RESUMO
We report 3 complicated and prolonged cases of mpox in people with advanced human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) not on antiretroviral therapy (ART) at mpox diagnosis. Multiple medical countermeasures were used, including prolonged tecovirimat treatment and immune optimization with ART initiation. Immunofluorescence of skin biopsies demonstrated a dense immune infiltrate of predominantly myeloid and CD8+ T cells, with a strong type I interferon local response. RNAscope detected abundant replication of monkeypox virus (MPXV) in epithelial cells and dendritic cells. These data suggest that prolonged mpox in people with advanced HIV may be due to ongoing MPXV replication, warranting aggressive medical countermeasures and immune optimization.
Assuntos
Infecções por HIV , Mpox , Dermatopatias , Humanos , HIV , BenzamidasRESUMO
Since May 2022, mpox has been identified in 108 countries without endemic disease; most cases have been in gay, bisexual, or other men who have sex with men. To determine number of missed cases, we conducted 2 studies during June-September 2022: a prospective serologic survey detecting orthopoxvirus antibodies among men who have sex with men in San Francisco, California, and a retrospective monkeypox virus PCR testing of swab specimens submitted for other infectious disease testing among all patients across the United States. The serosurvey of 225 participants (median age 34 years) detected 18 (8.0%) who were orthopoxvirus IgG positive and 3 (1.3%) who were also orthopoxvirus IgM positive. The retrospective PCR study of 1,196 patients (median age 30 years; 54.8% male) detected 67 (5.6%) specimens positive for monkeypox virus. There are likely few undiagnosed cases of mpox in regions where sexual healthcare is accessible and patient and clinician awareness about mpox is increased.
Assuntos
Mpox , Orthopoxvirus , Minorias Sexuais e de Gênero , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto , Feminino , Monkeypox virus/genética , Mpox/diagnóstico , Mpox/epidemiologia , Prevalência , Homossexualidade Masculina , Estudos Prospectivos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Surtos de DoençasRESUMO
Monkeypox (mpox) is a disease caused by infection with Monkeypox virus (MPXV), an Orthopoxvirus (OPXV) in the same genus as Variola virus, which causes smallpox. During 2022, a global outbreak involving mpox clade IIb was recognized, primarily among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men.* Most affected patients have been immunocompetent and experienced ≤10 rash lesions (1). CDC has recommended supportive care including pain control. However, some patients have experienced severe mpox manifestations, including ocular lesions, neurologic complications, myopericarditis, complications associated with mucosal (oral, rectal, genital, and urethral) lesions, and uncontrolled viral spread due to moderate or severe immunocompromise, particularly advanced HIV infection (2). Therapeutic medical countermeasures (MCMs) are Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-regulated drugs and biologics that are predominantly stockpiled by the U.S. government; MCMs developed for smallpox preparedness or shown to be effective against other OPXVs (i.e., tecovirimat, brincidofovir, cidofovir, trifluridine ophthalmic solution, and vaccinia immune globulin intravenous [VIGIV]) have been used to treat severe mpox. During May 2022-January 2023, CDC provided more than 250 U.S. mpox consultations. This report synthesizes data from animal models, MCM use for human cases of related OPXV, unpublished data, input from clinician experts, and experience during consultations (including follow-up) to provide interim clinical treatment considerations. Randomized controlled trials and other carefully controlled research studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of MCMs for treating human mpox. Until data gaps are filled, the information presented in this report represents the best available information concerning the effective use of MCMs and should be used to guide decisions about MCM use for mpox patients.
Assuntos
Infecções por HIV , Mpox , Minorias Sexuais e de Gênero , Varíola , Animais , Masculino , Humanos , Homossexualidade MasculinaRESUMO
In May 2022, the Salt Lake County Health Department reported two real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed travel-associated cases of monkeypox to the Utah Department of Health and Human Services (UDHHS). The two persons with monkeypox (patients A and B) lived together without other housemates. Both persons experienced prodromal symptoms (e.g., fatigue and body aches). Eight days after symptom onset, patient A experienced penile lesions; lesions spread to the lips, hands, legs, chest, and scalp by day 10. Patient B experienced prodromal symptoms 8 days after illness onset of patient A; patient B experienced a lesion on the foot which spread to the leg and finger by day 11. Although both patients had lesions in multiple anatomic areas, the overall number of lesions was small, and lesions varied in presentation from "pimple-like" or ulcerated, to characteristically well-circumscribed and centrally umbilicated. Both patients had mild illness. The time from symptom onset to resolution was approximately 30 days for patient A and approximately 22 days for patient B.
