Transition of care from the emergency department to skilled nursing facility: Retrospective case-control study.

Objective: The primary objective of this study is to describe associations between emergency department (ED)-to-skilled nursing facility (SNF) transition and ED length-of-stay (LOS). The secondary objective is to explore how social determinants of health (SDOH) influence ED-to-SNF transition visit parameters. In 2020, The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services issued the "COVID-19 Emergency Declaration Blanket Waivers for Health Care Providers" eliminating the requirement of a 3-day qualifying hospital stay before SNF placement. The waiver allowed ED patients to be transitioned directly to an SNF from the ED. Methods: We conducted a descriptive retrospective case-control study of adult patients who sought care in the University of North Carolina Hospitals (UNCH) ED between March 1, 2020, and March 1, 2022, lived in a non-SNF residence before their ED visit, and were transitioned directly to an SNF from the ED (n 1 = 27), compared with a group seen in the ED and admitted to hospital for SNF placement (n 2 = 54). Results: The ED-to-SNF group experienced a significantly longer ED LOS compared to the ED-to-Inpatient-to-SNF group: 72.8 hours (95% confidence interval [CI], 59.2-86.4) compared to 14.5 hours (95% CI, 12.1-16.9). We found no significant differences in SDOH between the ED-to-SNF group and the ED-to-Inpatient-to-SNF group. Conclusion: Patients who transition from the ED to an SNF experience long ED stays that may adversely affect health and well-being. Transitioning directly from the ED to an SNF may contribute to ED boarding and overcrowding.

Brief Educational Video plus Telecare to Enhance Recovery for Older Emergency Department Patients with Acute Musculoskeletal Pain: an update to the study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This update describes changes to the Brief Educational Tool to Enhance Recovery (BETTER) trial in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS/DESIGN: The original protocol was published in Trials. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the BETTER trial converted to remote recruitment in April 2020. All recruitment, consent, enrollment, and randomization now occur by phone within 24 h of the acute care visit. Other changes to the original protocol include an expansion of inclusion criteria and addition of new recruitment sites. To increase recruitment numbers, eligibility criteria were expanded to include individuals with chronic pain, non-daily opioid use within 2 weeks of enrollment, presenting musculoskeletal pain (MSP) symptoms for more than 1 week, hospitalization in past 30 days, and not the first time seeking medical treatment for presenting MSP pain. In addition, recruitment sites were expanded to other emergency departments and an orthopedic urgent care clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Recruiting from an orthopedic urgent care clinic and transitioning to remote operations not only allowed for continued participant enrollment during the pandemic but also resulted in some favorable outcomes, including operational efficiencies, increased enrollment, and broader generalizability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04118595 . Registered on October 8, 2019.

Utility of COVID-19 antigen testing in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: The BinaxNOW coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Ag Card test (Abbott Diagnostics Scarborough, Inc.) is a lateral flow immunochromatographic point-of-care test for the qualitative detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleocapsid protein antigen. It provides results from nasal swabs in 15 minutes. Our purpose was to determine its sensitivity and specificity for a COVID-19 diagnosis. METHODS: Eligible patients had symptoms of COVID-19 or suspected exposure. After consent, 2 nasal swabs were collected; 1 was tested using the Abbott RealTime SARS-CoV-2 (ie, the gold standard polymerase chain reaction test) and the second run on the BinaxNOW point of care platform by emergency department staff. RESULTS: From July 20 to October 28, 2020, 767 patients were enrolled, of which 735 had evaluable samples. Their mean (SD) age was 46.8 (16.6) years, and 422 (57.4%) were women. A total of 623 (84.8%) patients had COVID-19 symptoms, most commonly shortness of breath (n = 404; 55.0%), cough (n = 314; 42.7%), and fever (n = 253; 34.4%). Although 460 (62.6%) had symptoms ≤7 days, the mean (SD) time since symptom onset was 8.1 (14.0) days. Positive tests occurred in 173 (23.5%) and 141 (19.2%) with the gold standard versus BinaxNOW test, respectively. Those with symptoms >2 weeks had a positive test rate roughly half of those with earlier presentations. In patients with symptoms ≤7 days, the sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive values for the BinaxNOW test were 84.6%, 98.5%, 94.9%, and 95.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The BinaxNOW point-of-care test has good sensitivity and excellent specificity for the detection of COVID-19. We recommend using the BinasNOW for patients with symptoms up to 2 weeks.

Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Clinician Judgment to a Novel Host Response Diagnostic for Acute Respiratory Illness.

BACKGROUND: Difficulty discriminating bacterial from viral infections drives antibacterial misuse. Host gene expression tests discriminate bacterial and viral etiologies, but their clinical utility has not been evaluated. METHODS: Host gene expression and procalcitonin levels were measured in 582 emergency department participants with suspected infection. We also recorded clinician diagnosis and clinician-recommended treatment. These 4 diagnostic strategies were compared with clinical adjudication as the reference. To estimate the clinical impact of host gene expression, we calculated the change in overall Net Benefit (∆NB; the difference in Net Benefit comparing 1 diagnostic strategy with a reference) across a range of prevalence estimates while factoring in the clinical significance of false-positive and -negative errors. RESULTS: Gene expression correctly classified bacterial, viral, or noninfectious illness in 74.1% of subjects, similar to the other strategies. Clinical diagnosis and clinician-recommended treatment revealed a bias toward overdiagnosis of bacterial infection resulting in high sensitivity (92.6% and 94.5%, respectively) but poor specificity (67.2% and 58.8%, respectively), resulting in a 33.3% rate of inappropriate antibacterial use. Gene expression offered a more balanced sensitivity (79.0%) and specificity (80.7%), which corresponded to a statistically significant improvement in average weighted accuracy (79.9% vs 71.5% for procalcitonin and 76.3% for clinician-recommended treatment; P<.0001 for both). Consequently, host gene expression had greater Net Benefit in diagnosing bacterial infection than clinician-recommended treatment (∆NB=6.4%) and procalcitonin (∆NB=17.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Host gene expression-based tests to distinguish bacterial and viral infection can facilitate appropriate treatment, improving patient outcomes and mitigating the antibacterial resistance crisis.

Discriminating Bacterial and Viral Infection Using a Rapid Host Gene Expression Test.

OBJECTIVES: Host gene expression signatures discriminate bacterial and viral infection but have not been translated to a clinical test platform. This study enrolled an independent cohort of patients to describe and validate a first-in-class host response bacterial/viral test. DESIGN: Subjects were recruited from 2006 to 2016. Enrollment blood samples were collected in an RNA preservative and banked for later testing. The reference standard was an expert panel clinical adjudication, which was blinded to gene expression and procalcitonin results. SETTING: Four U.S. emergency departments. PATIENTS: Six-hundred twenty-three subjects with acute respiratory illness or suspected sepsis. INTERVENTIONS: Forty-five-transcript signature measured on the BioFire FilmArray System (BioFire Diagnostics, Salt Lake City, UT) in ~45 minutes. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Host response bacterial/viral test performance characteristics were evaluated in 623 participants (mean age 46 yr; 45% male) with bacterial infection, viral infection, coinfection, or noninfectious illness. Performance of the host response bacterial/viral test was compared with procalcitonin. The test provided independent probabilities of bacterial and viral infection in ~45 minutes. In the 213-subject training cohort, the host response bacterial/viral test had an area under the curve for bacterial infection of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.84-0.94) and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87-0.95) for viral infection. Independent validation in 209 subjects revealed similar performance with an area under the curve of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.78-0.90) for bacterial infection and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.85-0.94) for viral infection. The test had 80.1% (95% CI, 73.7-85.4%) average weighted accuracy for bacterial infection and 86.8% (95% CI, 81.8-90.8%) for viral infection in this validation cohort. This was significantly better than 68.7% (95% CI, 62.4-75.4%) observed for procalcitonin (p < 0.001). An additional cohort of 201 subjects with indeterminate phenotypes (coinfection or microbiology-negative infections) revealed similar performance. CONCLUSIONS: The host response bacterial/viral measured using the BioFire System rapidly and accurately discriminated bacterial and viral infection better than procalcitonin, which can help support more appropriate antibiotic use.

SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence among a Southern U.S. Population Indicates Limited Asymptomatic Spread under Physical Distancing Measures.

