High-dose influenza vaccine to reduce clinical outcomes in high-risk cardiovascular patients: Rationale and design of the INVESTED trial.

BACKGROUND: Influenza leads to significant cardiopulmonary morbidity and mortality-particularly in patients with cardiovascular disease-that may be prevented with a standard influenza vaccine. However, patients with cardiovascular conditions have a reduced immune response to influenza vaccine, potentially resulting in reduced effectiveness for preventing clinical events. High-dose vaccine augments immune response in cardiac patients, suggesting that a high-dose influenza vaccination strategy may further reduce morbidity and mortality. Alternatively, broader coverage with an influenza vaccine containing an increased number of viral strains is an alternative strategy without direct evaluation. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: INfluenza Vaccine to Effectively Stop Cardio Thoracic Events and Decompensated heart failure (INVESTED) is a pragmatic, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, active-controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of an annual vaccination strategy of high-dose trivalent versus standard-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine in patients with a history of recent heart failure or myocardial infarction hospitalization. The trial will enroll approximately 9,300 patients over 4 influenza seasons. The primary hypothesis is that high-dose influenza vaccine will reduce the composite outcome of all-cause mortality and hospitalization from a cardiovascular or pulmonary cause compared with standard-dose influenza vaccine within each enrolling season. Approximately 1,300 primary outcome events will provide >90% power to detect an 18% relative risk reduction at a 2-sided α level of .05. CONCLUSION: INVESTED is the largest and longest study to assess whether high-dose influenza vaccine is superior to standard-dose influenza vaccine in reducing cardiopulmonary events in a high-risk cardiovascular population (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02787044).

Viruses associated with acute respiratory infections and influenza-like illness among outpatients from the Influenza Incidence Surveillance Project, 2010-2011.

BACKGROUND: The Influenza Incidence Surveillance Project (IISP) monitored outpatient acute respiratory infection (ARI; defined as the presence of ≥ 2 respiratory symptoms not meeting ILI criteria) and influenza-like illness (ILI) to determine the incidence and contribution of associated viral etiologies. METHODS: From August 2010 through July 2011, 57 outpatient healthcare providers in 12 US sites reported weekly the number of visits for ILI and ARI and collected respiratory specimens on a subset for viral testing. The incidence was estimated using the number of patients in the practice as the denominator, and the virus-specific incidence of clinic visits was extrapolated from the proportion of patients testing positive. RESULTS: The age-adjusted cumulative incidence of outpatient visits for ARI and ILI combined was 95/1000 persons, with a viral etiology identified in 58% of specimens. Most frequently detected were rhinoviruses/enteroviruses (RV/EV) (21%) and influenza viruses (21%); the resulting extrapolated incidence of outpatient visits was 20 and 19/1000 persons respectively. The incidence of influenza virus-associated clinic visits was highest among patients aged 2-17 years, whereas other viruses had varied patterns among age groups. CONCLUSIONS: The IISP provides a unique opportunity to estimate the outpatient respiratory illness burden by etiology. Influenza virus infection and RV/EV infection(s) represent a substantial burden of respiratory disease in the US outpatient setting, particularly among children.

Incidence of medically attended influenza during pandemic and post-pandemic seasons through the Influenza Incidence Surveillance Project, 2009-13.

BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) to the USA in 2009, the Influenza Incidence Surveillance Project has monitored the burden of influenza in the outpatient setting through population-based surveillance. METHODS: From Oct 1, 2009, to July 31, 2013, outpatient clinics representing 13 health jurisdictions in the USA reported counts of influenza-like illness (fever including cough or sore throat) and all patient visits by age. During four years, staff at 104 unique clinics (range 35-64 per year) with a combined median population of 368,559 (IQR 352,595-428,286) attended 35,663 patients with influenza-like illness and collected 13,925 respiratory specimens. Clinical data and a respiratory specimen for influenza testing by RT-PCR were collected from the first ten patients presenting with influenza-like illness each week. We calculated the incidence of visits for influenza-like illness using the size of the patient population, and the incidence attributable to influenza was extrapolated from the proportion of patients with positive tests each week. FINDINGS: The site-median peak percentage of specimens positive for influenza ranged from 58.3% to 77.8%. Children aged 2 to 17 years had the highest incidence of influenza-associated visits (range 4.2-28.0 per 1000 people by year), and adults older than 65 years had the lowest (range 0.5-3.5 per 1000 population). Influenza A H3N2, pandemic H1N1, and influenza B equally co-circulated in the first post-pandemic season, whereas H3N2 predominated for the next two seasons. Of patients for whom data was available, influenza vaccination was reported in 3289 (28.7%) of 11,459 patients with influenza-like illness, and antivirals were prescribed to 1644 (13.8%) of 11,953 patients. INTERPRETATION: Influenza incidence varied with age groups and by season after the pandemic of 2009 influenza A H1N1. High levels of influenza virus circulation, especially in young children, emphasise the need for additional efforts to increase the uptake of influenza vaccines and antivirals. FUNDING: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Information chaos in primary care: implications for physician performance and patient safety.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to explore the concept of information chaos as it applies to the issues of patient safety and physician workload in primary care and to propose a research agenda. METHODS: We use a human factors engineering perspective to discuss the concept of information chaos in primary care and explore implications for its impact on physician performance and patient safety. RESULTS: Information chaos is comprised of various combinations of information overload, information underload, information scatter, information conflict, and erroneous information. We provide a framework for understanding information chaos, its impact on physician mental workload and situation awareness, and its consequences, and we discuss possible solutions and suggest a research agenda that may lead to methods to reduce the problem. CONCLUSIONS: Information chaos is experienced routinely by primary care physicians. This is not just inconvenient, annoying, and frustrating; it has implications for physician performance and patient safety. Additional research is needed to define methods to measure and eventually reduce information chaos.