Burden of all-cause and organism-specific parapneumonic empyema hospitalization rates prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in the United States

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Parapneumonic empyema, a severe pneumonia complication, decreased shortly after 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) introduction in US children, though the long-term impact remains poorly described. It is also unclear whether PCV13 introduction in 2010 or the 2014 US recommendation for PCV13 use in older adults was associated with declines in empyema among adults. We examined overall and organism-specific parapneumonic empyema rates among US children and adults from 2006 to 2019, prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the updated recommendations for PCV15 and PCV20 in the US.

METHODS

We used the National Inpatient Sample and US Census Data to calculate national annual all-cause and pneumococcal empyema hospitalization rates by age group (2006-2019). We examined rates during the late-PCV13 era (October 2015-2019) after transition to ICD10 codes compared to rates in the late-PCV7 (2006-2009) and early-PCV13 era (2011-September 2015). We also examined the rate of empyema with thoracentesis-related procedures and according to the causative organism type.

RESULTS

Compared to the late-PCV7 era, all-cause empyema hospitalization rates were lower among child age groups (<1, 1, 2-4 and 5-17 years) in the late-PCV13 era. In contrast, among most adult age groups (18-34, 50-64, 65+ years), all-cause empyema rates were higher in the late-PCV13 era compared to the late-PCV7 era.

CONCLUSION

Early declines in all-cause empyema-related hospitalizations observed right after PCV13 introduction among children in 2010 were sustained through 2019, though rates did not decline among adults.

Early and Increased Influenza Activity Among Children - Tennessee, 2022-23 Influenza Season

Influenza seasons typically begin in October and peak between December and February (1); however, the 2022-23 influenza season in Tennessee began in late September and was characterized by high pediatric hospitalization rates during November. This report describes a field investigation conducted in Tennessee during November 2022, following reports of increasing influenza hospitalizations. Data from surveillance networks, patient surveys, and whole genome sequencing of influenza virus specimens were analyzed to assess influenza activity and secondary illness risk. Influenza activity increased earlier than usual among all age groups, and rates of influenza-associated hospitalization among children were high in November, reaching 12.6 per 100,000 in children aged <5 years, comparable to peak levels typically seen in high-severity seasons. Circulating influenza viruses were genetically similar to vaccine components. Among persons who received testing for influenza at outpatient clinics, children were twice as likely to receive a positive influenza test result as were adults. Among household contacts exposed to someone with influenza, children were more than twice as likely to become ill compared with adults. As the influenza season continues, it is important for all persons, especially those at higher risk for severe disease, to protect themselves from influenza. To prevent influenza and severe influenza complications, all persons aged ≥6 months should get vaccinated, avoid contact with ill persons, and take influenza antivirals if recommended and prescribed.

Comparative effectiveness of metformin versus sulfonylureas on kidney function decline or death among patients with reduced kidney function: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Diabetes often causes kidney disease. In this study, we sought to evaluate if metformin use was associated with death or kidney events in patients with diabetes and concurrent reduced kidney function.

METHODS

We used data from the Veterans Health Administration, Medicare and National Death Index databases to assemble a national retrospective cohort of veterans who were using metformin or sulfonylureas from 2001 through 2016 and who began follow-up at an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m². The primary composite outcome was a kidney event (i.e., 40% decline in eGFR or end-stage renal disease) or death. The secondary outcome was a kidney event (eGFR decline or end-stage renal disease). We weighted the cohort using propensity scores and used Cox proportional models to estimate the cause-specific hazard of outcomes and of treatment nonpersistence as a competing risk. We stratified follow-up into 2 periods, namely the first 360 days from the start of follow-up, and 361 days and beyond.

RESULTS

In the first 360 days, the propensity score-weighted cohort included 24 883 patients who used metformin and 24 998 who used sulfonylureas. There were 33.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] 30.9-36.3) and 43.0 (95% CI 40.1-46.0) deaths or kidney events per 1000 person-years for patients who used metformin or sulfonylureas, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78, 95% CI 0.71-0.85). For the secondary outcome of kidney events, the HR was 0.94 (95% CI 0.67-1.33). In the second period from 361 days onward, the primary outcome event rate was 26.5 (95% CI 24.7-28.5) per 1000 person-years for those who used metformin, compared with 36.3 (95% CI 34.2-38.6) per 1000 person-years for those who used sulfonylureas (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.67-0.79). Results were consistent for kidney events alone (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59-0.91).

INTERPRETATION

Metformin use for 361 days or longer after reaching an eGFR of less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m² was associated with decreased likelihood of kidney events or death in patients with diabetes, compared with use of sulfonylureas. Metformin provided end-organ protection, in addition to glucose control.

Absolute and Relative Vaccine Effectiveness of Primary and Booster Series of COVID-19 Vaccines (mRNA and Adenovirus Vector) Against COVID-19 Hospitalizations in the United States, December 2021-April 2022

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies are increasingly reporting relative VE (rVE) comparing a primary series plus booster doses with a primary series only. Interpretation of rVE differs from traditional studies measuring absolute VE (aVE) of a vaccine regimen against an unvaccinated referent group. We estimated aVE and rVE against COVID-19 hospitalization in primary-series plus first-booster recipients of COVID-19 vaccines.

