RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Influenza circulation during the 2022-2023 season in the United States largely returned to pre-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-pandemic patterns and levels. Influenza A(H3N2) viruses were detected most frequently this season, predominately clade 3C.2a1b.2a, a close antigenic match to the vaccine strain. METHODS: To understand effectiveness of the 2022-2023 influenza vaccine against influenza-associated hospitalization, organ failure, and death, a multicenter sentinel surveillance network in the United States prospectively enrolled adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illness between 1 October 2022, and 28 February 2023. Using the test-negative design, vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates against influenza-associated hospitalization, organ failures, and death were measured by comparing the odds of current-season influenza vaccination in influenza-positive case-patients and influenza-negative, SARS-CoV-2-negative control-patients. RESULTS: A total of 3707 patients, including 714 influenza cases (33% vaccinated) and 2993 influenza- and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-negative controls (49% vaccinated) were analyzed. VE against influenza-associated hospitalization was 37% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 27%-46%) and varied by age (18-64 years: 47% [30%-60%]; ≥65 years: 28% [10%-43%]), and virus (A[H3N2]: 29% [6%-46%], A[H1N1]: 47% [23%-64%]). VE against more severe influenza-associated outcomes included: 41% (29%-50%) against influenza with hypoxemia treated with supplemental oxygen; 65% (56%-72%) against influenza with respiratory, cardiovascular, or renal failure treated with organ support; and 66% (40%-81%) against influenza with respiratory failure treated with invasive mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: During an early 2022-2023 influenza season with a well-matched influenza vaccine, vaccination was associated with reduced risk of influenza-associated hospitalization and organ failure.
Asunto(s)
Subtipo H1N1 del Virus de la Influenza A , Virus de la Influenza A , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adolescente , Adulto Joven , Persona de Mediana Edad , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Subtipo H3N2 del Virus de la Influenza A , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Virus de la Influenza B , Hospitalización , Vacunación , Estaciones del AñoRESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The prioritization of U.S. health care personnel for early receipt of messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), allowed for the evaluation of the effectiveness of these new vaccines in a real-world setting. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative case-control study involving health care personnel across 25 U.S. states. Cases were defined on the basis of a positive polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) or antigen-based test for SARS-CoV-2 and at least one Covid-19-like symptom. Controls were defined on the basis of a negative PCR test for SARS-CoV-2, regardless of symptoms, and were matched to cases according to the week of the test date and site. Using conditional logistic regression with adjustment for age, race and ethnic group, underlying conditions, and exposures to persons with Covid-19, we estimated vaccine effectiveness for partial vaccination (assessed 14 days after receipt of the first dose through 6 days after receipt of the second dose) and complete vaccination (assessed ≥7 days after receipt of the second dose). RESULTS: The study included 1482 case participants and 3449 control participants. Vaccine effectiveness for partial vaccination was 77.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70.9 to 82.7) with the BNT162b2 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) and 88.9% (95% CI, 78.7 to 94.2) with the mRNA-1273 vaccine (Moderna); for complete vaccination, vaccine effectiveness was 88.8% (95% CI, 84.6 to 91.8) and 96.3% (95% CI, 91.3 to 98.4), respectively. Vaccine effectiveness was similar in subgroups defined according to age (<50 years or ≥50 years), race and ethnic group, presence of underlying conditions, and level of patient contact. Estimates of vaccine effectiveness were lower during weeks 9 through 14 than during weeks 3 through 8 after receipt of the second dose, but confidence intervals overlapped widely. CONCLUSIONS: The BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines were highly effective under real-world conditions in preventing symptomatic Covid-19 in health care personnel, including those at risk for severe Covid-19 and those in racial and ethnic groups that have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).