Assuntos
Monkeypox virus , Mpox , Humanos , Sintomas Prodrômicos , Viagem , Utah/epidemiologiaRESUMO
In late August 2021, a boy aged 7 years was bitten by a bat while he was playing outside his apartment home in Medina County, Texas. He informed his parents; however, no rabies postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) was sought because there were no visible bite marks, and the family was unaware that contact with a bat, including in the absence of visible bite marks, might cause rabies. Approximately 2 months later, the child was hospitalized for altered mental status, seizures, and hypersalivation and ultimately received a diagnosis of rabies. Experimental therapies were attempted; however, the child died 22 days after symptom onset. Fifty-seven persons who met criteria for suspected or known exposure to infectious secretions in this case were advised to consult with a medical provider about the need for rabies PEP in accordance with Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) guidelines (1). Rabies, an acute, progressive neuroencephalitis, is nearly always fatal. Although dogs are the most common source of human rabies deaths worldwide and account for an estimated 59,000 annual cases of human rabies globally (2), bats are the most common source of domestically acquired rabies in the United States and have been implicated in 31 (81.6%) of 38 human infections since 2000 (3). Attempts to prevent death or poor neurologic outcomes once rabies symptoms develop have been largely unsuccessful (4). Administration of rabies PEP, comprising rabies immunoglobulin and a series of doses of rabies vaccine, is critical to preventing rabies after an exposure; enhanced public education about the risk posed by bats, and the availability of PEP to prevent rabies, is needed.
Assuntos
Pais , Criança , Humanos , Cães , Animais , Texas/epidemiologiaRESUMO
The mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine encoding the stabilized prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. During December 2020, the vaccine was granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation for use among persons aged ≥18 years (1), which was adopted by CDC. During December 19, 2020-January 30, 2022, approximately 204 million doses of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine were administered in the United States (2) as a primary series of 2 intramuscular doses (100 µg [0.5 mL] each) 4 weeks apart. On January 31, 2022, FDA approved a Biologics License Application (BLA) for use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine (Spikevax, ModernaTX, Inc.) in persons aged ≥18 years (3). On February 4, 2022, the ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group conclusions regarding recommendations for the use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine were presented to ACIP at a public meeting. The Work Group's deliberations were based on the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework,* which incorporates the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rank evidence quality. In addition to initial clinical trial data, ACIP considered new information gathered in the 12 months since issuance of the interim recommendations, including additional follow-up time in the clinical trial, real-world vaccine effectiveness studies, and postauthorization vaccine safety monitoring. ACIP also considered comparisons of mRNA vaccine effectiveness and safety in real-world settings when first doses were administered 8 weeks apart instead of the original intervals used in clinical trials (3 weeks for BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] COVID-19 vaccine and 4 weeks for Moderna COVID-19 vaccine). Based on this evidence, CDC has provided guidance that an 8-week interval might be optimal for some adolescents and adults. The additional information gathered since the issuance of the interim recommendations increased certainty that the benefits of preventing symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and death outweigh vaccine-associated risks of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. On February 4, 2022, ACIP modified its interim recommendation to a standard recommendation§ for use of the fully licensed Moderna COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥18 years.
Assuntos
Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV/administração & dosagem , Comitês Consultivos , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Diretrizes para o Planejamento em Saúde , Esquemas de Imunização , Adulto , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estados UnidosRESUMO
On May 17, 2022, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) Laboratory Response Network (LRN) laboratory confirmed the presence of orthopoxvirus DNA via real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) from lesion swabs obtained from a Massachusetts resident. Orthopoxviruses include Monkeypox virus, the causative agent of monkeypox. Subsequent real-time PCR testing at CDC on May 18 confirmed that the patient was infected with the West African clade of Monkeypox virus. Since then, confirmed cases* have been reported by nine states. In addition, 28 countries and territories, none of which has endemic monkeypox, have reported laboratory-confirmed cases. On May 17, CDC, in coordination with state and local jurisdictions, initiated an emergency response to identify, monitor, and investigate additional monkeypox cases in the United States. This response has included releasing a Health Alert Network (HAN) Health Advisory, developing interim public health and clinical recommendations, releasing guidance for LRN testing, hosting clinician and public health partner outreach calls, disseminating health communication messages to the public, developing protocols for use and release of medical countermeasures, and facilitating delivery of vaccine postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) and antivirals that have been stockpiled by the U.S. government for preparedness and response purposes. On May 19, a call center was established to provide guidance to states for the evaluation of possible cases of monkeypox, including recommendations for clinical diagnosis and orthopoxvirus testing. The call center also gathers information about possible cases to identify interjurisdictional linkages. As of May 31, this investigation has identified 17§ cases in the United States; most cases (16) were diagnosed in persons who identify as gay, bisexual, or men who have sex with men (MSM). Ongoing investigation suggests person-to-person community transmission, and CDC urges health departments, clinicians, and the public to remain vigilant, institute appropriate infection prevention and control measures, and notify public health authorities of suspected cases to reduce disease spread. Public health authorities are identifying cases and conducting investigations to determine possible sources and prevent further spread. This activity was reviewed by CDC and conducted consistent with applicable federal law and CDC policy.¶.
