A mobile unit overcomes the challenges to monoclonal antibody infusion for COVID-19 in skilled care facilities.

BACKGROUND: Residents of nursing homes and long-term care facilities are at increased risk for severe coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) but may not be able to access monoclonal antibody therapies offered at outpatient infusion centers due to frailty and logistical issues. We describe a mobile monoclonal antibody infusion program for patients with COVID-19 in skilled nursing facilities and provide descriptive data on its outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Collaboration between Mayo Clinic and skilled nursing facilities in Southeast Minnesota was developed to administer anti-spike monoclonal antibodies under the FDA Emergency Use Authorization. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy five residents of skilled nursing facilities at high risk of COVID-19 complications. EXPOSURE: Emergency use treatment with bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab. MEASUREMENTS: Hospitalization and medically attended visits. RESULTS: The mobile infusion unit, staffed by Mayo Clinic Infusion Therapy registered nurses and supported by the skilled nursing facility staff, infused anti-spike monoclonal antibodies to 45 of 75 patients (average age, 77.8 years) in December 2020. The infusions occurred at an average of 4.3 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. Fourteen days after infusion, there were no deaths, two emergency department visits, and three hospitalizations, for a combined event rate of 11.1%. There was one reported adverse event. CONCLUSION: The implementation of a mobile infusion unit embedded in a collaborative process resulted in rapid infusion of monoclonal antibodies to high-risk COVID-19 patients in skilled nursing facilities, who would otherwise be unable to access the novel therapies. The therapies were well tolerated and appear beneficial. Further study is warranted to explore the scalability and efficacy of this program.

Electronic consultations with Video Supported PowerPoint versus in-clinic face-to-face, pre-travel consultations: A single-centre, comparative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pretravel consultation involves a face-to-face visit with a Travel Medicine expert and includes time consuming educating/counseling. Efficacy of electronic consultations for pretravel is unknown. We compared pretravel education via face-to-face consult to an electronic consultations combined with education via Video Supported PowerPoint for select travelers. METHODS: We conducted a prospective trial comparing pre-travel education via electronic consultations versus face-to-face consult. Study was conducted from May 2014 through May 2015. RESULTS: Pretravel surveys were completed by 100 in electronic consult arm and 94 in face-to-face consult arm; 67/100 (67%) in the electronic consult and 51/94 (54.2%) in the face-to-face group completed post-travel surveys. Both groups had similar baseline demographics. 36.2% of the face-to-face group felt the trip preparation could have effectively been accomplished through electronic consult, while 33% felt that a face-to-face consult was needed; in contrast, a majority (63.3%) of electronic consult group preferred the electronic consult. Pre-travel education effectiveness was similar in both groups. No statistically significant differences in responses were noted in both groups to 5 of the 6 knowledge assessment questions. A higher proportion (76/100; 76%) in the electronic consult group compared to 55.4% (51/94) (p = 0.0018) in face-to-face group chose the correct response regarding management of febrile bloody diarrhea. 53% reported behavior change to prevent travel related illnesses, with no statistically significant differences between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: electronic consultation with Video Supported PowerPoint pre-travel education is as effective as education via face-to-face consultations and provides a viable alternative to face-to-face consultations in select travelers.

Improving influenza vaccine distribution in preparation for an H1N1 influenza pandemic: lessons from the field.

Vaccine distribution is an essential component of any healthcare organization's pandemic influenza plan. Variables surrounding distribution in these circumstances are often difficult to anticipate and require careful consideration. The 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic provided organizations with an opportunity to test current models and overall organizational readiness for the next influenza pandemic. This article describes the experiences at a large, midwestern, multispecialty medical system in responding to the unique circumstances surrounding distribution of the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine. We discuss challenges, variables to consider when choosing a vaccine distribution model, institutional response, and lessons learned.