Characterizing the asymptomatic spread of SARS-CoV-2 is important for understanding the COVID-19 pandemic. This study was aimed at determining asymptomatic spread of SARS-CoV-2 in a suburban, Southern U.S. population during a period of state restrictions and physical distancing mandates. This is one of the first published seroprevalence studies from North Carolina and included multicenter, primary care, and emergency care facilities serving a low-density, suburban and rural population since description of the North Carolina state index case introducing the SARS-CoV-2 respiratory pathogen to this population. To estimate point seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among asymptomatic individuals over time, two cohort studies were examined. The first cohort study, named ScreenNC, was comprised of outpatient clinics, and the second cohort study, named ScreenNC2, was comprised of inpatients unrelated to COVID-19. Asymptomatic infection by SARS-CoV-2 (with no clinical symptoms) was examined using an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA)-approved antibody test (Abbott) for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG. This assay as performed under CLIA had a reported specificity/sensitivity of 100%/99.6%. ScreenNC identified 24 out of 2,973 (0.8%) positive individuals among asymptomatic participants accessing health care during 28 April to 19 June 2020, which was increasing over time. A separate cohort, ScreenNC2, sampled from 3 March to 4 June 2020, identified 10 out of 1,449 (0.7%) positive participants.IMPORTANCE This study suggests limited but accelerating asymptomatic spread of SARS-CoV-2. Asymptomatic infections, like symptomatic infections, disproportionately affected vulnerable communities in this population, and seroprevalence was higher in African American participants than in White participants. The low, overall prevalence may reflect the success of shelter-in-place mandates at the time this study was performed and of maintaining effective physical distancing practices among suburban populations. Under these public health measures and aggressive case finding, outbreak clusters did not spread into the general population.

Recovery from Copperhead Snake Envenomation: Role of Age, Sex, Bite Location, Severity, and Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Few data exist to understand the recovery phase of pit viper envenomation. A recently published placebo-controlled clinical trial affords this opportunity. The purpose of this study is to examine the time course of recovery from copperhead snake (Agkistrodon contortrix) envenomation patients managed with and without the use of antivenom, stratified by age, sex, anatomic site of envenomation, initial severity of envenomation, and geographic region. METHODS: This is a post-hoc subgroup analysis of data from a multi-center double-blinded clinical trial of Fab antivenom (FabAV) vs. placebo. Outcomes were the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) score at 3, 7, 10, and 14 days after envenomation. Least-squares mean PSFS score curves were calculated for each subgroup, and repeated measures ANOVA was used to estimate between-group comparisons. RESULTS: Seventy-two subjects were included, of whom 44 received FabAV. Males demonstrated better overall recovery than females (model predicted PSFS score 6.18 vs 4.99; difference 1.19; 95% CI 0.12 to 2.25; p = 0.029). No sex difference was found in response to FabAV. Overall recovery and effect of FabAV were similar in adult vs adolescent patients, patients with upper vs lower extremity envenomation, and patients with initially mild vs moderate envenomation signs. Analysis by geographic location was not successful due to ANOVA mode instability. CONCLUSIONS: Male victims of copperhead snake envenomation demonstrate slightly better recovery than females, but response to Fab antivenom overall is similar across all subgroups studied.

Validity and reliability of telephone administration of the patient-specific functional scale for the assessment of recovery from snakebite envenomation.