Asunto(s)
Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273 , Vacuna BNT162 , COVID-19/prevención & control , Personal de Salud , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273/administración & dosificación , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Vacuna BNT162/administración & dosificación , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/etnología , Prueba Serológica para COVID-19 , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Humanos , Inmunización Secundaria , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Reacción en Cadena de la Polimerasa , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
In September 2023, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended updated 2023-2024 (monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 vaccination for all persons aged ≥6 months to prevent COVID-19, including severe disease. However, few estimates of updated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended illness are available. This analysis evaluated VE of an updated COVID-19 vaccine dose against COVID-19-associated emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) encounters and hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years during September 2023-January 2024 using a test-negative, case-control design with data from two CDC VE networks. VE against COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters was 51% (95% CI = 47%-54%) during the first 7-59 days after an updated dose and 39% (95% CI = 33%-45%) during the 60-119 days after an updated dose. VE estimates against COVID-19-associated hospitalization from two CDC VE networks were 52% (95% CI = 47%-57%) and 43% (95% CI = 27%-56%), with a median interval from updated dose of 42 and 47 days, respectively. Updated COVID-19 vaccine provided increased protection against COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters and hospitalization among immunocompetent adults. These results support CDC recommendations for updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination. All persons aged ≥6 months should receive updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccine.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Adolescente , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Comités Consultivos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , HospitalizaciónRESUMEN
STUDY OBJECTIVE: In the early months of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and before vaccine availability, there were concerns that infected emergency department (ED) health care personnel could present a threat to the delivery of emergency medical care. We examined how the pandemic affected staffing levels and whether COVID-19 positive staff were potentially infectious at work in a cohort of US ED health care personnel in 2020. METHODS: The COVID-19 Evaluation of Risks in Emergency Departments (Project COVERED) project was a multicenter prospective cohort study of US ED health care personnel conducted from May to December 2020. During surveillance, health care personnel completed weekly electronic surveys and underwent periodic serology and nasal reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing for SARS-CoV-2, and investigators captured weekly data on health care facility COVID-19 prevalence and health care personnel staffing. Surveys asked about symptoms, potential exposures, work attendance, personal protective equipment use, and behaviors. RESULTS: We enrolled 1,673 health care personnel who completed 29,825 person weeks of surveillance. Eighty-nine (5.3%) health care personnel documented 90 (0.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2% to 0.4%) person weeks of missed work related to documented or concerns for COVID-19 infection. Health care personnel experienced symptoms of COVID-19 during 1,256 (4.2%) person weeks and worked at least one shift whereas symptomatic during 1,042 (83.0%) of these periods. Seventy-five (4.5%) participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the surveillance period, including 43 (57.3%) who indicated they never experienced symptoms; 74 (98.7%; 95% CI 90.7% to 99.9%) infected health care personnel worked at least one shift during the initial period of infection, and 71 (94.7%) continued working until laboratory confirmation of their infection. Physician staffing was not associated with the facility or community COVID-19 levels within any time frame studied (Kendall tau's 0.02, 0.056, and 0.081 for no shift, one-week time shift, and 2-week time shift, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: During the first wave of the pandemic, COVID-19 infections in ED health care personnel were infrequent, and the time lost from the workforce was minimal. Health care personnel frequently reported for work while infected with SARS-CoV-2 before laboratory confirmation. The ED staffing levels were poorly correlated with facility and community COVID-19 burden.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Personal de Salud , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Estudios Prospectivos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Masculino , Adulto , Personal de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Equipo de Protección Personal/provisión & distribución , Equipo de Protección Personal/estadística & datos numéricos , Pandemias , Transmisión de Enfermedad Infecciosa de Paciente a Profesional/prevención & controlRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Emergency medical services (EMS) clinicians experience dissatisfaction with the quality and quantity of clinical feedback from hospitals. Satisfaction is further diminished by the lack of a standardized systems approach. The purpose of this study was to identify rural clinicians' perceptions and preferences regarding clinical feedback received from hospitals, the delivery mechanisms, and its impact on their relationships with health care organizations. METHODS: This was a qualitative study focused on EMS clinicians involved in rural prehospital care at a single Midwestern academic medical center. Using a phenomenological framework, semi-structured interviews were conducted with medical directors, service directors, fire captains, air medical personnel, emergency medical responders, emergency medical technicians, advanced emergency medical technicians, and paramedics, all of whom were selected through purposive sampling. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and independently coded by two trained reviewers. RESULTS: Twenty participants (11 frontline clinicians and 9 administrative staff members) with a wide range of clinical experience from 14 air and ground EMS agencies were interviewed. Emerging themes included: (1) the value or usefulness of feedback; (2) desired feedback system characteristics; (3) barriers to receiving feedback; (4) utilization and application of feedback; and (5) the feedback's impact on the relationship with health care organizations. Participants felt that clinical feedback from hospitals was especially important as a method of improving quality of care, though was rarely provided. Professional development was seen as a major benefit of receiving clinical feedback from hospitals. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that consistent clinical feedback provided by hospitals was valued. Establishing a culture of providing organized feedback to practicing rural EMS clinicians is important for professional development and can strengthen the relationships between EMS clinicians and hospitals. These study findings can assist in the development and implementation of a standardized feedback instrument to benefit rural EMS clinicians, patients, and the health care system as a whole.
Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Entrevistas como Asunto , Evaluación de Necesidades , Investigación Cualitativa , Humanos , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia/normas , Femenino , Masculino , Servicios de Salud Rural/normas , Servicios de Salud Rural/organización & administración , RetroalimentaciónRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: There are over 300,000 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) annually in the United States (US) and despite many scientific advances in the field, the survival rate remains low. We seek to determine if return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) is higher when use of emergency medical dispatch (EMD) protocols is documented for OHCA calls compared to when no EMD protocol use is documented. We also seek identify care-related processes that differ in calls that use EMD protocols. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of U.S. adults with OHCA prior to emergency medical services (EMS) arrival using 2019 National EMS Information System data. The primary exposure was EMD usage during EMS call. The primary outcome was prehospital ROSC, and secondary outcomes included automated external defibrillator (AED) use before EMS arrival, bystander CPR, and end-of-event EMS survival (survival to the end of the EMS care at transport destination). Multivariable logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, primary insurance, rurality, initial rhythm, arrest etiology, and witnessed arrest. RESULTS: Of the 96,269 OHCA cases included, EMD use was documented in 73%. Overall, 26% of subjects achieved ROSC in EMS care. EMD subjects were more likely to achieve ROSC (27.2% vs. 23.5%, uOR 1.22, 95%CI 1.18 - 1.26) even after adjusting for subject and arrest characteristics (aOR 1.13, 95%CI 1.08 - 1.17). EMD subjects also had higher end-of-event survival (19.1% vs. 16.4%, aOR 1.20, 95%CI 1.15 - 1.25). AED use before EMS arrival was more common in the EMD group (28.3% vs. 26.3% %diff 2.0, 95%CI 1.4 to 2.6), as was CPR before EMS arrival (63.8% vs. 55.1%, difference 8.6%, 95%CI 7.9 to 9.3%). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective analysis, the rate of ROSC was higher in adult OHCA patients when EMD protocol use was reported compared to when it was not reported. The group with documented EMD use also experienced higher rates of bystander AED use, bystander CPR, and end-of-event survival.
