Validation and comparison of triage-based screening strategies for sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to externally validate and compare proposed methods for stratifying sepsis risk at emergency department (ED) triage. METHODS: This nested case/control study enrolled ED patients from four hospitals in Utah and evaluated the performance of previously-published sepsis risk scores amenable to use at ED triage based on their area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC, which balances positive predictive value and sensitivity) and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC, which balances sensitivity and specificity). Score performance for predicting whether patients met Sepsis-3 criteria in the ED was compared to patients' assigned ED triage score (Canadian Triage Acuity Score [CTAS]) with adjustment for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: Among 2000 case/control patients, 981 met Sepsis-3 criteria on final adjudication. The best performing sepsis risk scores were the Predict Sepsis version #3 (AUPRC 0.183, 95 % CI 0.148-0.256; AUROC 0.859, 95 % CI 0.843-0.875) and Borelli scores (AUPRC 0.127, 95 % CI 0.107-0.160, AUROC 0.845, 95 % CI 0.829-0.862), which significantly outperformed CTAS (AUPRC 0.038, 95 % CI 0.035-0.042, AUROC 0.650, 95 % CI 0.628-0.671, p < 0.001 for all AUPRC and AUROC comparisons). The Predict Sepsis and Borelli scores exhibited sensitivity of 0.670 and 0.678 and specificity of 0.902 and 0.834, respectively, at their recommended cutoff values and outperformed Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria (AUPRC 0.083, 95 % CI 0.070-0.102, p = 0.052 and p = 0.078, respectively; AUROC 0.775, 95 % CI 0.756-0.795, p < 0.001 for both scores). CONCLUSIONS: The Predict Sepsis and Borelli scores exhibited improved performance including increased specificity and positive predictive values for sepsis identification at ED triage compared to CTAS and SIRS criteria.

Effectiveness of Updated 2023-2024 (Monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 Vaccination Against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB and BA.2.86/JN.1 Lineage Hospitalization and a Comparison of Clinical Severity-IVY Network, 26 Hospitals, October 18, 2023-March 9, 2024.

BACKGROUND: Assessing variant-specific COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) and severity can inform public health risk assessments and decisions about vaccine composition. BA.2.86 and its descendants, including JN.1 (referred to collectively as "JN lineages"), emerged in late 2023 and exhibited substantial divergence from co-circulating XBB lineages. METHODS: We analyzed patients hospitalized with COVID-19-like illness at 26 hospitals in 20 U.S. states admitted October 18, 2023-March 9, 2024. Using a test-negative, case-control design, we estimated effectiveness of an updated 2023-2024 (Monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 vaccine dose against sequence-confirmed XBB and JN lineage hospitalization using logistic regression. Odds of severe outcomes, including intensive care unit (ICU) admission and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death, were compared for JN versus XBB lineage hospitalizations using logistic regression. RESULTS: 585 case-patients with XBB lineages, 397 case-patients with JN lineages, and 4,580 control-patients were included. VE in the first 7-89 days after receipt of an updated dose was 54.2% (95% CI = 36.1%-67.1%) against XBB lineage hospitalization and 32.7% (95% CI = 1.9%-53.8%) against JN lineage hospitalization. Odds of ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.80; 95% CI = 0.46-1.38) and IMV or death (aOR 0.69; 95% CI = 0.34-1.40) were not significantly different among JN compared to XBB lineage hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination provided protection against both XBB and JN lineage hospitalization, but protection against the latter may be attenuated by immune escape. Clinical severity of JN lineage hospitalizations was not higher relative to XBB.

Molecular Phenotyping of Patients with Sepsis and Kidney Injury and Differential Response to Fluid Resuscitation.