Assuntos
Malária , Mpox , Minorias Sexuais e de Gênero , Surtos de Doenças , Homossexualidade Masculina , Humanos , Malária/diagnóstico , Masculino , Mpox/diagnóstico , Mpox/epidemiologia , Vigilância da População , Viagem , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
As of October 21, 2022, a total of 27,884 monkeypox cases (confirmed and probable) have been reported in the United States.§ Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men have constituted a majority of cases, and persons with HIV infection and those from racial and ethnic minority groups have been disproportionately affected (1,2). During previous monkeypox outbreaks, severe manifestations of disease and poor outcomes have been reported among persons with HIV infection, particularly those with AIDS (3-5). This report summarizes findings from CDC clinical consultations provided for 57 patients aged ≥18 years who were hospitalized with severe manifestations of monkeypox¶ during August 10-October 10, 2022, and highlights three clinically representative cases. Overall, 47 (82%) patients had HIV infection, four (9%) of whom were receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) before monkeypox diagnosis. Most patients were male (95%) and 68% were non-Hispanic Black (Black). Overall, 17 (30%) patients received intensive care unit (ICU)-level care, and 12 (21%) have died. As of this report, monkeypox was a cause of death or contributing factor in five of these deaths; six deaths remain under investigation to determine whether monkeypox was a causal or contributing factor; and in one death, monkeypox was not a cause or contributing factor.** Health care providers and public health professionals should be aware that severe morbidity and mortality associated with monkeypox have been observed during the current outbreak in the United States (6,7), particularly among highly immunocompromised persons. Providers should test all sexually active patients with suspected monkeypox for HIV at the time of monkeypox testing unless a patient is already known to have HIV infection. Providers should consider early commencement and extended duration of monkeypox-directed therapy in highly immunocompromised patients with suspected or laboratory-diagnosed monkeypox.§§ Engaging all persons with HIV in sustained care remains a critical public health priority.
Assuntos
Infecções por HIV , Mpox , Minorias Sexuais e de Gênero , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Adolescente , Adulto , Feminino , Infecções por HIV/diagnóstico , Homossexualidade Masculina , Etnicidade , Vigilância da População , Grupos Minoritários , Mpox/epidemiologiaRESUMO
Data on monkeypox in children and adolescents aged <18 years are limited (1,2). During May 17September 24, 2022, a total of 25,038 monkeypox cases were reported in the United States, primarily among adult gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (3). During this period, CDC and U.S. jurisdictional health departments identified Monkeypox virus (MPXV) infections in 83 persons aged <18 years, accounting for 0.3% of reported cases. Among 28 children aged 012 years with monkeypox, 64% were boys, and most had direct skin-to-skin contact with an adult with monkeypox who was caring for the child in a household setting. Among 55 adolescents aged 1317 years, most were male (89%), and male-to-male sexual contact was the most common presumed exposure route (66%). Most children and adolescents with monkeypox were non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) (47%) or Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) (35%). Most (89%) were not hospitalized, none received intensive care unit (ICU)level care, and none died. Monkeypox in children and adolescents remains rare in the United States. Ensuring equitable access to monkeypox vaccination, testing, and treatment is a critical public health priority. Vaccination for adolescents with risk factors and provision of prevention information for persons with monkeypox caring for children might prevent additional infections.