Asunto(s)
Reanimación Cardiopulmonar , Asesoramiento de Urgencias Médicas , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario , Adulto , Humanos , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia/métodos , Reanimación Cardiopulmonar/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/terapiaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: There is currently conflicting data as to the effects of hypercapnia on clinical outcomes among mechanically ventilated patients in the emergency department (ED). These conflicting results may be explained by the degree of acidosis. We sought to test the hypothesis that hypercapnia is associated with increased in-hospital mortality and decreased ventilator-free days at lower pH, but associated with decreased in-hospital mortality and increased ventilator-free days at higher pH, among patients requiring mechanical ventilation in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: Secondary analysis of patient level data from prior clinical trials and cohort studies that enrolled adult patients who required mechanical ventilation in the ED. Patients who had a documented blood gas while on mechanical ventilation in the ED were included in these analyses. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and secondary outcome was ventilator-free days. Mixed-effects logistic, linear, and survival-time regression models were used to test if pH modified the association between partial pressure of carbon dioxide (pCO2) and outcome measures. RESULTS: Of the 2348 subjects included, the median [interquartile range (IQR)] pCO2 was 43 (35-54) and pH was 7.31 (7.22-7.39). Overall, in-hospital mortality was 27%. We found pH modified the association between pCO2 and outcomes, with higher pCO2 associated with increased probability of in-hospital mortality when pH is below 7.00, and decreased probability of in-hospital mortality when pH is above 7.10. These results remained consistent across multiple sensitivity and subgroup analyses. A similar relationship was found with ventilator-free days. CONCLUSIONS: Higher pCO2 is associated with decreased mortality and greater ventilator-free days when pH is >7.10; however, it is associated with increased mortality and fewer ventilator-free days when the pH is below 7.00. Targeting pCO2 based on pH in the ED may be a potential intervention target for future clinical trials to improve clinical outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Dióxido de Carbono , Respiración Artificial , Adulto , Humanos , Respiración Artificial/métodos , Hipercapnia/etiología , Presión Parcial , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Concentración de Iones de HidrógenoRESUMEN
Background: Chronic health diseases such as congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and diabetes mellitus (DM) affect 6 in 10 Americans and contribute to 90% of the $4.1 trillion health care expenditures. The objective of this study was to measure the effect of clinical video telehealth (CVT) on health care utilization and mortality. A retrospective cohort study of Veterans ≥65 years with CHF, COPD, or DM was conducted. Measures: Veterans using CVT were matched 1:3 on demographic characteristics to Veterans who did not use CVT. Outcomes included 1-year incidence of ED visits, inpatient admissions, and mortality, reported as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Final analytical cohorts included 22,280 Veterans with CHF, 51,872 Veterans with COPD, and 170,605 Veterans with DM. CVT utilization was associated with increased ED visits for CHF (aOR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.15-1.34), COPD (aOR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.14-1.26), and DM (aOR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.00-1.10). For CHF, there was no difference between CVT utilization and inpatient admissions (aOR: 0.98; 95% CI 0.91-1.05) or mortality (aOR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.93-1.15). For COPD, CVT was associated with increased inpatient admissions (aOR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.02-1.13) and mortality (aOR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.25-1.48). For DM, CVT utilization was associated with lower risk of inpatient admissions (aOR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.80-0.86) and mortality (aOR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.84-0.95). Conclusions: CVT use as an alternative care site might serve as an early warning system, such that this mechanism may indicate when an in-person assessment is needed for potential exacerbation of conditions. Although inpatient and mortality varied, ED utilization was higher with CVT. Exploring pathways accessing clinical care through CVT, and how CVT is directly or indirectly associated with immediate and long-term clinical outcomes would be valuable.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica , Telemedicina , United States Department of Veterans Affairs , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Estados Unidos , Telemedicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Enfermedad Crónica/terapia , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/terapia , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/mortalidad , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/mortalidad , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Diabetes Mellitus/terapia , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Veteranos/estadística & datos numéricos , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
