RESUMEN
Background: Several risk scores have been derived to predict the risk of infective endocarditis (IE) amongst patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (SAB), which helps to guide clinical management. Methods: We prospectively studied 634 patients admitted with SAB. The cohort was stratified into those with or without IE, and the PREDICT Day 1, Day 5 and VIRSTA scores were tabulated. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curves were constructed to compare the performance of each score. Results: Of the 634 patients examined, 36 (5.7%) had IE. These patients were younger (51.6 ± 20.1 vs. 59.2 ± 18.0 years, p = 0.015), tended to have community acquisition of bacteraemia (41.7% vs. 17.9%, p < 0.001), and had persistent bacteraemia beyond 72 h (19.4% vs. 6.0%, p = 0.002). The VIRSTA score had the best performance in predicting IE (AUC 0.76, 95%CI 0.66-0.86) compared with PREDICT Day 1 and Day 5. A VIRSTA score of <3 had the best negative predictive value (97.5%), compared with PREDICT Day 1 (<4) and Day 5 (<2) (94.3% and 96.6%, respectively). Conclusions: Overall, the risk scores performed well in our Asian cohort. If applied, 23.5% of the cohort with a VIRSTA ≥ 3 would require TEE, and a score of <3 had an excellent negative predictive value.
Asunto(s)
Ebolavirus , Fiebre Hemorrágica Ebola , Enfermedad del Virus de Marburg , Animales , Humanos , Fiebre Hemorrágica Ebola/epidemiología , Fiebre Hemorrágica Ebola/prevención & control , Enfermedad del Virus de Marburg/prevención & control , Práctica Clínica Basada en la Evidencia , Organización Mundial de la SaludRESUMEN
A cost-minimization analysis was conducted for Klebsiella pneumoniae liver abscess (KLA) patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial which found oral ciprofloxacin to be non-inferior to intravenous (IV) ceftriaxone in terms of clinical outcomes. Healthcare service utilization and cost data were obtained from medical records and estimated from self-reported patient surveys in a non-inferiority trial of oral ciprofloxacin versus IV ceftriaxone administered to 152 hospitalized adults with KLA in Singapore between November 2013 and October 2017. Total costs were evaluated by category and payer, and compared between oral and IV antibiotic groups over the trial period of 12 weeks. Among the subset of 139 patients for whom cost data were collected, average total cost over 12 weeks was $16,378 (95% CI, $14,620-$18,136) for the oral ciprofloxacin group and $20,569 (95% CI, $18,296-$22,842) for the IV ceftriaxone group, largely driven by lower average outpatient costs, as the average number of outpatient visits was halved for the oral ciprofloxacin group. There were no other statistically significant differences, either in inpatient costs or in other informal healthcare costs. Oral ciprofloxacin is less costly than IV ceftriaxone in the treatment of Klebsiella liver abscess, largely driven by reduced outpatient service costs.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01723150 (7/11/2012).
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Absceso Hepático , Adulto , Humanos , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Ceftriaxona/uso terapéutico , Klebsiella pneumoniae , Ciprofloxacina/uso terapéutico , Absceso Hepático/tratamiento farmacológico , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Administración OralRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the change to health service costs and health benefits from a decision to adopt temporary isolation rooms that are effective at isolating the patient within a general ward environment. We assess the cost-effectiveness of a decision to adopt an existing temporary isolation room in a Singapore setting. METHOD: We performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis to evaluate the impact of a decision to adopt temporary isolation rooms for infection prevention. We estimated changes to the costs from implementation, the number of cases of healthcare associated infection, acute care bed days used, they money value of bed days, the number of deaths, and the expected change to life years. We report the probability that adoption was cost-effective by the cost by life year gained, against a relevant threshold. Uncertainty is addressed with probabilistic sensitivity analysis and the findings are tested with plausible scenarios for the effectiveness of the intervention. RESULTS: We predict 478 fewer cases of HAI per 100,000 occupied bed days from a decision to adopt temporary isolation rooms. This will result in cost savings of $SGD329,432 and there are 1,754 life years gained. When the effectiveness of the intervention is set at 1% of cases of HAI prevented the incremental cost per life year saved is $16,519; below the threshold chosen for cost-effectiveness in Singapore. CONCLUSIONS: We provide some evidence that adoption of a temporary isolation room is cost-effective for Singapore acute care hospitals. It is plausible that adoption is a positive decision for other countries in the region who may demonstrate fewer resources for infection prevention and control.
