Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Pre-pandemic Among Adults Hospitalized With Congestive Heart Failure or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited on influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the prevention of influenza-related hospitalizations in older adults and those with underlying high-risk comorbidities. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, test-negative, case-control study at 2 US hospitals from October 2018-March 2020 among adults aged ≥50 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs) and adults ≥18 years admitted with congestive heart failure (CHF) or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. Adults were eligible if they resided in 1 of 8 counties in metropolitan Atlanta, Georgia. Nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs were tested using BioFire FilmArray (bioMérieux, Inc.) respiratory panel, and standard-of-care molecular results were included when available. Influenza vaccination history was determined from the Georgia vaccine registry and medical records. We used multivariable logistic regression to control for potential confounders and to determine 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Among 3090 eligible adults, 1562 (50.6%) were enrolled. Of the 1515 with influenza vaccination history available, 701 (46.2%) had received vaccination during that season. Influenza was identified in 37 (5.3%) vaccinated versus 78 (9.6%) unvaccinated participants. After adjustment for age, race/ethnicity, immunosuppression, month, and season, pooled VE for any influenza-related hospitalization in the eligible study population was 63.1% (95% CI, 43.8-75.8%). Adjusted VE against influenza-related hospitalization for ARI in adults ≥50 years was 55.9% (29.9-72.3%) and adjusted VE against influenza-related CHF/COPD exacerbation in adults ≥18 years was 80.3% (36.3-93.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination was effective in preventing influenza-related hospitalizations in adults aged ≥50 years and those with CHF/COPD exacerbations during the 2018-2020 seasons.

"Establishment of an acute headache infusion clinic as an alternative for emergency department care".

OBJECTIVES: Numerous patients receive acute migraine care in the Emergency Department (ED) setting. A shift of this care to the outpatient Neurology Clinic and outpatient Infusion Center setting has the potential to optimize clinical management while decreasing resource utilization. METHODS: Clinicians and administrators collaborated on the operationalization of an Acute Headache Infusion Clinic run through the outpatient Neurology Clinic. Data was collected on all patients treated in the Acute Headache Infusion Clinic from 9/2018-12/2019. Duration of the outpatient visit, cost per visit, and pre- and post-treatment pain scores were collected. Comparison was made to similar care administered at our institution's Emergency Department. RESULTS: Results from 133 patients were obtained. The outpatient encounter was 3.73 h shorter than the ED encounter and was associated with a cost savings of ~$9400/patient. Patients experienced a substantial decrease in their pain scores with treatment in the outpatient setting. CONCLUSIONS: The transition of acute migraine management requiring infusion therapies can successfully be transitioned from the ED to the outpatient setting. This can be associated with shorter clinical encounters with more optimal resource utilization while still providing adequate headache relief. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence for an outpatient infusion clinic for saving costs and clinical care time for patients with acute migraines requiring infusion therapies.

Steady State Magnetic Resonance Angiography of the Thoracic Aorta Using Inversion-recovery Steady-State Free Precession and a High Relaxivity Contrast Agent.

PURPOSE: To evaluate image quality and aortic dimension measurement accuracy of high resolution, motion compensated steady-state magnetic resonance angiography (SS-MRA) with a high relaxivity, extracellular fluid gadolinium-based contrast agent compared with standard first-pass contrast enhanced MRA (FP-CEMRA) in patients with thoracic aortic aneurysms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-nine patients (mean age, 51.7 y, 25% female) diagnosed with thoracic aortic aneurysms who underwent MRA on a 1.5 T scanner using FP-CEMRA and SS-MRA techniques were retrospectively identified. Quantitative analysis was performed by measuring the aortic diameters at 6 locations within the thoracic aorta for each technique. Two radiologists independently performed the qualitative analysis by assessing the image quality (1 to 5), presence of artifact (1 to 4), signal-to-noise (1 to 4), contrast-to-noise (1 to 4), and wall conspicuity (1 to 4) in the aorta at 4 different locations: the aortic root, the ascending aorta, the aortic arch, and the descending aorta. RESULTS: The aortic dimensions obtained by SS-MRA had a good correlation with FP-CEMRA. Means for the aortic diameters between the FP-CEMRA and the SS-MRA at all 6 locations demonstrated minimal mean differences (0.013 to 0.044 mm).Qualitative assessment of aorta at 4 locations by 2 reviewers demonstrated that SS-MRA had on average superior image quality at the aortic root and ascending aorta for both reviewers (P<0.05) and at the descending aorta for one reader (P<0.05). Otherwise, both techniques were comparable at the ascending aorta. SS-MRA demonstrated less artifact at the aortic root and the ascending aorta (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Aortic dimension measurements provided by SS-MRA with a high relaxivity, extracellular fluid gadolinium-based contrast agent are comparable to the conventional FP-CEMRA. Furthermore, SS-MRA qualitatively demonstrated comparable to better overall image quality than FP-CEMRA at different aortic locations. Therefore, SS-MRA may provide a comparable alternative, or complementary examination to conventional FP-CEMRA in patients who have difficulty breath holding, or in situations where contrast bolus timing was poor.