Factors affecting ambulance utilization for asthma attack treatment: understanding where to target interventions.

OBJECTIVES: Asthma is a serious, sometimes fatal condition, in which attacks vary in severity, potentially requiring emergency medical services (EMS) ambulance treatment. A portion of asthma attacks requiring EMS ambulance treatment may be prevented with improved education and access to care. The aim of this study was to identify areas of the city with high rates of utilization of EMS ambulance for treatment, and the demographics, socio-economic status, and time of day associated with these rates, to better target future interventions to prevent emergencies and reduce cost. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted on individuals in Houston, TX (USA) requiring ambulance treatment for asthma attacks from 2004 to 2011. METHODS: 12,155 EMS ambulance-treated asthma attack cases were linked to census tracts. High rate treatment areas were identified with geospatial mapping. Census tract demographic characteristics of these high rate areas were compared with the remainder of the city using logistic regression. The association between case level demographics and the time of day of asthma attack within the high rate area was also assessed with logistic regression. RESULTS: EMS ambulance-treated high rate areas were identified and found to have a utilization incidence rate over six times higher per 100,000 people than the remainder of the city. There is an increased risk of location in this high rate area with a census tract level increase of percent of population: earning less than $10,000 yearly income (RR 1.21, 1.16-1.26), which is black (RR 1.08, 1.07-1.10), which is female (RR 1.34, 1.20-1.49) and have obtained less than a high school degree (RR 1.02, 1.01-1.03). Within the high rate area, case level data indicates an increased risk of requiring an ambulance after normal doctor office hours for men compared with women (RR 1.13, 1.03-1.22), for black compared with Hispanic ethnicity (RR 1.31, 1.08-1.59), or for adults (less than 41 and greater than 60) compared with children. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to prevent asthma emergencies should be targeted in the high rate area and towards groups identified most at risk. Consideration should be given to improved access to care after normal doctor office hours in these locations. While ambulance treatment reflects the most urgent care needs, these interventions are also expected to reduce the need for emergency room visits.

Evaluation of the safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity of FluBlok® trivalent recombinant baculovirus-expressed hemagglutinin influenza vaccine administered intramuscularly to healthy adults 50-64 years of age.

BACKGROUND: Alternative methods for influenza vaccine production are needed to ensure adequate supplies. METHODS: Healthy adults 50-64 years were assigned randomly to receive one intramuscular injection of trivalent recombinant hemagglutinin (rHA) or U.S. licensed trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV) containing H1, H3 and B antigens (Ag) derived from 2007 to 2008 influenza virus strains A/Solomon Islands/03/2006 (H1N1), A/Wisconsin/67/2005 (H3N2), and B/Malaysia/2506/2004. Each rHA dose contained 45 µg HA/strain of the 2007-2008 FDA-recommended Ag vs. 15 µg/strain for TIV. Antibody (Ab) responses were measured using a hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) assay at baseline and 28 days post-vaccination. Respiratory samples for viral culture were collected from subjects with influenza-like illness (ILI) during the 2007-2008 season in the U.S. RESULTS: 601 subjects were enrolled. Vaccines were well tolerated. Seroconversion (the percentage of subjects with either (a) a pre-vaccination HAI titer ≤ 10 and a post-vaccination HAI titer ≥ 40 or (b) a pre-vaccination titer ≥ 10 and a minimum four-fold rise in post-vaccination HAI antibody titer) in the TIV and rHA groups, respectively, was obtained in 66% vs. 72% for H1; 44% vs. 61% for H3; and 41% vs. 41% for B. Proportions achieving titers ≥ 40 were 96% vs. 96% for H1, 75% vs. 85% for H3, and 94% vs. 93% vs. B. Geometric mean titer ratios at day 28 (TIV/rHA) were 0.77 for H1; 0.58 for H3; and 1.05 for B, respectively. ILI frequencies were low and similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both vaccines were safe and immunogenic. Ab responses vs. H1 and H3 Ags were significantly higher in the rHA group, with similar responses to B. Furthermore, the FluBlok group had a statistically significantly higher seroconversion rate against influenza A/H3N2 compared to the TIV group.

Efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in children. Northern California Kaiser Permanente Vaccine Study Center Group.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of the heptavalent CRM197 pneumococcal conjugate vaccine against invasive disease caused by vaccine serotypes and to determine the effectiveness of this vaccine against clinical episodes of otitis media. METHODS: The Wyeth Lederle Heptavalent CRM197 (PCV) was given to infants at 2, 4, 6 and 12 to 15 months of age in a double blind trial; 37,868 children were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine or meningococcus type C CRM197 conjugate. The primary study outcome was invasive disease caused by vaccine serotype. Other outcomes included overall impact on invasive disease regardless of serotype, effectiveness against clinical otitis media visits and episodes, impact against frequent and severe otitis media and ventilatory tube placement. In addition the serotype-specific efficacy against otitis media was estimated in an analysis of spontaneously draining ears. RESULTS: In the interim analysis in August, 1998, 17 of the 17 cases of invasive disease caused by vaccine serotype in fully vaccinated children and 5 of 5 of partially vaccinated cases occurred in the control group for a vaccine efficacy of 100%. Blinded case ascertainment was continued until April, 1999. As of that time 40 fully vaccinated cases of invasive disease caused by vaccine serotype had been identified, all but 1 in controls for an efficacy of 97.4% (95% confidence interval, 82.7 to 99.9%), and 52 cases, all but 3 in controls in the intent-to-treat analysis for an efficacy of 93.9% (95% confidence interval, 79.6 to 98.5%). There was no evidence of any increase of disease caused by nonvaccine serotypes. Efficacy for otitis media against visits, episodes, frequent otitis and ventilatory tube placement was 8.9, 7.0, 9.3 and 20.1% with P < 0.04 for all. In the analysis of spontaneously draining ears, serotype-specific effectiveness was 66.7%. CONCLUSION: This heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate appears to be highly effective in preventing invasive disease in young children and to have a significant impact on otitis media.

Safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of concomitant injections in separate locations of M-M-R II, VARIVAX and TETRAMUNE in healthy children vs. concomitant injections of M-M-R II and TETRAMUNE followed six weeks later by VARIVAX.

OBJECTIVES AND STUDY DESIGN: The primary objectives of this study were to compare immunologic responses, antibody persistence, safety and varicella breakthrough rates when VARIVAX (varicella vaccine) is given at the same time as M-M-R II (measles, mumps, rubella vaccine) and TETRAMUNE (conjugate Haemophilus influenzae type b, diphtheria, tetanus and whole cell pertussis vaccine) at separate injection sites (Group A) vs. VARIVAX given 6 weeks after M-M-R II and TETRAMUNE (Group B). Six hundred nine healthy children, 12 to 23 months of age, were randomized to one of two treatment (immunization) groups (Group A and Group B). Blood for antibody titers was drawn on the day of immunization, 6 weeks after each injection and 1 year later. Local and systemic adverse reactions were recorded. Exposure and cases of varicella were documented through a 1-year follow-up period. RESULTS: Measles, mumps and rubella seroconversion rates and geometric mean titers (GMTs) were similar for both treatment groups. Varicella seroconversion rates were also similar between groups. However, varicella GMTs and percent with a varicella-protective level [> or =5.0 glycoprotein (gp) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) units] did not meet the prespecified criteria for similarity were lower for Group A (GMT 10.5; 82.8% > or =5.0 gp ELISA units) than for Group B (GMT 14.5; 91.2% > or =5.0 gp ELISA units). The GMTs between groups for other antibodies were similar. At the 1-year follow-up antibody titers were comparable in both groups and breakthrough varicella cases appeared generally similar. There were fewer local adverse events (AEs) at the VARIVAX injection sites (9.8% and 2.9%, Group A and B, respectively) than at the TETRAMUNE sites (27.9% and 24.0%). Systemic AEs were not statistically different when M-M-R II was administered alone (8.6%) or concomitantly with VARIVAX (8.9%). When VARIVAX was given alone AEs were 1.8%. The rate of fever > or =102 degrees F after M-M-R II and TETRAMUNE administered together was 10.7% on Days 0 to 3 and 23.7% on Days 7 to 21. When VARIVAX was administered alone, the rate of fever was 5.4% on Days 0 to 3 (P = 0.018) and 10.8% on Days 7 to 21 (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Because the varicella titers were comparable and varicella breakthrough rates generally similar at 1 year in both groups, we expect that the concomitant administration of VARIVAX with M-M-R II and TETRAMUNE has clinical effectiveness similar to that with VARIVAX 6 weeks after the administration of these other two vaccines. VARIVAX appears to be less reactogenic than M-M-R II and TETRAMUNE.

Semirigid instrumentation in the management of lumbar spinal conditions combined with circumferential fusion. A multicenter study.

STUDY DESIGN: Patients with the diagnosis of degenerative disc conditions or spondylolisthesis undergoing circumferential fusion with posterior pedicle screw fixation using a semirigid rod were reviewed. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of this approach in achieving a spinal fusion and satisfactory clinical outcome, and to determine the complications associated with the procedure. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The use of instrumentation to stabilize the lumbar motion segments and thereby enhance the fusion rate has been proposed in a number of studies. Semirigid fixation was believed to be effective in achieving these objectives without concern for stress-shielding, which was suggested by some authors using rigid fixation systems. METHODS: Patients who required spinal fusion with anterior and posterior approaches because of specific lumbar pathology or previous surgeries were selected. The surgery consisted of an anterior interbody fusion using allograft, followed by a posterolateral fusion and pedicle screw fixation. Fusion was determined by continuity of trabecular bridging, and outcomes were determined by pain reduction and return to previous levels of activity. Fusion was considered solid if the two posterolateral areas were fused (Zones one and two), if the anterior interbody area was fused (Zone three), or if all three zones were fused. Complications were documented during and after surgery. RESULTS: Sixty-two percent of patients had previous surgery with 25% of these patients having a diagnosis of pseudarthrosis. Fifty-five percent of patients had two or more levels fused, and 43% were heavy smokers. Ninety-seven percent of patients had successful fusions. Pain was significantly reduced on a pain analogue scale from 7.1 to 2.1 in the back and from 5.8 to 1.5 in the leg (p < 0.006 and 0.0001, respectively). Fifty-nine percent of patients returned to their previous level of activity, and 18% returned to lighter work or job retraining, for a total of 77% returning to the same or lighter levels of activity. Complications included metal failure, 4.9%; neurologic deficit, 1.2%; deep infection, 1.2%; deep venous thrombosis, 4.9%; and vascular injury, 2.4%. Fatal pulmonary embolus occurred in one patient. CONCLUSION: This technique produces a satisfactory fusion rate (97%) and a good clinical outcome based on pain reduction and return to a satisfactory level of activity (77%). It is associated with few, but significant, complications that compare well with other reported series in a difficult group of patients. This procedure should be reserved for patients who are considered to be at high risk for not achieving spinal fusion.