Purpose: Previous work has identified two AKI sub-phenotypes (SP1 and SP2) characterized by differences in inflammation and endothelial dysfunction. Here we identify these sub-phenotypes using biospecimens collected in the emergency department and test for differential response to restrictive versus liberal fluid strategy in sepsis-induced hypotension in the CLOVERS trial. Methods: We applied a previously validated 3-biomarker model using plasma angiopietin-1 and 2, and soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor-1 to classify sub-phenotypes in patients with kidney dysfunction (AKI or end-stage kidney disease [ESKD]). We also compared a de novo latent class analysis (LCA) to the 3-biomarker based sub-phenotypes. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to test for differences in outcomes and sub-phenotype by treatment interaction. Results: Among 1289 patients, 846 had kidney dysfunction on enrollment and the 3-variable prediction model identified 605 as SP1 and 241 as SP2. The optimal LCA model identified two sub-phenotypes with high correlation with the 3-biomarker model (Cohen's Kappa 0.8). The risk of 28 and 90-day mortality was greater in SP2 relative to SP1 independent of AKI stage and SOFA scores. Patients with SP2, characterized by more severe endothelial injury and inflammation, had a reduction in 28-day mortality with a restrictive fluid strategy versus a liberal fluid strategy (26% vs 41%), while patients with SP1 had no difference in 28-day mortality (10% vs 11%) (p-value-for-interaction = 0.03). Conclusion: Sub-phenotypes can be identified in the emergency department that respond differently to fluid strategy in sepsis. Identification of these sub-phenotypes could inform a precision-guided therapeutic approach for patients with sepsis-induced hypotension and kidney injury.

Mobile App-Based Mindfulness Intervention for Addressing Psychological Distress Among Survivors of Hospitalization for COVID-19 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Psychological distress symptoms are present and persistent among many patients who survive a critical illness like COVID-19. RESEARCH QUESTION: Could a self-directed mobile app-delivered mindfulness intervention be feasibly and rapidly implemented within a clinical trials network to reduce distress symptoms? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A randomized clinical trial was conducted between January 2021 and May 2022 at 29 US sites and included survivors of hospitalization due to COVID-19-related illness with elevated symptoms of depression at discharge. Participants were randomized to intervention or usual care control. The intervention consisted of four themed weeks of daily audio, video, and text content. All study procedures were virtual. The primary outcome was depression symptoms assessed with the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale), quality of life (EQ-5D), and adherence. We used general linear models to estimate treatment arm differences in outcomes over time. RESULTS: Among 56 randomized participants (mean age ± SD, 51.0 ± 13.2 years; 38 female [67.9%]; 14 Black participants [25%]), 45 (intervention: n = 23 [79%]; control: n = 22 [81%]) were retained at 6 months. There was no difference in mean improvement between intervention and control participants at 3 months in Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (-0.5 vs 0.1), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale (-0.3 vs 0.1), or EQ-5D (-0.03 vs 0.02) scores, respectively; 6-month results were similar. Only 15 participants (51.7%) initiated the intervention, whereas the mean number ± SD of the 56 prescribed intervention activities completed was 12.0 ± 15.2. Regulatory approvals delayed trial initiation by nearly a year. INTERPRETATION: Among survivors of COVID-19 hospitalization with elevated psychological distress symptoms, a self-directed mobile app-based mindfulness intervention had poor adherence. Future psychological distress interventions mobilized at broad scale should focus efforts on patient engagement and regulatory simplification to enhance success. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04581200; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Effectiveness and Safety of an Emergency Department Code Sepsis Protocol: A Pragmatic Clinical Trial.