Asunto(s)
Servicios de Salud , Habitaciones de Pacientes , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Humanos , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , SingapurRESUMEN
Using best practices to produce creative, relatable, contextualized health messaging contributes to effective risk communication. During emergency disasters, the landscape of mis- and dis-information demands strategic, collaborative approaches across all stakeholders particularly government and the media to ensure effective public messaging. However, tools for new RCCE practitioners and media agencies such as television producers and advertising firms to rapidly create effective RCCE products are currently not readily available. In response to concerns that vaccine hesitancy may become more evident once a significant proportion of the population had been reached, the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) in Singapore launched a public health music video on 2 May 2021, making headlines globally and garnering more than 5 million views worldwide. The video aimed to dispel myths and concerns about vaccinations and encouraged citizens to get their vaccination quickly rather than wait. We aimed to evaluate this video as a case study and articulate why it is an example of good practice in risk communications. Working inductively to identify emergent principles of product creation in this case study and analyzing them against existing RCCE frameworks and recommendations helped develop a practical tool to guide the rapid creation of RCCE products by those who may be unfamiliar to RCCE principles. This tool can help new RCCE practitioners and media agencies to produce effective products in times of crisis. The easy-to-use tool provides a brief checklist that guides rapid creation of RCCE products, including criteria for understanding the target audience, message comprehension, development, reach and impact measurement. Given its derivation from existing RCCE frameworks and health literacy concepts, these can potentially be applied across different modalities and diverse cultures. Future work would include validation of these criteria and evaluation of its utility to strengthen RCCE as core in an emergency response.
Asunto(s)
Comunicación , Alfabetización en Salud , Salud Pública , SingapurRESUMEN
In early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in Singapore, Risk Communication and Community Engagement (RCCE) with large, diverse communities of migrant workers living in high-density accommodation was slow to develop. By August 2020, Singapore had reported 55,661 cases of COVID-19, with migrant workers comprising 94.6% of the cases. A system of RCCE among migrant worker communities in Singapore was developed to maximize synergy in RCCE. Proactive stakeholder engagement and participatory approaches with affected communities were key to effective dissemination of scientific information about COVID-19 and its prevention.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Myopericarditis is a rare complication of vaccination. However, there have been increasing reports of myopericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination, especially among adolescents and young adults. We aimed to characterise the incidence of myopericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination, and compare this with non-COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching four international databases from Jan 1, 1947, to Dec 31, 2021, for studies in English reporting on the incidence of myopericarditis following vaccination (the primary outcome). We included studies reporting on people in the general population who had myopericarditis in temporal relation to receiving vaccines, and excluded studies on a specific subpopulation of patients, non-human studies, and studies in which the number of doses was not reported. Random-effects meta-analyses (DerSimonian and Laird) were conducted, and the intra-study risk of bias (Joanna Briggs Institute checklist) and certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach) were assessed. We analysed the difference in incidence of myopericarditis among subpopulations, stratifying by the type of vaccine (COVID-19 vs non-COVID-19) and age group (adult vs paediatric). Among COVID-19 vaccinations, we examined the effect of the type of vaccine (mRNA or non-mRNA), sex, age, and dose on the incidence of myopericarditis. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021275477). FINDINGS: The overall incidence of myopericarditis from 22 studies (405 272 721 vaccine doses) was 33·3 cases (95% CI 15·3-72·6) per million vaccine doses, and did not differ significantly between people who received COVID-19 vaccines (18·2 [10·9-30·3], 11 studies [395 361 933 doses], high certainty) and those who received non-COVID-19 vaccines (56·0 [10·7-293·7], 11 studies [9 910 788 doses], moderate certainty, p=0·20). Compared with COVID-19 vaccination, the incidence of myopericarditis was significantly higher following smallpox vaccinations (132·1 [81·3-214·6], p<0·0001) but was not significantly different after influenza vaccinations (1·3 [0·0-884·1], p=0·43) or in studies reporting on various other non-smallpox vaccinations (57·0 [1·1-3036·6], p=0·58). Among people who received COVID-19 vaccines, the incidence of myopericarditis was significantly higher in males (vs females), in people younger than 30 years (vs 30 years or older), after receiving an mRNA vaccine (vs non-mRNA vaccine), and after a second dose of vaccine (vs a first or third dose). INTERPRETATION: The overall risk of myopericarditis after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine is low. However, younger males have an increased incidence of myopericarditis, particularly after receiving mRNA vaccines. Nevertheless, the risks of such rare adverse events should be balanced against the risks of COVID-19 infection (including myopericarditis). FUNDING: None.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Miocarditis , Adolescente , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Niño , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Miocarditis/epidemiología , Miocarditis/etiología , Vacunación/efectos adversosRESUMEN