Assuntos
Mpox , Criança , Animais , Adolescente , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Mpox/epidemiologia , Zoonoses/epidemiologia , Surtos de DoençasRESUMO
Since May 2022, approximately 20,000 cases of monkeypox have been identified in the United States, part of a global outbreak occurring in approximately 90 countries and currently affecting primarily gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) (1). Monkeypox virus (MPXV) spreads from person to person through close, prolonged contact; a small number of cases have occurred in populations who are not MSM (e.g., women and children), and testing is recommended for persons who meet the suspected case definition* (1). CDC previously developed five real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays for detection of orthopoxviruses from lesion specimens (2,3). CDC was granted 510(k) clearance for the nonvariola-orthopoxvirus (NVO)-specific PCR assay by the Food and Drug Administration. This assay was implemented within the Laboratory Response Network (LRN) in the early 2000s and became critical for early detection of MPXV and implementation of public health action in previous travel-associated cases as well as during the current outbreak (4-7). PCR assays (NVO and other Orthopoxvirus laboratory developed tests [LDT]) represent the primary tool for monkeypox diagnosis. These tests are highly sensitive, and cross-contamination from other MPXV specimens being processed, tested, or both alongside negative specimens can occasionally lead to false-positive results. This report describes three patients who had atypical rashes and no epidemiologic link to a monkeypox case or known risk factors; these persons received diagnoses of monkeypox based on late cycle threshold (Ct) values ≥34, which were false-positive test results. The initial diagnoses were followed by administration of antiviral treatment (i.e., tecovirimat) and JYNNEOS vaccine postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) to patients' close contacts. After receiving subsequent testing, none of the three patients was confirmed to have monkeypox. Knowledge gained from these and other cases resulted in changes to CDC guidance. When testing for monkeypox in specimens from patients without an epidemiologic link or risk factors or who do not meet clinical criteria (or where these are unknown), laboratory scientists should reextract and retest specimens with late Ct values (based on this report, Ct ≥34 is recommended) (8). CDC can be consulted for complex cases including those that appear atypical or questionable cases and can perform additional viral species- and clade-specific PCR testing and antiorthopoxvirus serologic testing.
Assuntos
Doenças Transmissíveis , Mpox , Orthopoxvirus , Minorias Sexuais e de Gênero , Animais , Criança , Feminino , Homossexualidade Masculina , Humanos , Masculino , Mpox/diagnóstico , Mpox/epidemiologia , Monkeypox virus/genética , Orthopoxvirus/genética , Viagem , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
PURPOSE: Describe a dose rounding strategy for rabies immune globulin (RIG) administration. METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective, observational review of patients that received RIG following an exposure from an animal with potential to transmit rabies infection in one health-system from March 2011 through December 2021. The primary outcome was to describe the RIG dose rounding strategy and population of patients that received RIG rounded to the nearest vial size compared to those that did not. Secondary outcomes evaluated additional costs and RIG international units (IU) wasted that could have occurred (rounded group) or did occur (not rounded group), re-presentation to the ED or primary care provider (PCP) within 7 days due to RIG related complaint, and occurrence of rabies infection. Data collection included patient demographics, exposure information, and RIG dose administered. Descriptive data and univariate analyses are reported. Cost and RIG IU wasted were calculated for the dosing strategies. RESULTS: 426 patients were included; 373 (88%) had RIG rounded to the nearest vial size and 53 (12%) did not (mean age 36.1 years ±20.5, 51.6% male, most common exposures were bats [50%], type was bite [58%], and category III exposures [92%]). Those that had RIG rounded were younger and had lower total RIG doses, but similar IU/kg doses to those not rounded. A cost savings of $144,815 and prevention of 40,572 RIG IU wasted was calculated from those patients that had RIG rounded. There was no difference in the rate of re-presentation within 7 days and no cases of human rabies infection in the region during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: RIG dose rounding to the nearest vial size is associated with cost savings and prevention of wasting RIG IU. There was no association with re-presentation to the ED or PCP with RIG related issues within 7 days from administration.