RATIONALE: Sepsis care delivery - including initiation of prompt, appropriate antimicrobials - remains suboptimal. OBJECTIVE: Determine direct and off-target effects of emergency department (ED) sepsis care reorganization. METHODS: This pragmatic pilot trial enrolled adult patients presenting November 2019 to February 2021 to an ED in Utah before and after implementation of a multimodal, team-based "Code Sepsis" protocol. Patients presenting to two other EDs where usual care was continued served as contemporaneous controls. The primary outcome was door-to-antimicrobial time among patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria before ED departure. Secondary and safety outcomes included all-cause 30-day mortality, antimicrobial utilization and overtreatment, and antimicrobial-associated adverse events. Multivariable regression analyses employed difference-in-differences methods to account for trends in outcomes unrelated to the studied intervention. RESULTS: Code Sepsis protocol activation (N=307) exhibited 8.5% sensitivity and 66% positive predictive value for patients meeting sepsis criteria before ED departure. Among 10,151 patients meeting sepsis criteria during the study, adjusted difference-in-differences analysis demonstrated a 13-minute (95% CI 7-19-minute) decrease in door-to-antimicrobial time associated with Code Sepsis implementation (p<0.001). Mortality and clinical safety outcomes were unchanged, but Code Sepsis implementation was associated with increased false-positive presumptive infection diagnosis among patients meeting sepsis criteria in the ED and increased antimicrobial utilization. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a team-based protocol for rapid sepsis evaluation and treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic's first year was associated with decreased ED door-to-antimicrobial time but also increased antimicrobial utilization. Measurement of both patient-centered and off-target effects of sepsis care improvement interventions is essential to comprehensive assessment of their value. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04148989) This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Effectiveness of Updated 2023-2024 (Monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 Vaccination Against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB and BA.2.86/JN.1 Lineage Hospitalization and a Comparison of Clinical Severity - IVY Network, 26 Hospitals, October 18, 2023-March 9, 2024.

Background: Assessing COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) and severity of SARS-CoV-2 variants can inform public health risk assessments and decisions about vaccine composition. BA.2.86 and its descendants, including JN.1 (referred to collectively as "JN lineages"), emerged in late 2023 and exhibited substantial genomic divergence from co-circulating XBB lineages. Methods: We analyzed patients hospitalized with COVID-19-like illness at 26 hospitals in 20 U.S. states admitted October 18, 2023-March 9, 2024. Using a test-negative, case-control design, we estimated the effectiveness of an updated 2023-2024 (Monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 vaccine dose against sequence-confirmed XBB and JN lineage hospitalization using logistic regression. Odds of severe outcomes, including intensive care unit (ICU) admission and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death, were compared for JN versus XBB lineage hospitalizations using logistic regression. Results: 585 case-patients with XBB lineages, 397 case-patients with JN lineages, and 4,580 control-patients were included. VE in the first 7-89 days after receipt of an updated dose was 54.2% (95% CI = 36.1%-67.1%) against XBB lineage hospitalization and 32.7% (95% CI = 1.9%-53.8%) against JN lineage hospitalization. Odds of ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.80; 95% CI = 0.46-1.38) and IMV or death (aOR 0.69; 95% CI = 0.34-1.40) were not significantly different among JN compared to XBB lineage hospitalizations. Conclusions: Updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination provided protection against both XBB and JN lineage hospitalization, but protection against the latter may be attenuated by immune escape. Clinical severity of JN lineage hospitalizations was not higher relative to XBB lineage hospitalizations.

Mobile Mindfulness Intervention for Psychological Distress Among Intensive Care Unit Survivors: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Although psychological distress is common among survivors of critical illness, there are few tailored therapies. Objective: To determine the optimal method for delivering a mindfulness intervention via a mobile app for critical illness survivors. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial used a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design and was conducted at 3 sites among survivors of critical illness with elevated postdischarge symptoms of depression. The study was conducted between August 2019 and July 2023. Interventions: Participants were randomized to 1 of 8 different groups as determined by 3 two-level intervention component combinations: intervention introduction method (mobile app vs therapist call), mindfulness meditation dose (once daily vs twice daily), and management of increasing symptoms (mobile app vs therapist call). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) depression scale score (range, 0-27) at 1 month. Secondary outcomes included anxiety (7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder) and posttraumatic stress disorder (Posttraumatic Stress Scale) symptoms at 1 and 3 months, adherence, and feasibility. General linear models were used to compare main effects and interactions of the components among intervention groups. A formal decisional framework was used to determine an optimized intervention version. Results: A total of 247 participants (mean [SD] age, 50.2 [15.4] years; 104 [42.1%] women) were randomized. Twice-daily meditation compared with once-daily meditation was associated with a 1.2 (95% CI, 0.04-2.4)-unit lower mean estimated PHQ-9 score at 1 month and a 1.5 (95% CI, 0.1-2.8)-unit lower estimated mean score at 3 months. The other 2 intervention components had no main effects on the PHQ-9. Across-group adherence was high (217 participants [87.9%] using the intervention at trial conclusion) and retention was strong (191 [77.3%] and 182 [73.7%] at 1 and 3 months, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: A mindfulness intervention for survivors of critical illness that included an app-based introduction, twice-daily guided meditation, and app-based management of increasing depression symptoms was optimal considering effects on psychological distress symptoms, adherence, and feasibility. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04038567.