Background: As a result of the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE), telehealth utilization accelerated to facilitate health care management and minimize risk. However, those with mental health conditions and substance use disorders (SUD)-who represent a vulnerable population, and members of underrepresented minorities (e.g., rural, racial/ethnic minorities, the elderly)-may not benefit from telehealth equally. Objective: To evaluate health equality in clinical effectiveness and utilization measures associated with telehealth for clinical management of mental health disorders and SUD to identify emerging patterns for underrepresented groups stratified by race/ethnicity, gender, age, rural status, insurance, sexual minorities, and social vulnerability. Methods: We performed a systematic review in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL through November 2022. Studies included those with telehealth, COVID-19, health equity, and mental health or SUD treatment/care concepts. Our outcomes included general clinical measures, mental health or SUD clinical measures, and operational measures. Results: Of the 2,740 studies screened, 25 met eligibility criteria. The majority of studies (n = 20) evaluated telehealth for mental health conditions, while the remaining five studies evaluated telehealth for opioid use disorder/dependence. The most common study outcomes were utilization measures (n = 19) or demographic predictors of telehealth utilization (n = 3). Groups that consistently demonstrated less telehealth utilization during the PHE included rural residents, older populations, and Black/African American minorities. Conclusions: We observed evidence of inequities in telehealth utilization among several underrepresented groups. Future efforts should focus on measuring the contribution of utilization disparities on outcomes and strategies to mitigate disparities in implementation.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Equidad en Salud , Trastornos Mentales , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Telemedicina , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Telemedicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/terapia , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/epidemiología , Trastornos Mentales/terapia , Trastornos Mentales/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemias , Salud Mental , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) genomic and subgenomic RNA levels are frequently used as a correlate of infectiousness. The impact of host factors and SARS-CoV-2 lineage on RNA viral load is unclear. METHODS: Total nucleocapsid (N) and subgenomic N (sgN) RNA levels were measured by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) in specimens from 3204 individuals hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at 21 hospitals. RT-qPCR cycle threshold (Ct) values were used to estimate RNA viral load. The impact of time of sampling, SARS-CoV-2 variant, age, comorbidities, vaccination, and immune status on N and sgN Ct values were evaluated using multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Mean Ct values at presentation for N were 24.14 (SD 4.53) for non-variants of concern, 25.15 (SD 4.33) for Alpha, 25.31 (SD 4.50) for Delta, and 26.26 (SD 4.42) for Omicron. N and sgN RNA levels varied with time since symptom onset and infecting variant but not with age, comorbidity, immune status, or vaccination. When normalized to total N RNA, sgN levels were similar across all variants. CONCLUSIONS: RNA viral loads were similar among hospitalized adults, irrespective of infecting variant and known risk factors for severe COVID-19. Total N and subgenomic RNA N viral loads were highly correlated, suggesting that subgenomic RNA measurements add little information for the purposes of estimating infectivity.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adulto , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2/genética , ARN Subgenómico , Carga Viral , ARN , ARN Viral/genéticaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with historically low influenza circulation during the 2020-2021 season, followed by an increase in influenza circulation during the 2021-2022 US season. The 2a.2 subgroup of the influenza A(H3N2) 3C.2a1b subclade that predominated was antigenically different from the vaccine strain. METHODS: To understand the effectiveness of the 2021-2022 vaccine against hospitalized influenza illness, a multistate sentinel surveillance network enrolled adults aged ≥18 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness and tested for influenza by a molecular assay. Using the test-negative design, vaccine effectiveness (VE) was measured by comparing the odds of current-season influenza vaccination in influenza-positive case-patients and influenza-negative, SARS-CoV-2-negative controls, adjusting for confounders. A separate analysis was performed to illustrate bias introduced by including SARS-CoV-2-positive controls. RESULTS: A total of 2334 patients, including 295 influenza cases (47% vaccinated), 1175 influenza- and SARS-CoV-2-negative controls (53% vaccinated), and 864 influenza-negative and SARS-CoV-2-positive controls (49% vaccinated), were analyzed. Influenza VE was 26% (95% CI: -14% to 52%) among adults aged 18-64 years, -3% (-54% to 31%) among adults aged ≥65 years, and 50% (15-71%) among adults aged 18-64 years without immunocompromising conditions. Estimated VE decreased with inclusion of SARS-CoV-2-positive controls. CONCLUSIONS: During a season where influenza A(H3N2) was antigenically different from the vaccine virus, vaccination was associated with a reduced risk of influenza hospitalization in younger immunocompetent adults. However, vaccination did not provide protection in adults ≥65 years of age. Improvements in vaccines, antivirals, and prevention strategies are warranted.