Assuntos
Vacina Antirrábica , Raiva , Adulto , Animais , Redução de Custos , Feminino , Humanos , Imunoglobulinas , Fatores Imunológicos , Masculino , Raiva/prevenção & controle , Estudos Retrospectivos , UniversidadesAssuntos
SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Humanos , Vigilância da População , Adulto , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Idoso , Filogenia , AdolescenteAssuntos
Doenças Transmissíveis Importadas , Mpox , Humanos , Maryland/epidemiologia , Mpox/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of toxic alcohol poisoning is often based on clinical presentation and nonspecific surrogate laboratory studies due to limited testing availability. Fomepizole is the recommended antidote and often administered empirically. The objective of this study is to identify substances that mimic toxic alcohols and compare key clinical factors between toxic alcohol and non-toxic alcohol exposures when fomepizole was administered. METHODS: This study was a retrospective evaluation using the National Poison Data System from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2021. Exposures were included if fomepizole was administered. Toxic alcohol exposures had ethylene glycol or methanol as a coded substance. For exposures not coded as a toxic alcohol, the first substance was described. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) exposures from 2020 and 2021 were excluded. RESULTS: Fomepizole was reportedly used 25,110 times over 12 years. Use increased from 1,955 in 2010 to 2,710 in 2021. Most administrations were for reported toxic alcohol poisoning (60 percent) but use in reported non-toxic alcohol poisoning was greater starting in 2020. Toxic alcohol exposures were older (43.3 versus 39.8 years; P < 0.001) and more likely male (65.7 percent versus 58.2 percent). Level of care was mostly a critical care unit (67.7 percent), which was less common in toxic alcohol (63.3 percent) than non-toxic alcohol exposures (74.2 percent). The most common non-toxic alcohol substances were ethanol (24.9 percent) or an unknown drug (17.5 percent). Acidosis, increased creatinine concentration, anion gap, and osmolal gap, and kidney failure were coded in a lower proportion of toxic alcohol exposures than non-toxic alcohol exposures (P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: The inability to provide rapid clinical confirmation of toxic alcohol poisoning results in the empiric administration of fomepizole to many patients who will ultimately have other diagnoses. Although fomepizole is relative well tolerated we estimated that this practice costs between $1.5 to $2.5 million. The major limitations of this work include the biases associated with retrospective record review, and the inability to confirm the exposures which may have resulted in allocation error. CONCLUSION: Most fomepizole use was for a presumed toxic alcohol. This recently shifted to greater use in likely non-toxic alcohol poisoning. Key difference between the groups suggest fomepizole administration was likely due to the difficulty in diagnosis of toxic alcohol poisoning along with the efficacy and safety of fomepizole. Increased toxic alcohol laboratory testing availability could improve timely diagnosis, reserving fomepizole use for toxic alcohol poisoning.
Assuntos
Intoxicação , Venenos , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Fomepizol/uso terapêutico , Venenos/uso terapêutico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Pirazóis/uso terapêutico , Pirazóis/toxicidade , Antídotos/uso terapêutico , Etanol , Metanol , Etilenoglicol , Diálise Renal/métodos , Intoxicação/diagnóstico , Intoxicação/epidemiologia , Intoxicação/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
Historical targets for country-level animal rabies testing volumes were abandoned due to ethical and welfare concerns, and interpretation challenges of testing healthy animals. To-date, no quantitative threshold has been established for evaluating adequate surveillance capacity specific to suspected rabid animals. The purpose here is to establish quantitative testing thresholds for rabies suspected animals to assess a country's rabies surveillance capacity. Animal rabies testing data was obtained from official and unofficial rabies surveillance platforms from 2010 to 2019 and supplemented with official country reports and published literature. Testing rates were determined for all-animal and domestic animals, and standardized per 100,000 estimated human population; the domestic animal rate was also standardized per 100,000 estimated dog population. There were 113 countries that reported surveillance data eligible for analysis. Countries reporting the most data were under WHO categories as having endemic human rabies or no dog rabies. The annual median all-animal testing rate for all countries was 1.53 animals/100,000 human population (IQR 0.27-8.78). Three proposed testing rate thresholds are an all-animal rate of 1.9 animals/100,000 humans, a domestic animal per human rate of 0.8 animals/100,000 humans, and a domestic animal per dog rate of 6.6 animals/100,000 dogs. These three peer-derived rabies testing thresholds for passive surveillance can be used to facilitate assessment of a country's rabies surveillance capacity.