Long-term outcomes after treatment of delirium during critical illness with antipsychotics (MIND-USA): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is common during critical illness and is associated with long-term cognitive impairment and disability. Antipsychotics are frequently used to treat delirium, but their effects on long-term outcomes are unknown. We aimed to investigate the effects of antipsychotic treatment of delirious, critically ill patients on long-term cognitive, functional, psychological, and quality-of-life outcomes. METHODS: This prespecified, long-term follow-up to the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 MIND-USA Study was conducted in 16 hospitals throughout the USA. Adults (aged ≥18 years) who had been admitted to an intensive care unit with respiratory failure or septic or cardiogenic shock were eligible for inclusion in the study if they had delirium. Participants were randomly assigned-using a computer-generated, permuted-block randomisation scheme with stratification by trial site and age-in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive intravenous placebo, haloperidol, or ziprasidone for up to 14 days. Investigators and participants were masked to treatment group assignment. 3 months and 12 months after randomisation, we assessed survivors' cognitive, functional, psychological, quality-of-life, and employment outcomes using validated telephone-administered tests and questionnaires. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01211522, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Dec 7, 2011, and Aug 12, 2017, we screened 20 914 individuals, of whom 566 were eligible and consented or had consent provided to participate. Of these 566 patients, 184 were assigned to the placebo group, 192 to the haloperidol group, and 190 to the ziprasidone group. 1-year survival and follow-up rates were similar between groups. Cognitive impairment was common in all three treatment groups, with a third of survivors impaired at both 3-month and 12-month follow-up in all groups. More than half of the surveyed survivors in each group had cognitive or physical limitations (or both) that precluded employment at both 3-month and 12-month follow-up. At both 3 months and 12 months, neither haloperidol (adjusted odds ratio 1·22 [95% CI 0·73-2.04] at 3 months and 1·12 [0·60-2·11] at 12 months) nor ziprasidone (1·07 [0·59-1·96] at 3 months and 0·94 [0·62-1·44] at 12 months) significantly altered cognitive outcomes, as measured by the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status T score, compared with placebo. We also found no evidence that functional, psychological, quality-of-life, or employment outcomes improved with haloperidol or ziprasidone compared with placebo. INTERPRETATION: In delirious, critically ill patients, neither haloperidol nor ziprasidone had a significant effect on cognitive, functional, psychological, or quality-of-life outcomes among survivors. Our findings, along with insufficient evidence of short-term benefit and frequent inappropriate continuation of antipsychotics at hospital discharge, indicate that antipsychotics should not be used routinely to treat delirium in critically ill adults. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health and the US Department of Veterans Affairs.

Severity of Respiratory Syncytial Virus vs COVID-19 and Influenza Among Hospitalized US Adults.