OBJECTIVES: Although more than 1.8 million people survive snakebite envenomation each year, their recovery is understudied. Obtaining long-term follow-up is challenging in both high- and low-resource settings. The Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) is an easily administered, well-accepted patient-reported outcome that is validated for assessing limb recovery from snakebite envenomation. We studied whether the PSFS is valid and reliable when administered by telephone. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized clinical trial. We analyzed the results of PSFS collected in-person on days 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28 and by telephone on days 10, 17, and 24. We assessed the following scale psychometric properties: (a) content validity (ceiling and floor effects), (b) internal structure and consistency (Cronbach's alpha), and (c) temporal and external validity using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). Temporal stability was assessed using Spearman's correlation coefficient and agreement between adjacent in-person and telephonic assessments with Cohen's kappa. Bland Altman analysis was used to assess differential bias in low and high score results. RESULTS: Data from 74 patients were available for analysis. Floor effects were seen in the early post-injury time points (median: 3 (IQR: 0, 5) at 3 days post-enrollment) and ceiling effects in the late time points (median: 9 (IQR: 8, 10). Internal consistency was good to excellent with both in-person (Cronbach α: 0.91 (95%CI 0.88, 0.95)) and telephone administration (0.81 (0.73, 0.89). Temporal stability was also good (ICC: 0.83 (0.72, 0.89) in-person, 0.80 (0.68, 0.88) telephone). A strong linear correlation was found between in-person and telephone administration (Spearman's ρ: 0.83 (CI: 0.78, 0.84), consistency was assessed as excellent (Cohen's κ 0.81 (CI: 0.78, 0.84), and Bland Altman analysis showed no systematic bias. CONCLUSIONS: Telephone administration of the PSFS provides valid, reliable, and consistent data for the assessment of recovery from snakebite envenomation.

Validation of a host response test to distinguish bacterial and viral respiratory infection.

BACKGROUND: Distinguishing bacterial and viral respiratory infections is challenging. Novel diagnostics based on differential host gene expression patterns are promising but have not been translated to a clinical platform nor extensively tested. Here, we validate a microarray-derived host response signature and explore performance in microbiology-negative and coinfection cases. METHODS: Subjects with acute respiratory illness were enrolled in participating emergency departments. Reference standard was an adjudicated diagnosis of bacterial infection, viral infection, both, or neither. An 87-transcript signature for distinguishing bacterial, viral, and noninfectious illness was measured from peripheral blood using RT-PCR. Performance characteristics were evaluated in subjects with confirmed bacterial, viral, or noninfectious illness. Subjects with bacterial-viral coinfection and microbiologically-negative suspected bacterial infection were also evaluated. Performance was compared to procalcitonin. FINDINGS: 151 subjects with microbiologically confirmed, single-etiology illness were tested, yielding AUROCs 0•85-0•89 for bacterial, viral, and noninfectious illness. Accuracy was similar to procalcitonin (88% vs 83%, p = 0•23) for bacterial vs. non-bacterial infection. Whereas procalcitonin cannot distinguish viral from non-infectious illness, the RT-PCR test had 81% accuracy in making this determination. Bacterial-viral coinfection was subdivided. Among 19 subjects with bacterial superinfection, the RT-PCR test identified 95% as bacterial, compared to 68% with procalcitonin (p = 0•13). Among 12 subjects with bacterial infection superimposed on chronic viral infection, the RT-PCR test identified 83% as bacterial, identical to procalcitonin. 39 subjects had suspected bacterial infection; the RT-PCR test identified bacterial infection more frequently than procalcitonin (82% vs 64%, p = 0•02). INTERPRETATION: The RT-PCR test offered similar diagnostic performance to procalcitonin in some subgroups but offered better discrimination in others such as viral vs. non-infectious illness and bacterial/viral coinfection. Gene expression-based tests could impact decision-making for acute respiratory illness as well as a growing number of other infectious and non-infectious diseases.

The validity, reliability and minimal clinically important difference of the patient specific functional scale in snake envenomation.

OBJECTIVE: Valid, reliable, and clinically relevant outcome measures are necessary in clinical studies of snake envenomation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric (validity and reliability) and clinimetric (minimal clinically important difference [MCID]) properties of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) in snakebite envenomation. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of two existing snakebite trials that measured clinical outcomes using the PSFS as well as other quality of life and functional assessments. Data were collected at 3, 7, 10, and 17 days. Reliability was determined using Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for temporal stability at 10 and 17 days. Validity was assessed using concurrent validity correlating with the other assessments. The MCID was evaluated using the following criteria: (1) the distribution of stable patients according to both standard error of measurement (SEM) and responsiveness techniques, and (2) anchor-based methods to compare between individuals and to detect discriminant ability of a positive change with a receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve and optimal cutoff point. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients were evaluated in this study. The average PSFS scores were 5.37 (SD 3.23), 7.95 (SD 2.22), and 9.12 (SD 1.37) at 3, 7, and 10 days, respectively. Negligible floor effect was observed (maximum of 8% at 3 days); however, a ceiling effect was observed at 17 days (25%). The PSFS showed good reliability with an internal consistency of 0.91 (Cronbach's alpha) (95% CI 0.88, 0.95) and a temporal stability of 0.83 (ICC) (95% CI 0.72, 0.89). The PSFS showed a strong positive correlation with quality of life and functional assessments. The MCID was approximately 1.0 for all methods. CONCLUSIONS: With an MCID of approximately 1 point, the PSFS is a valid and reliable tool to assess quality of life and functionality in patients with snake envenomation.