Assuntos
Doenças do Cão , Vacina Antirrábica , Raiva , Animais , Humanos , Cães , Raiva/diagnóstico , Raiva/epidemiologia , Raiva/veterinária , Vigilância da População , Animais Domésticos , Grupo Associado , Projetos de Pesquisa , Doenças do Cão/diagnóstico , Doenças do Cão/epidemiologiaRESUMO
The relative contribution of the respiratory route to transmission of mpox (formerly known as monkeypox) is unclear. We review the evidence for respiratory transmission of monkeypox virus (MPXV), examining key works from animal models, human outbreaks and case reports, and environmental studies. Laboratory experiments have initiated MPXV infection in animals via respiratory routes. Some animal-to-animal respiratory transmission has been shown in controlled studies, and environmental sampling studies have detected airborne MPXV. Reports from real-life outbreaks demonstrate that transmission is associated with close contact, and although it is difficult to infer the route of MPXV acquisition in individual case reports, so far respiratory transmission has not been specifically implicated. Based on the available evidence, the likelihood of human-to-human MPXV respiratory transmission appears to be low; however, studies should continue to assess this possibility.
Assuntos
Mpox , Animais , Humanos , Mpox/epidemiologia , Monkeypox virus , Modelos Animais , ProbabilidadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Limited data describe poisoning exposures in pregnant women. Previous studies are limited to inpatient populations, those seen only by toxicologists, or single poison centers. This study aimed to describe poison exposures reported to U.S. poison control centers in pregnant patients compared to non-pregnant controls. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of exposures reported to the American Association of Poison Control Centers National Poison Data System from 2000 through 2019. Pregnant patients were included from 15-44 years along with a random sampling of 5:1 age and year matched control group of non-pregnant exposures. Demographics, primary substance, and known medical outcomes were described. Chi square analysis was performed for comparisons. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2019, a total of 131,619 pregnant cases and 658,095 non-pregnant controls were identified. The median age was 27 years (IQR: 22, 31) for the matched groups. For known trimester of pregnancy: 29.8, 37.0, and 28.2% were in the first, second, and third trimester, respectively. Most common exposures were analgesics and cleaning products. Intentional exposures were more common in non-pregnant compared to pregnant cases (41.2 vs 21.9%; OR 2.71, 95% CI 2.67-2.75), mostly self-harm attempts (31.5 vs. 15.8%). Notably, there was a large discrepancy in the proportion of environmental exposures, with fewer in non-pregnant controls compared with pregnant cases (3.8 vs. 12.1%; OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.28-0.29). More non-pregnant cases had multiple substance exposures compared with pregnant cases (22.2 vs. 10.9%; OR 2.34, 95% CI 2.29-2.38). There were more moderate effect outcomes in non-pregnant compared with pregnant cases (13.2 vs. 6.3%; OR 2.25, 95% CI 2.20-2.30). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes of poisoning exposures in pregnant patients reported to U.S. poison centers are less serious compared to non-pregnant controls, likely due to the lower rates of intentional abuse and self-harm exposures and greater number of minimally toxic environmental exposures.
Assuntos
Intoxicação , Venenos , Adulto , Bases de Dados Factuais , Exposição Ambiental , Feminino , Humanos , Centros de Controle de Intoxicações , Intoxicação/epidemiologia , Intoxicação/etiologia , Gravidez , Trimestres da Gravidez , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This is a descriptive study evaluating fatal iatrogenic and in-hospital medication errors reported to United States poison centers. METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of the National Poison Data System from 2000-2017 of all therapeutic errors with a scenario coded as iatrogenic/healthcare professional or occurring in a healthcare facility. Death abstracts were reviewed for details of the exposure and therapeutic error scenarios were recoded or added to the case as appropriate. Cases, where death was considered not related to the exposure, were excluded. Additionally, we created one additional scenario (rate-related) and one additional route of administration (intrathecal) to better describe the cases. RESULTS: A total of 172 cases were evaluated. The majority of the patients were female (52.3%) with a median age of 58.5 years (range: 2 days to 96 years). The most commonly reported medication error was "other incorrect dose" (22.7%) followed by other/unknown error (15.1%). The route of exposure was primarily parenteral (54.9%), followed by ingestion (30.2%), then intrathecal (7.0%). The most common medications were cardiac drugs, chemotherapeutics, opioids, anticoagulants, and sedative-hypnotic/antipsychotics. CONCLUSIONS: Iatrogenic and in-hospital medication errors have been studied extensively with goals to reduce their occurrence. Specific controls to prevent incorrect dosing routes, 10-fold overdoses, and incorrect intrathecal administration have been instituted. Despite interventions, all three of these therapeutic errors continued to occur in 2017, suggesting that more preventive controls should be instituted.