Importance: On June 21, 2023, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended the first respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccines for adults aged 60 years and older using shared clinical decision-making. Understanding the severity of RSV disease in adults can help guide this clinical decision-making. Objective: To describe disease severity among adults hospitalized with RSV and compare it with the severity of COVID-19 and influenza disease by vaccination status. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, adults aged 18 years and older admitted to the hospital with acute respiratory illness and laboratory-confirmed RSV, SARS-CoV-2, or influenza infection were prospectively enrolled from 25 hospitals in 20 US states from February 1, 2022, to May 31, 2023. Clinical data during each patient's hospitalization were collected using standardized forms. Data were analyzed from August to October 2023. Exposures: RSV, SARS-CoV-2, or influenza infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Using multivariable logistic regression, severity of RSV disease was compared with COVID-19 and influenza severity, by COVID-19 and influenza vaccination status, for a range of clinical outcomes, including the composite of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and in-hospital death. Results: Of 7998 adults (median [IQR] age, 67 [54-78] years; 4047 [50.6%] female) included, 484 (6.1%) were hospitalized with RSV, 6422 (80.3%) were hospitalized with COVID-19, and 1092 (13.7%) were hospitalized with influenza. Among patients with RSV, 58 (12.0%) experienced IMV or death, compared with 201 of 1422 unvaccinated patients with COVID-19 (14.1%) and 458 of 5000 vaccinated patients with COVID-19 (9.2%), as well as 72 of 699 unvaccinated patients with influenza (10.3%) and 20 of 393 vaccinated patients with influenza (5.1%). In adjusted analyses, the odds of IMV or in-hospital death were not significantly different among patients hospitalized with RSV and unvaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.59-1.13; P = .22) or influenza (aOR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.82-1.76; P = .35); however, the odds of IMV or death were significantly higher among patients hospitalized with RSV compared with vaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (aOR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.02-1.86; P = .03) or influenza disease (aOR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.62-4.86; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults hospitalized in this US cohort during the 16 months before the first RSV vaccine recommendations, RSV disease was less common but similar in severity compared with COVID-19 or influenza disease among unvaccinated patients and more severe than COVID-19 or influenza disease among vaccinated patients for the most serious outcomes of IMV or death.

Tackling Brain and Muscle Dysfunction in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Survivors: NHLBI Workshop Report.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with long-term impairments in brain and muscle function that significantly impact the quality of life of those who survive the acute illness. The mechanisms underlying these impairments are not yet well understood, and evidence-based interventions to minimize the burden on patients remain unproved. The NHLBI of the NIH assembled a workshop in April 2023 to review the state of the science regarding ARDS-associated brain and muscle dysfunction, to identify gaps in current knowledge, and to determine priorities for future investigation. The workshop included presentations by scientific leaders across the translational science spectrum and was open to the public as well as the scientific community. This report describes the themes discussed at the workshop as well as recommendations to advance the field toward the goal of improving the health and well-being of ARDS survivors.

Fluid Management in Acute Respiratory Failure.

Fluid management in acute respiratory failure is an area of uncertainty requiring a delicate balance of resuscitation and fluid removal to manage hypoperfusion and avoidance of hypoxemia. Overall, a restrictive fluid strategy (minimizing fluid administration) and careful attention to overall fluid balance may be beneficial after initial resuscitation and does not have major side effects. Further studies are needed to improve our understanding of patients who will benefit from a restrictive or liberal fluid management strategy.

Ethnic Disparities in Deep Sedation of Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in the United States: Secondary Analysis of a Multicenter Randomized Trial.

Rationale: Patients identified as Hispanic, the largest minority group in the United States, are more likely to die from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) than non-Hispanic patients. Mechanisms to explain this disparity remain unidentified. However, Hispanic patients may be at risk of overexposure to deep sedation because of language differences between patients and clinicians, and deep sedation is associated with higher ARDS mortality.Objective: We examined associations between Hispanic ethnicity and exposure to deep sedation among patients with ARDS.Methods: A secondary analysis was conducted of patients enrolled in the control arm of a randomized trial of neuromuscular blockade for ARDS across 48 U.S. hospitals. Exposure to deep sedation was measured over the first 5 days that a patient was alive and received mechanical ventilation. Multilevel mixed-effects models were used to evaluate associations between Hispanic ethnicity and exposure to deep sedation, controlling for patient characteristics.Results: Patients identified as Hispanic had approximately five times the odds of deep sedation (odds ratio, 4.98; 95% confidence interval, 2.02-12.28; P < 0.0001) on a given day, compared with non-Hispanic White patients. Hospitals with at least one enrolled Hispanic patient kept all enrolled patients deeply sedated longer than hospitals without any enrolled Hispanic patients (85.8% of ventilator-days vs. 65.5%; P < 0.001).Conclusions: Hispanic patients are at higher risk of exposure to deep sedation than non-Hispanic White patients. There is an urgent need to understand and address disparities in sedation delivery.

Racial Differences in Shared Decision-Making About Critical Illness.

