Factor Analysis in Distinguishing Coronavirus Disease 2019 From Other Influenza-like Illness Using a Validated Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument FLU-PRO Plus: A Prospective Real-world Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: InFLUenza Patient-reported Outcome (FLU-PRO Plus) is a 34-item patient-reported outcome instrument designed to capture the intensity and frequency of viral respiratory symptoms. This study evaluates whether FLU-PRO Plus responses could discriminate between symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and influenza-like illness (ILI) with no COVID diagnosis, as well as forecast disease progression. METHODS: FLU-PRO Plus was administered daily for 14 days. Exploratory factor analysis was used to reduce the FLU-PRO Plus responses on the first day to 3 factors interpreted as "symptom clusters." The 3 clusters were used to predict COVID-19 versus ILI diagnosis in logistic regression. Correlation between the clusters and quality of life (QoL) measures was used to assess concurrent validity. The timing of self-reported return to usual health in the 14-day period was estimated as a function of the clusters within COVID-19 and ILI groups. RESULTS: Three hundred fourteen patients completed day 1 FLU-PRO Plus, of which 65% had a COVID-19 diagnosis. Exploratory factor analysis identified 3 symptom clusters: (1)general Body, (2) tracheal/bronchial, and (3) nasopharyngeal. Higher nasopharyngeal scores were associated with higher odds of COVID-19 compared with ILI diagnosis [adjusted odds ratio = 1.61 (1.21, 2.12)]. Higher tracheal/bronchial scores were associated with lower odds of COVID-19 [0.58 (0.44, 0.77)]. The 3 symptom clusters were correlated with multiple QoL measures ( r = 0.14-0.56). Higher scores on the general body and tracheal/bronchial symptom clusters were associated with prolonged time to return to usual health [adjusted hazard ratios: 0.76 (0.64, 0.91), 0.80 (0.67, 0.96)]. CONCLUSION: Three symptom clusters identified from FLU-PRO Plus responses successfully discriminated patients with COVID-19 from non-COVID ILI and were associated with QoL and predicted symptom duration.

Systematic surveillance of patient-reported symptoms of viral respiratory tract infectious Syndromes in diverse populations.

BACKGROUND: Patient reported outcome measures (PROM) can improve patient care and be crucial for symptom tracking especially during disease outbreaks. FLU-PRO Plus is a validated PROM used to track viral respiratory symptoms. Our study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of using FLU-PRO© Plus, to track symptoms across three healthcare systems. METHODS: The prospective, longitudinal study recruited adults between February-May 2021 from HealthPartners Institute (HP), Kaiser Permanente Georgia (KPGA), and Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States (KPMAS). Adult members were eligible if they had a positive lab or diagnosis for either COVID-19 or influenza-like illness (ILI) or exhibited 2 + viral respiratory symptoms. Descriptive statistics were calculated to describe the patient characteristics for participants that were eligible for FLU-PRO Plus, successfully contacted, attempted to log in to the FLU-PRO Plus website, and participants who completed FLU-PRO Plus Day 1. Bivariable and multivariable logistic regression using PROC GLIMMIXX investigated the patient characteristics associated with (1) successful contact and (2) FLU-PRO Plus Day 1 completion. RESULTS: We identified a total of 15,650 eligible participants during the enrollment period: 9,582 from HP, 1,740 from KPGA, and 4,328 from KPMAS. Among the total of 409 eligible adults who attempted to participate in FLU-PRO Plus, 317 completed FLU-PRO Plus Day 1. Among the 317 individuals that completed FLU-PRO Plus Day 1, 205 (67.5%) were diagnosed with COVID-19; 112 adults diagnosed with COVID-19 completed FLU-PRO Plus Day 14. Among adults successfully contacted, adults aged 35-64 (OR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.05, 1.87), females (OR = 1.77, 95% CI 1.38, 2.27), and adults diagnosed with COVID-19 (OR = 1.66, 95% CI 1.27, 2.17) had higher odds of completing FLU-PRO Plus Day 1; Asian adults (OR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.19, 0.76) and Black and African American adults (OR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.19, 0.76) had lower odds compared to White adults. CONCLUSION: Our study reports on the feasibility of patients across three integrated healthcare systems utilizing FLU-PRO Plus to monitor their respiratory symptoms. Patient reported outcome measures (PROM) can improve patient care, quality of life, and reduce the strain of limited resources on healthcare systems. Future FLU-PRO Plus studies should develop an implementation strategy to fully integrate FLU-PRO Plus within clinical care and patient management.

Saliva-based SARS-CoV-2 serology using at-home collection kits returned via mail.

Serology provides tools for epidemiologic studies, and may have a role in vaccine prioritization and selection. Automated serologic testing of saliva, especially specimens that are self-collected at home and sent to a laboratory via the mail without refrigeration, could be a highly-scalable strategy for population-wide testing. In this prospective study, non-vaccinated patients were recruited after PCR testing to self-collect saliva and return their specimens via mail. Longitudinal specimens were analyzed in order to monitor seroconversion in the weeks after a diagnostic PCR test for SARS-CoV-2. Diverse users self-collected saliva and returned specimens via mail in compliance with shipping regulations. At our pre-established threshold (0.963 AU/mL), salivary IgG reactivity to full-length spike protein achieved 95.8% sensitivity and 92.4% specificity at 2-4 weeks after diagnostic testing, which is comparable to the typical sensitivity and specificity achieved for serum testing. Reactivity to N antigen also was detected with 92.6% sensitivity and 90.7% specificity at 4-8 weeks after diagnostic testing. Moreover, serologic testing for endemic coronaviruses performed in multiplex with SARS-CoV-2 antigens has the potential to identify samples that may require retesting due to effects of pre-analytical factors. The easy-to-use saliva collection kit, coupled with thresholds for positivity and methods of flagging samples for retest, provides a framework for large-scale serosurveillance of SARS-CoV-2.

Expert Consensus Statement: Pediatric Drug-Induced Sleep Endoscopy.

OBJECTIVE: To develop an expert consensus statement on pediatric drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) that clarifies controversies and offers opportunities for quality improvement. Pediatric DISE was defined as flexible endoscopy to examine the upper airway of a child with obstructive sleep apnea who is sedated and asleep. METHODS: Development group members with expertise in pediatric DISE followed established guidelines for developing consensus statements. A search strategist systematically reviewed the literature, and the best available evidence was used to compose consensus statements regarding DISE in children 0 to 18 years old. Topics with significant practice variation and those that would improve the quality of patient care were prioritized. RESULTS: The development group identified 59 candidate consensus statements, based on 50 initial proposed topics, that focused on addressing the following high-yield topics: (1) indications and utility, (2) protocol, (3) optimal sedation, (4) grading and interpretation, (5) complications and safety, and (6) outcomes for DISE-directed surgery. After 2 iterations of the Delphi survey and removal of duplicative statements, 26 statements met the criteria for consensus; 11 statements were designated as no consensus. Several areas, such as the role of DISE at the time of adenotonsillectomy, were identified as needing further research. CONCLUSION: Expert consensus was achieved for 26 statements pertaining to indications, protocol, and outcomes for pediatric DISE. Clinicians can use these statements to improve quality of care, inform policy and protocols, and identify areas of uncertainty. Future research, ideally randomized controlled trials, is warranted to address additional controversies related to pediatric DISE.