Asunto(s)
Subtipo H3N2 del Virus de la Influenza A , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Humanos , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Gripe Humana/virología , Estaciones del Año , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto Joven , Persona de Mediana Edad , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificaciónRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Understanding the changing epidemiology of adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) informs research priorities and public health policies. METHODS: Among adults (≥18 years) hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed, acute COVID-19 between 11 March 2021, and 31 August 2022 at 21 hospitals in 18 states, those hospitalized during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron-predominant period (BA.1, BA.2, BA.4/BA.5) were compared to those from earlier Alpha- and Delta-predominant periods. Demographic characteristics, biomarkers within 24 hours of admission, and outcomes, including oxygen support and death, were assessed. RESULTS: Among 9825 patients, median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 60 years (47-72), 47% were women, and 21% non-Hispanic Black. From the Alpha-predominant period (Mar-Jul 2021; N = 1312) to the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineage-predominant period (Jun-Aug 2022; N = 1307): the percentage of patients who had ≥4 categories of underlying medical conditions increased from 11% to 21%; those vaccinated with at least a primary COVID-19 vaccine series increased from 7% to 67%; those ≥75 years old increased from 11% to 33%; those who did not receive any supplemental oxygen increased from 18% to 42%. Median (IQR) highest C-reactive protein and D-dimer concentration decreased from 42.0 mg/L (9.9-122.0) to 11.5 mg/L (2.7-42.8) and 3.1 mcg/mL (0.8-640.0) to 1.0 mcg/mL (0.5-2.2), respectively. In-hospital death peaked at 12% in the Delta-predominant period and declined to 4% during the BA.4/BA.5-predominant period. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to adults hospitalized during early COVID-19 variant periods, those hospitalized during Omicron-variant COVID-19 were older, had multiple co-morbidities, were more likely to be vaccinated, and less likely to experience severe respiratory disease, systemic inflammation, coagulopathy, and death.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Adulto , Femenino , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Masculino , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , OxígenoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines were authorized in the United States in December 2020. Although vaccine effectiveness (VE) against mild infection declines markedly after several months, limited understanding exists on the long-term durability of protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization. METHODS: Case-control analysis of adults (≥18 years) hospitalized at 21 hospitals in 18 states 11 March-15 December 2021, including COVID-19 case patients and reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-negative controls. We included adults who were unvaccinated or vaccinated with 2 doses of a mRNA vaccine before the date of illness onset. VE over time was assessed using logistic regression comparing odds of vaccination in cases versus controls, adjusting for confounders. Models included dichotomous time (<180 vs ≥180 days since dose 2) and continuous time modeled using restricted cubic splines. RESULTS: A total of 10 078 patients were included, 4906 cases (23% vaccinated) and 5172 controls (62% vaccinated). Median age was 60 years (interquartile range, 46-70), 56% were non-Hispanic White, and 81% had ≥1 medical condition. Among immunocompetent adults, VE <180 days was 90% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88-91) versus 82% (95% CI, 79-85) at ≥180 days (P < .001). VE declined for Pfizer-BioNTech (88% to 79%, P < .001) and Moderna (93% to 87%, P < .001) products, for younger adults (18-64 years) (91% to 87%, P = .005), and for adults ≥65 years of age (87% to 78%, P < .001). In models using restricted cubic splines, similar changes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In a period largely predating Omicron variant circulation, effectiveness of 2 mRNA doses against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was largely sustained through 9 months.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Hospitalización , Vacunas de ARNm , ARN Mensajero , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , AncianoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Regionalized sepsis care could improve sepsis outcomes by facilitating the interhospital transfer of patients to higher-capability hospitals. There are no measures of sepsis capability to guide the identification of such hospitals, although hospital case volume of sepsis has been used as a proxy. We evaluated the performance of a novel hospital sepsis-related capability (SRC) index as compared with sepsis case volume. DESIGN: Principal component analysis (PCA) and retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A total of 182 New York (derivation) and 274 Florida and Massachusetts (validation) nonfederal hospitals, 2018. PATIENTS: A total of 89,069 and 139,977 adult patients (≥ 18 yr) with sepsis were directly admitted into the derivation and validation cohort hospitals, respectively. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We derived SRC scores by PCA of six hospital resource use characteristics (bed capacity, annual volumes of sepsis, major diagnostic procedures, renal replacement therapy, mechanical ventilation, and major therapeutic procedures) and classified hospitals into capability score tertiles: high, intermediate, and low. High-capability hospitals were mostly urban teaching hospitals. Compared with sepsis volume, the SRC score explained more variation in hospital-level sepsis mortality in the derivation (unadjusted coefficient of determination [ R2 ]: 0.25 vs 0.12, p < 0.001 for both) and validation (0.18 vs 0.05, p < 0.001 for both) cohorts; and demonstrated stronger correlation with outward transfer rates for sepsis in the derivation (Spearman coefficient [ r ]: 0.60 vs 0.50) and validation (0.51 vs 0.45) cohorts. Compared with low-capability hospitals, patients with sepsis directly admitted into high-capability hospitals had a greater number of acute organ dysfunctions, a higher proportion of surgical hospitalizations, and higher adjusted mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.55; 95% CI, 1.25-1.92). In stratified analysis, worse mortality associated with higher hospital capability was only evident among patients with three or more organ dysfunctions (OR, 1.88 [1.50-2.34]). CONCLUSIONS: The SRC score has face validity for capability-based groupings of hospitals. Sepsis care may already be de facto regionalized at high-capability hospitals. Low-capability hospitals may have become more adept at treating less complicated sepsis.