Importance: Shared decision-making is the preferred method for evaluating complex tradeoffs in the care of patients with critical illness. However, it remains unknown whether critical care clinicians engage diverse patients and caregivers equitably in shared decision-making. Objective: To compare critical care clinicians' approaches to shared decision-making in recorded conversations with Black and White caregivers of patients with critical illness. Design, Setting, and Participants: This thematic analysis consisted of unstructured clinician-caregiver meetings audio-recorded during a randomized clinical trial of a decision aid about prolonged mechanical ventilation at 13 intensive care units in the US. Participants in meetings included critical care clinicians and Black or White caregivers of patients who underwent mechanical ventilation. The codebook included components of shared decision-making and known mechanisms of racial disparities in clinical communication. Analysts were blinded to caregiver race during coding. Patterns within and across racial groups were evaluated to identify themes. Data analysis was conducted between August 2021 and April 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were themes describing clinician behaviors varying by self-reported race of the caregivers. Results: The overall sample comprised 20 Black and 19 White caregivers for a total of 39 audio-recorded meetings with clinicians. The duration of meetings was similar for both Black and White caregivers (mean [SD], 23.9 [13.7] minutes vs 22.1 [11.2] minutes, respectively). Both Black and White caregivers were generally middle-aged (mean [SD] age, 47.6 [9.9] years vs 51.9 [8.8] years, respectively), female (15 [75.0%] vs 14 [73.7%], respectively), and possessed a high level of self-assessed health literacy, which was scored from 3 to 15 with lower scores indicating increasing health literacy (mean [SD], 5.8 [2.3] vs 5.3 [2.0], respectively). Clinicians conducting meetings with Black and White caregivers were generally young (mean [SD] age, 38.8 [6.6] years vs 37.9 [8.2] years, respectively), male (13 [72.2%] vs 12 [70.6%], respectively), and White (14 [77.8%] vs 17 [100%], respectively). Four variations in clinicians' shared decision-making behaviors by caregiver race were identified: (1) providing limited emotional support for Black caregivers, (2) failing to acknowledge trust and gratitude expressed by Black caregivers, (3) sharing limited medical information with Black caregivers, and (4) challenging Black caregivers' preferences for restorative care. These themes encompass both relational and informational aspects of shared decision-making. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this thematic analysis showed that critical care clinicians missed opportunities to acknowledge emotions and value the knowledge of Black caregivers compared with White caregivers. These findings may inform future clinician-level interventions aimed at promoting equitable shared decision-making.

Features of acute COVID-19 associated with post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 phenotypes: results from the IMPACC study.

Post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC) is a significant public health concern. We describe Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) on 590 participants prospectively assessed from hospital admission for COVID-19 through one year after discharge. Modeling identified 4 PRO clusters based on reported deficits (minimal, physical, mental/cognitive, and multidomain), supporting heterogenous clinical presentations in PASC, with sub-phenotypes associated with female sex and distinctive comorbidities. During the acute phase of disease, a higher respiratory SARS-CoV-2 viral burden and lower Receptor Binding Domain and Spike antibody titers were associated with both the physical predominant and the multidomain deficit clusters. A lower frequency of circulating B lymphocytes by mass cytometry (CyTOF) was observed in the multidomain deficit cluster. Circulating fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21) was significantly elevated in the mental/cognitive predominant and the multidomain clusters. Future efforts to link PASC to acute anti-viral host responses may help to better target treatment and prevention of PASC.

Development and External Validation of Models to Predict Persistent Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure for Clinical Trial Enrichment.

