collected at home or in clinic., Conclusions: NP swabs detected more SARS-CoV-2 cases than non-NP swabs, and the sensitivity of the non-NP swabs decreased with time postsymptom onset. While other swabs may be simpler to collect, NP swabs present the best chance of detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA, which is essential for clinical care as well as genomic surveillance., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2021.)