Asunto(s)
Sepsis , Adulto , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sepsis/terapia , Hospitalización , Hospitales de Enseñanza , Mortalidad HospitalariaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Mechanically ventilated emergency department (ED) patients experience high morbidity and mortality. In a prior trial at our center, ED-based lung-protective ventilation was associated with improved care delivery and outcomes. Whether this strategy has persisted in the years after the trial remains unclear. The objective was to assess practice change and clinical outcomes associated with ED lung-protective ventilation. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of individual patient-level data from prior clinical trials and cohort studies. SETTING: ED and ICUs of a single academic center. PATIENTS: Mechanically ventilated adults. INTERVENTIONS: A lung-protective ventilator protocol used as the default approach in the ED. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary ventilator-related outcome was tidal volume, and the primary clinical outcome was hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included ventilator-, hospital-, and ICU-free days. Multivariable logistic regression, propensity score (PS)-adjustment, and multiple a priori subgroup analyses were used to evaluate outcome as a function of the intervention. A total of 1,796 patients in the preintervention period and 1,403 patients in the intervention period were included. In the intervention period, tidal volume was reduced from 8.2 mL/kg predicted body weight (PBW) (7.3-9.1) to 6.5 mL/kg PBW (6.1-7.1), and low tidal volume ventilation increased from 46.8% to 96.2% ( p < 0.01). The intervention period was associated with lower mortality (35.9% vs 19.1%), remaining significant after multivariable logistic regression analysis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.43; 95% CI, 0.35-0.53; p < 0.01). Similar results were seen after PS adjustment and in subgroups. The intervention group had more ventilator- (18.8 [10.1] vs 14.1 [11.9]; p < 0.01), hospital- (12.2 [9.6] vs 9.4 [9.5]; p < 0.01), and ICU-free days (16.6 [10.1] vs 13.1 [11.1]; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: ED lung-protective ventilation has persisted in the years since implementation and was associated with improved outcomes. These data suggest the use of ED-based lung-protective ventilation as a means to improve outcome.