Early administration of Fab antivenom resulted in faster limb recovery in copperhead snake envenomation patients.

BACKGROUND: No previous research has studied whether early snake antivenom administration leads to better clinical outcomes than late antivenom administration in North American pit viper envenomation. METHODS: A secondary analysis of data from a clinical trial of Fab antivenom (FabAV) versus placebo for copperhead snake envenomation was conducted. Patients treated before the median time to FabAV administration were classified as receiving early treatment and those treated after the median time were defined as the late treatment group. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to compare time to full recovery on the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) instrument between groups. Secondary analyses compared estimated mean PSFS scores using a generalized linear model and the estimated proportion of patients with full recovery at each time point using logistic regression. To evaluate for confounding, the main analysis was repeated using data from placebo-treated subjects. RESULTS: Forty-five subjects were treated with FabAV at a median of 5.47 h after envenomation. Patients in the early treatment group had a significantly shorter time to full recovery than those treated late (median time: 17 versus 28 days, p = .025). Model-estimated PSFS scores were numerically higher at each time point in the early group. No difference was found between patients treated early versus late with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In this secondary analysis of trial data, recovery of limb function was faster when Fab antivenom was administered soon after envenomation, as opposed to late administration.

Validity and reliability of telephone administration of the patient-specific functional scale for the assessment of recovery from snakebite envenomation

Objectives Although more than 1.8 million people survive snakebite envenomation each year, their recovery is understudied. Obtaining long-term follow-up is challenging in both high- and low-resource settings. The Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) is an easily administered, well-accepted patient-reported outcome that is validated for assessing limb recovery from snakebite envenomation. We studied whether the PSFS is valid and reliable when administered by telephone. Methods This is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized clinical trial. We analyzed the results of PSFS collected in-person on days 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28 and by telephone on days 10, 17, and 24. We assessed the following scale psychometric properties: (a) content validity (ceiling and floor effects), (b) internal structure and consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), and (c) temporal and external validity using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). Temporal stability was assessed using Spearman’s correlation coefficient and agreement between adjacent in-person and telephonic assessments with Cohen’s kappa. Bland Altman analysis was used to assess differential bias in low and high score results. Results Data from 74 patients were available for analysis. Floor effects were seen in the early post-injury time points (median: 3 (IQR: 0, 5) at 3 days post-enrollment) and ceiling effects in the late time points (median: 9 (IQR: 8, 10). Internal consistency was good to excellent with both in-person (Cronbach a: 0.91 (95%CI 0.88, 0.95)) and telephone administration (0.81 (0.73, 0.89). Temporal stability was also good (ICC: 0.83 (0.72, 0.89) in-person, 0.80 (0.68, 0.88) telephone). A strong linear correlation was found between in-person and telephone administration (Spearman’s Ró: 0.83 (CI: 0.78, 0.84), consistency was assessed as excellent (Cohen’s capa 0.81 (CI: 0.78, 0.84), and Bland Altman analysis showed no systematic bias. Conclusions Telephone administration of the PSFS provides valid, reliable, and consistent data for the assessment of recovery from snakebite envenomation.