OBJECTIVES: Improving the efficiency of clinical trials in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (HRF) depends on enrichment strategies that minimize enrollment of patients who quickly resolve with existing care and focus on patients at high risk for persistent HRF. We aimed to develop parsimonious models predicting risk of persistent HRF using routine data from ICU admission and select research immune biomarkers. DESIGN: Prospective cohorts for derivation ( n = 630) and external validation ( n = 511). SETTING: Medical and surgical ICUs at two U.S. medical centers. PATIENTS: Adults with acute HRF defined as new invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and hypoxemia on the first calendar day after ICU admission. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We evaluated discrimination, calibration, and practical utility of models predicting persistent HRF risk (defined as ongoing IMV and hypoxemia on the third calendar day after admission): 1) a clinical model with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) selecting Pa o2 /F io2 , vasopressors, mean arterial pressure, bicarbonate, and acute respiratory distress syndrome as predictors; 2) a model adding interleukin-6 (IL-6) to clinical predictors; and 3) a comparator model with Pa o2 /F io2 alone, representing an existing strategy for enrichment. Forty-nine percent and 69% of patients had persistent HRF in derivation and validation sets, respectively. In validation, both LASSO (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.64-0.73) and LASSO + IL-6 (0.71; 95% CI, 0.66-0.76) models had better discrimination than Pa o2 /F io2 (0.64; 95% CI, 0.59-0.69). Both models underestimated risk in lower risk deciles, but exhibited better calibration at relevant risk thresholds. Evaluating practical utility, both LASSO and LASSO + IL-6 models exhibited greater net benefit in decision curve analysis, and greater sample size savings in enrichment analysis, compared with Pa o2 /F io2 . The added utility of LASSO + IL-6 model over LASSO was modest. CONCLUSIONS: Parsimonious, interpretable models that predict persistent HRF may improve enrichment of trials testing HRF-targeted therapies and warrant future validation.

An Update on Management of Adult Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline.

Background: This document updates previously published Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), incorporating new evidence addressing the use of corticosteroids, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, neuromuscular blocking agents, and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). Methods: We summarized evidence addressing four "PICO questions" (patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome). A multidisciplinary panel with expertise in ARDS used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework to develop clinical recommendations. Results: We suggest the use of: 1) corticosteroids for patients with ARDS (conditional recommendation, moderate certainty of evidence), 2) venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in selected patients with severe ARDS (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence), 3) neuromuscular blockers in patients with early severe ARDS (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence), and 4) higher PEEP without lung recruitment maneuvers as opposed to lower PEEP in patients with moderate to severe ARDS (conditional recommendation, low to moderate certainty), and 5) we recommend against using prolonged lung recruitment maneuvers in patients with moderate to severe ARDS (strong recommendation, moderate certainty). Conclusions: We provide updated evidence-based recommendations for the management of ARDS. Individual patient and illness characteristics should be factored into clinical decision making and implementation of these recommendations while additional evidence is generated from much-needed clinical trials.

Premorbid weight in pulmonary arterial hypertension.

Relationships between obesity and outcomes in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) are complex. Previous work suggested obesity, occurring alongside PAH, may be associated with better survival. In our work, we suggest obesity prior to PAH development is associated with worse survival. This may add a novel temporal element to the "obesity-paradox."

Disease Severity of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Compared with COVID-19 and Influenza Among Hospitalized Adults Aged ≥60 Years - IVY Network, 20 U.S. States, February 2022-May 2023.

On June 21, 2023, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccination for adults aged ≥60 years, offered to individual adults using shared clinical decision-making. Informed use of these vaccines requires an understanding of RSV disease severity. To characterize RSV-associated severity, 5,784 adults aged ≥60 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness and laboratory-confirmed RSV, SARS-CoV-2, or influenza infection were prospectively enrolled from 25 hospitals in 20 U.S. states during February 1, 2022-May 31, 2023. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare RSV disease severity with COVID-19 and influenza severity on the basis of the following outcomes: 1) standard flow (<30 L/minute) oxygen therapy, 2) high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) or noninvasive ventilation (NIV), 3) intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and 4) invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death. Overall, 304 (5.3%) enrolled adults were hospitalized with RSV, 4,734 (81.8%) with COVID-19 and 746 (12.9%) with influenza. Patients hospitalized with RSV were more likely to receive standard flow oxygen, HFNC or NIV, and ICU admission than were those hospitalized with COVID-19 or influenza. Patients hospitalized with RSV were more likely to receive IMV or die compared with patients hospitalized with influenza (adjusted odds ratio = 2.08; 95% CI = 1.33-3.26). Among hospitalized older adults, RSV was less common, but was associated with more severe disease than COVID-19 or influenza. High disease severity in older adults hospitalized with RSV is important to consider in shared clinical decision-making regarding RSV vaccination.