Asunto(s)
Respiración Artificial , Lesión Pulmonar Inducida por Ventilación Mecánica , Adulto , Humanos , Estudios de Cohortes , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Respiración Artificial/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Lesión Pulmonar Inducida por Ventilación Mecánica/prevención & controlRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The high prevalence of chronic diseases, including congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and diabetes mellitus (DM), accounts for a large burden of cost and poor health outcomes in US hospitals, and home telehealth (HT) monitoring has been proposed to improve outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To measure the association between HT initiation and 12-month inpatient hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and mortality in veterans with CHF, COPD, or DM. DESIGN: Comparative effectiveness matched cohort study. PATIENTS: Veterans aged 65 years and older treated for CHF, COPD, or DM. MAIN MEASURES: We matched veterans initiating HT with veterans with similar demographics who did not use HT (1:3). Our outcome measures included a 12-month risk of inpatient hospitalization, ED visits, and all-cause mortality. KEY RESULTS: A total of 139,790 veterans with CHF, 65,966 with COPD, and 192,633 with DM were included in this study. In the year after HT initiation, the risk of hospitalization was not different in those with CHF (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.98-1.05) or DM (aOR 1.00, 95%CI 0.97-1.03), but it was higher in those with COPD (aOR 1.15, 95%CI 1.09-1.21). The risk of ED visits was higher among HT users with CHF (aOR 1.09, 95%CI 1.05-1.13), COPD (1.24, 95%CI 1.18-1.31), and DM (aOR 1.03, 95%CI 1.00-1.06). All-cause 12-month mortality was lower in those initiating HT monitoring with CHF (aOR 0.70, 95%CI 0.67-0.73) and DM (aOR 0.79, 95%CI 0.75-0.83), but higher in COPD (aOR 1.08, 95%CI 1.00-1.16). CONCLUSIONS: The initiation of HT was associated with increased ED visits, no change in hospitalizations, and lower all-cause mortality in patients with CHF or DM, while those with COPD had both higher healthcare utilization and all-cause mortality.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica , Telemedicina , Humanos , Estudios de Cohortes , Salud de los Veteranos , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/epidemiología , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/terapia , Enfermedad Crónica , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Hospitalización , Aceptación de la Atención de SaludRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Gripe Humana , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio , Virus Sincitial Respiratorio Humano , Humanos , Anciano , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/terapia , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/terapia , SARS-CoV-2 , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/epidemiología , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/terapia , Hospitalización , Gravedad del Paciente , OxígenoRESUMEN
As of April 2023, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in 1.1 million deaths in the United States, with approximately 75% of deaths occurring among adults aged ≥65 years (1). Data on the durability of protection provided by monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination against critical outcomes of COVID-19 are limited beyond the Omicron BA.1 lineage period (December 26, 2021-March 26, 2022). In this case-control analysis, the effectiveness of 2-4 monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses was evaluated against COVID-19-associated invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and in-hospital death among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years during February 1, 2022-January 31, 2023. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against IMV and in-hospital death was 62% among adults aged ≥18 years and 69% among those aged ≥65 years. When stratified by time since last dose, VE was 76% at 7-179 days, 54% at 180-364 days, and 56% at ≥365 days. Monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination provided substantial, durable protection against IMV and in-hospital death among adults during the Omicron variant period. All adults should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccination to prevent critical COVID-19-associated outcomes.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Adulto , Adolescente , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Pandemias , Respiración Artificial , SARS-CoV-2 , ARN MensajeroRESUMEN
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To describe endotracheal intubation practices in emergency departments by staff intubating patients early in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: Multicenter prospective cohort study of endotracheal intubations conducted at 20 US academic emergency departments from May to December 2020, stratified by known or suspected COVID-19 status. We used multivariable regression to measure the association between intubation strategy, COVID-19 known or suspected status, first-pass success, and adverse events. RESULTS: There were 3,435 unique emergency department endotracheal intubations by 586 participating physicians or advanced practice providers; 565 (18%) patients were known or suspected of having COVID-19 at the time of endotracheal intubation. Compared with patients not known or suspected of COVID-19, endotracheal intubations of patients with known or suspected COVID-19 were more often performed using video laryngoscopy (88% versus 82%, difference 6.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.0% to 9.6%) and passive nasal oxygenation (44% versus 39%, difference 5.1%; 95% CI, 0.9% to 9.3%). First-pass success was not different between those who were and were not known or suspected of COVID-19 (87% versus 86%, difference 0.6%; 95% CI, -2.4% to 3.6%). Adjusting for patient characteristics and procedure factors in those with low anticipated airway difficulty (n=2,374), adverse events (most commonly hypoxia) occurred more frequently in patients with known or suspected COVID-19 (35% versus 19%, adjusted odds ratio 2.4; 95% CI, 1.7 to 3.3). CONCLUSION: Compared with patients not known or suspected of COVID-19, endotracheal intubation of those confirmed or suspected to have COVID-19 was associated with a similar first-pass intubation success rate but higher risk-adjusted adverse events.