Validity and reliability of telephone administration of the patient-specific functional scale for the assessment of recovery from snakebite envenomation

Objectives Although more than 1.8 million people survive snakebite envenomation each year, their recovery is understudied. Obtaining long-term follow-up is challenging in both high- and low-resource settings. The Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) is an easily administered, well-accepted patient-reported outcome that is validated for assessing limb recovery from snakebite envenomation. We studied whether the PSFS is valid and reliable when administered by telephone. Methods This is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized clinical trial. We analyzed the results of PSFS collected in-person on days 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28 and by telephone on days 10, 17, and 24. We assessed the following scale psychometric properties: (a) content validity (ceiling and floor effects), (b) internal structure and consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), and (c) temporal and external validity using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). Temporal stability was assessed using Spearman’s correlation coefficient and agreement between adjacent in-person and telephonic assessments with Cohen’s kappa. Bland Altman analysis was used to assess differential bias in low and high score results. Results Data from 74 patients were available for analysis. Floor effects were seen in the early post-injury time points (median: 3 (IQR: 0, 5) at 3 days post-enrollment) and ceiling effects in the late time points (median: 9 (IQR: 8, 10). Internal consistency was good to excellent with both in-person (Cronbach a: 0.91 (95%CI 0.88, 0.95)) and telephone administration (0.81 (0.73, 0.89). Temporal stability was also good (ICC: 0.83 (0.72, 0.89) in-person, 0.80 (0.68, 0.88) telephone). A strong linear correlation was found between in-person and telephone administration (Spearman’s Ró: 0.83 (CI: 0.78, 0.84), consistency was assessed as excellent (Cohen’s capa 0.81 (CI: 0.78, 0.84), and Bland Altman analysis showed no systematic bias. Conclusions Telephone administration of the PSFS provides valid, reliable, and consistent data for the assessment of recovery from snakebite envenomation.

Adverse Events in the Efficacy of Crotalidae Polyvalent Immune Fab Antivenom vs Placebo in Recovery from Copperhead Snakebite Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions following copperhead envenomation treated with Fab antivenom (FabAV) or placebo. METHODS: Patients with copperhead snakebites received treatment and follow-up in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of FabAV or placebo. The treatment allocation ratio was 2:1 (FabAV:placebo). All of the included patients received at least one dose of study treatment. We reviewed all treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) using a previously published scale to classify likely hypersensitivity reactions as mild, moderate, or severe. RESULTS: We enrolled 74 patients at 13 sites. Forty-five patients received FabAV, and 29 patients received placebo. Five FabAV patients and 4 placebo patients had moderate envenomations; the rest were mild. Twenty-five FabAV patients and 8 placebo patients had at least 1 AE. Mild skin reactions occurred in 11 (24%) FabAV patients (pruritis, urticaria, rash, ecchymosis, erythema) and 1 (3%) placebo patient (pruritis). Moderate gastrointestinal AEs occurred in 7 (16%) FabAV patients (nausea, vomiting, constipation, diarrhea, oral paresthesia) and in 2 (7%) placebo patients (nausea). Respiratory AEs occurred in 3 (7%) FabAV patients (dyspnea, pulmonary embolism, nasal congestion, sneezing) and no placebo patients. Hypotension occurred in 1 patient in each group. CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized controlled trial of FabAV for copperhead bites, the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions was low. Most reactions were mild skin reactions.

Evaluating the discriminating capacity of cell death (apoptotic) biomarkers in sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis biomarker panels that provide diagnostic and prognostic discrimination in sepsis patients would be transformative to patient care. We assessed the mortality prediction and diagnostic discriminatory accuracy of two biomarkers reflective of cell death (apoptosis), circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA), and nucleosomes. METHODS: The cfDNA and nucleosome levels were assayed in plasma samples acquired in patients admitted from four emergency departments with suspected sepsis. Subjects with non-infectious systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) served as controls. Samples were acquired at enrollment (T0) and 24 h later (T24). We assessed diagnostic (differentiating SIRS from sepsis) and prognostic (28-day mortality) predictive power. Models incorporating procalcitonin (diagnostic prediction) and APACHE II scores (mortality prediction) were generated. RESULTS: Two hundred three subjects were included (107 provided procalcitonin measurements). Four subjects exhibited uncomplicated sepsis, 127 severe sepsis, 35 septic shock, and 24 had non-infectious SIRS. There were 190-survivors and 13 non-survivors. Mortality prediction models using cfDNA, nucleosomes, or APACHEII yielded AUC values of 0.61, 0.75, and 0.81, respectively. A model combining nucleosomes with the APACHE II score improved the AUC to 0.84. Diagnostic models distinguishing sepsis from SIRS using procalcitonin, cfDNA(T0), or nucleosomes(T0) yielded AUC values of 0.64, 0.65, and 0.63, respectively. The three parameter model yielded an AUC of 0.74. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first head-to-head comparison of cfDNA and nucleosomes in diagnosing sepsis and predicting sepsis-related mortality. Both cfDNA and nucleosome concentrations demonstrated a modest ability to distinguish sepsis survivors and non-survivors and provided additive diagnostic predictive accuracy in differentiating sepsis from non-infectious SIRS when integrated into a diagnostic prediction model including PCT and APACHE II. A sepsis biomarker strategy incorporating measures of the apoptotic pathway may serve as an important component of a sepsis diagnostic and mortality prediction tool.