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) serology has an evolving role in the diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. However, its use in hospitalized patients with acute respiratory symptoms remains unclear. Hospitalized patients with acute respiratory illness admitted to an isolation ward were recruited. All patients had negative nasopharyngeal swab polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for SARS-CoV-2. Serological studies using four separate assays (cPass: surrogate neutralizing enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]; Elecsys: N-antigen based chemiluminescent assay; SFB: S protein flow-based; epitope peptide-based ELISA) were performed on stored plasma collected from patients during the initial hospital stay, and a convalescent visit 4-12 weeks later. Of the 51 patients studied (aged 54, interquartile range 21-84; 62.7% male), no patients tested positive on the Elecsys or cPass assays. Out of 51 patients, 5 had antibodies detected on B-cell Epitope Assay and 3/51 had antibodies detected on SFB assay. These 8 patients with positive serological test to COVID-19 were more likely to have a high-risk occupation (p = 0.039), bacterial infection (p = 0.028), and neutrophilia (p = 0.013) during their initial hospital admission. Discrepant COVID-19 serological findings were observed among those with recent hospital admissions and bacterial infections. The positive serological findings within our cohort raise important questions about the interpretation of sero-epidemiology during the current pandemic.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Anticuerpos Antivirales , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Ensayo de Inmunoadsorción Enzimática , Femenino , Fiebre , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias , Reacción en Cadena de la Polimerasa , SARS-CoV-2/genéticaAsunto(s)
Prueba Serológica para COVID-19/instrumentación , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Personal de Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Sistemas de Atención de Punto/normas , SARS-CoV-2/genética , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Prueba Serológica para COVID-19/economía , Prueba Serológica para COVID-19/normas , Humanos , Singapur/epidemiología , Centros de Atención Terciaria/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
The complete picture regarding transmission modes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is unknown. This review summarises the available evidence on its transmission modes, our preliminary research findings and implications for infection control policy, and outlines future research directions. Environmental contamination has been reported in hospital settings occupied by infected patients, and is higher in the first week of illness. Transmission via environmental surfaces or fomites is likely, but decontamination protocols are effective in minimising this risk. The extent of airborne transmission is also unclear. While several studies have detected SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid in air samples, none has isolated viable virus in culture. Transmission likely lies on a spectrum between droplet and airborne transmission, depending on the patient, disease and environmental factors. Singapore's current personal protective equipment and isolation protocols are sufficient to manage this risk.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospitales , Humanos , Control de Infecciones/métodos , Equipo de Protección PersonalAsunto(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemias , Humanos , Pandemias/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Singapur/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic represents one of the greatest ever challenges for healthcare. In the UK and beyond, acute medical units (AMUs) are the first point of assessment and care for the majority of medical inpatients. By their design and systems, they inevitably played an important role in the COVID-19 response but to date little has been published on how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected how AMUs have reorganised their resources, processes and structure. METHODS: This retrospective study in August 2020 of 10 AMUs across Europe and Australasia used a standardised questionnaire to investigate existing practice and structure of AMUs, the national context of local hospital experience, changes to practice during the COVID-19 pandemic and views regarding future practice. RESULTS: Changes to AMU structure, process and organisation are described in two contexts: preventing and controlling the spread of COVID-19 and adding value to the patient's acute care journey in the local context. We describe novel practices that have arisen and highlight areas of concern. CONCLUSIONS: The AMUs were able to adapt to meet the demands of acute care delivery during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Operational planning and prioritisation of resources must be optimised to ensure sustainability of these services for future waves.