Search

Background: Trimodulin (human polyvalent immunoglobulin [Ig] M ~ 23%, IgA ~ 21%, IgG ~ 56% preparation) has previously been associated with a lower mortality rate in a subpopulation of patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia on invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and with clear signs of inflammation. The hypothesis for the ESsCOVID trial was that trimodulin may prevent inflammation-driven progression of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to critical disease or even death., Methods: Adults with severe COVID-19 were randomised to receive intravenous infusions of trimodulin or placebo for 5 consecutive days in addition to standard of care. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of clinical deterioration (Days 6-29) and 28-day all-cause mortality (Days 1-29)., Results: One-hundred-and-sixty-six patients received trimodulin (n = 84) or placebo (n = 82). Thirty-three patients died, nine during the treatment phase. Overall, 84.9% and 76.5% of patients completed treatment and follow-up, respectively. The primary efficacy endpoint was reported in 33.3% of patients on trimodulin and 34.1% of patients on placebo (P = 0.912). No differences were observed in the proportion of patients recovered on Day 29, days of invasive mechanical ventilation, or intensive care unit-free days. Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable. A post hoc analysis was conducted in patients with early systemic inflammation by excluding those with high CRP (> 150 mg/L) and/or D-dimer (≥ 3 mg/L) and/or low platelet counts (< 130 × 10 9 /L) at baseline. Forty-seven patients in the trimodulin group and 49 in the placebo group met these criteria. A difference of 15.5 percentage points in clinical deterioration and mortality was observed in favour of trimodulin (95% confidence interval: -4.46, 34.78; P = 0.096)., Conclusion: Although there was no difference in the primary outcome in the overall population, observations in a subgroup of patients with early systemic inflammation suggest that trimodulin may have potential in this setting that warrants further investigation. ESSCOVID WAS REGISTERED PROSPECTIVELY AT CLINICALTRIALS.GOV ON OCTOBER 6, 2020.: NCT04576728., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The study objective was to describe the hospital burden of pneumonia in the adult population in France., Methods: This retrospective study was conducted from the National Health Insurance Database. All hospitalizations for pneumonia (all-cause) between 2013 and 2019 were included. Different risk categories for patients were established based on pneumococcal vaccine recommendations by French health authorities., Results: A total of 2 199 240 episodes of CAP were registered over the study period (annual mean, 314 177 [standard deviation, 17 818.6]); 75% occurred in patients aged ≥65 years, among whom 47% were not classified in the moderate- or high-risk categories recommended for French pneumococcal vaccination. The incidence of CAP increased with age (117.9, 395.3, and 1916.7 per 100 000 for the age groups 18-49, 50-64, and ≥65 years, respectively, in 2019). Furthermore, being at risk of pneumococcal disease resulted in more severe outcomes, including longer episode duration (mean, 14 days in low-risk vs 17 days in high-risk patients) and higher risk of referral to critical care units (from 20% to 27%), of rehospitalization up to 180 days (from 39% to 67%), of in-hospital death (from 12% to 19%), and of 1-year mortality (from 26% to 49%)., Conclusions: This study establishes the incidence of CAP in adults in France, describes the significant burden of disease, and highlights the need for better prevention policies., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. A. S., M. B., E. B., S. F., J. M., and G. G. are employees of Pfizer. L. W. has received consulting fees from Pfizer for this work and from HEVA and IQVIA, outside the submitted work. A. A., J. T., M. L., N. C., and Y. B. are IQVIA employees, a company which was paid by Pfizer for this work, including manuscript development. M. S. F. reports grants from La Fondation du Souffle, and personal fees from Fisher & Paykel and bioMérieux, outside the submitted work. M. S. F. reports consulting fees from Pfizer for this work., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

In our recent survey, we aimed to collect information on perceived inequity as well as professional and personal fulfillment among women intensivists in France. For the 371 respondents out of the 732 persons who received the survey, the findings were unequivocal: for one-third of the respondents, being a woman was considered as an obstacle to careers or academic advancement, and for two thirds, pregnancy was viewed as a barrier to their career advancement. Gender discrimination had been experienced by 55% of the respondents. In 2019, to promote and achieve gender equity in the French Intensive Care Society (FICS), ten actions were initiated and are detailed in the present manuscript together with supporting data: (1) creation of a working group: the FEMMIR group; (2) promotion of mentorship; (3) implementation of concrete sponsorship; (4) transparency and public reporting of gender ratios in editorial boards; (5) workshops dedicated to unconscious gender bias; (6) workshops dedicated to improved women assertiveness; (7) role models; (8) creation of educational/information programs for young intensivists; (9) development of research on gender inequity and, as a perspective; and (10) development of a wide-ranging program. This review is aimed at providing a toolbox of organizational best practices designed to achieve gender equity. It is particularly important to share promising practical action engaged in our FEMMIR group with other concerned professionals around the world., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: The medical workforce has been feminized for the last two decades worldwide. Nonetheless, women remain under-represented among intensivists. We conducted a survey among French women intensivists to assess their professional and personal quality of life and their perception of potential gender discrimination at work., Methods: We conducted an observational descriptive study by sending a survey, designed by the group FEMMIR (FEmmes Médecins en Médecine Intensive Réanimation), to women intensivists in France, using primarily the Société de Réanimation de Langue Française (SRLF) mailing list. The questionnaire was also available online between September 2019 and January 2020 and women intensivists were encouraged to answer through email reminders. It pertained to five main domains, including demographic characteristics, work position, workload and clinical/research activities, self-fulfillment scale, perceived discrimination at work and suggested measures to implement., Results: Three hundred and seventy-one women responded to the questionnaire, among whom 16% had an academic position. Being a woman intensivist and pregnancy were both considered to increase difficulties in careers' advancement by 31% and 73% of the respondents, respectively. Almost half of the respondents (46%) quoted their quality of life equal to or lower than 6 on a scale varying from 1 (very bad quality of life) to 10 (excellent quality of life). They were 52% to feel an imbalance between their personal and professional life at the cost of their personal life. Gender discrimination has been experienced by 55% of the respondents while 37% confided having already been subject of bullying or harassment. Opportunities to adjust their work timetable including part-time work, better considerations for pregnant women including increasing the number of intensivists and the systematic replacement during maternity leave, and the respect of the law regarding the paternity leave were suggested as key measures to enable better professional and personal accomplishment by women intensivists., Conclusion: In this first large French survey in women intensivists, we pointed out issues felt by women intensivists that included an imbalance between professional and personal life, a perceived loss of opportunity due to the fact of being a woman, frequent reported bullying or harassment and a lack of consideration of the needs related to pregnancy and motherhood.