The Efficacy of Crotalidae Polyvalent Immune Fab (Ovine) Antivenom Versus Placebo Plus Optional Rescue Therapy on Recovery From Copperhead Snake Envenomation: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Clinical Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Copperhead snake (Agkistrodon contortrix) envenomation causes limb injury resulting in pain and disability. It is not known whether antivenom administration improves limb function. We determine whether administration of antivenom improves recovery from limb injury in patients envenomated by copperhead snakes. METHODS: From August 2013 through November 2015, we performed a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial to evaluate the effect of ovine Crotalidae polyvalent immune Fab (ovine) (CroFab; FabAV) antivenom therapy on recovery of limb function in patients with copperhead snake envenomation at 14 days postenvenomation. The study setting was 18 emergency departments in regions of the United States where copperhead snakes are endemic. Consecutive patients aged 12 years or older with mild- to moderate-severity envenomation received either FabAV or placebo. The primary outcome was limb function 14 days after envenomation, measured by the Patient-Specific Functional Scale. Additional outcomes included the Patient-Specific Functional Scale at other points; the Disorders of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, Lower Extremity Functional Scale, and Patient's Global Impression of Change instruments; grip strength; walking speed; quality of life (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Fucntion-10); pain; and analgesic use. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients received study drug (45 FabAV, 29 placebo). Mean age was 43 years (range 12 to 86 years). Fifty-three percent were men, 62% had lower extremity envenomation, and 88% had mild initial severity. The primary outcome, the least square mean Patient-Specific Functional Scale score at 14 days postenvenomation, was 8.6 for FabAV-treated subjects and 7.4 for placebo recipients (difference 1.2; 95% confidence interval 0.1 to 2.3; P=.04). Additional outcome assessments generally favored FabAV. More FabAV-treated subjects experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (56% versus 28%), but few were serious (1 in each group). CONCLUSION: Treatment with FabAV reduces limb disability measured by the Patient-Specific Functional Scale 14 days after copperhead envenomation.

Host gene expression classifiers diagnose acute respiratory illness etiology.

Acute respiratory infections caused by bacterial or viral pathogens are among the most common reasons for seeking medical care. Despite improvements in pathogen-based diagnostics, most patients receive inappropriate antibiotics. Host response biomarkers offer an alternative diagnostic approach to direct antimicrobial use. This observational cohort study determined whether host gene expression patterns discriminate noninfectious from infectious illness and bacterial from viral causes of acute respiratory infection in the acute care setting. Peripheral whole blood gene expression from 273 subjects with community-onset acute respiratory infection (ARI) or noninfectious illness, as well as 44 healthy controls, was measured using microarrays. Sparse logistic regression was used to develop classifiers for bacterial ARI (71 probes), viral ARI (33 probes), or a noninfectious cause of illness (26 probes). Overall accuracy was 87% (238 of 273 concordant with clinical adjudication), which was more accurate than procalcitonin (78%, P < 0.03) and three published classifiers of bacterial versus viral infection (78 to 83%). The classifiers developed here externally validated in five publicly available data sets (AUC, 0.90 to 0.99). A sixth publicly available data set included 25 patients with co-identification of bacterial and viral pathogens. Applying the ARI classifiers defined four distinct groups: a host response to bacterial ARI, viral ARI, coinfection, and neither a bacterial nor a viral response. These findings create an opportunity to develop and use host gene expression classifiers as diagnostic platforms to combat inappropriate antibiotic use and emerging antibiotic resistance.