Methods

Booster-eligible immunocompetent adults hospitalized at 21 medical centers in the United States during December 25, 2021-April 4, 2022 were included. In a test-negative design, logistic regression with case status as the outcome and completion of primary vaccine series or primary series plus 1 booster dose as the predictors, adjusted for potential confounders, were used to estimate aVE and rVE.

Results

A total of 2060 patients were analyzed, including 1104 COVID-19 cases and 956 controls. Relative VE against COVID-19 hospitalization in boosted mRNA vaccine recipients versus primary series only was 66% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55%-74%); aVE was 81% (95% CI, 75%-86%) for boosted versus 46% (95% CI, 30%-58%) for primary. For boosted Janssen vaccine recipients versus primary series, rVE was 49% (95% CI, -9% to 76%); aVE was 62% (95% CI, 33%-79%) for boosted versus 36% (95% CI, -4% to 60%) for primary.

Conclusions

Vaccine booster doses increased protection against COVID-19 hospitalization compared with a primary series. Comparing rVE measures across studies can lead to flawed interpretations of the added value of a new vaccination regimen, whereas difference in aVE, when available, may be a more useful metric.

Early Estimates of Bivalent mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness in Preventing COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Among Immunocompetent Adults Aged ≥65 Years - IVY Network, 18 States, September 8-November 30, 2022

Monovalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, designed against the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2, successfully reduced COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality in the United States and globally (1,2). However, vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19-associated hospitalization has declined over time, likely related to a combination of factors, including waning immunity and, with the emergence of the Omicron variant and its sublineages, immune evasion (3). To address these factors, on September 1, 2022, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended a bivalent COVID-19 mRNA booster (bivalent booster) dose, developed against the spike protein from ancestral SARS-CoV-2 and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineages, for persons who had completed at least a primary COVID-19 vaccination series (with or without monovalent booster doses) ≥2 months earlier (4). Data on the effectiveness of a bivalent booster dose against COVID-19 hospitalization in the United States are lacking, including among older adults, who are at highest risk for severe COVID-19-associated illness. During September 8-November 30, 2022, the Investigating Respiratory Viruses in the Acutely Ill (IVY) Network§ assessed effectiveness of a bivalent booster dose received after ≥2 doses of monovalent mRNA vaccine against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥65 years. When compared with unvaccinated persons, VE of a bivalent booster dose received ≥7 days before illness onset (median = 29 days) against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was 84%. Compared with persons who received ≥2 monovalent-only mRNA vaccine doses, relative VE of a bivalent booster dose was 73%. These early findings show that a bivalent booster dose provided strong protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization in older adults and additional protection among persons with previous monovalent-only mRNA vaccination. All eligible persons, especially adults aged ≥65 years, should receive a bivalent booster dose to maximize protection against COVID-19 hospitalization this winter season. Additional strategies to prevent respiratory illness, such as masking in indoor public spaces, should also be considered, especially in areas where COVID-19 community levels are high (4,5).

Polypharmacy among medicaid-insured children with and without documented obesity

OBJECTIVE

Polypharmacy increases the risk of drug-drug interactions and adverse drug events. As obesity and rates of obesity-associated comorbid chronic conditions continue to rise, an improved understanding of whether children with obesity experience higher risk of polypharmacy is needed. This study aimed to compare chronic medication polypharmacy prevalence among children with and without a diagnosis of obesity.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional examination of prescription data for children aged 2-18 years prescribed ≥1 chronic medication using the 2019 Marketscan Medicaid database. Children with documented obesity were identified using medical visit diagnosis codes. Chronic medications included any ≥30-day prescription with ≥2 dispensed refills. Polypharmacy was defined as the prescription of ≥2 chronic medications for ≥1 overlapping days. Chi-squared tests compared polypharmacy prevalence and the distribution of chronic medication classes between children with and without obesity. Logistic regression determined the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of polypharmacy for children with obesity, adjusting for relevant demographic and clinical differences.

RESULTS

Of 634,671 included children, 12.2% had documented obesity. More than one-half (52.7%) of children with obesity experienced polypharmacy compared with 47.6% of children without obesity (aOR 1.06 [95% confidence interval 1.04-1.08]). Chronic medication prescriptions, particularly for psychiatric and asthma medications, were more commonly prescribed among children with obesity than those without obesity.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with documented obesity have higher polypharmacy prevalence than children without obesity. Clinicians must be aware of this risk and minimize inappropriate polypharmacy whenever possible. Future work should examine the consequences of polypharmacy, including drug-drug interactions and adverse drug events in children with obesity.

1778. Veterans’ Perceptions and Categorial Constructs Regarding Antibiotics for Upper Respiratory Tract Infections (URIs)

Background

To reduce antibiotic prescribing, antimicrobial stewards must understand patient knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions (KAP) around antibiotics for URIs. Validated patient KAP surveys are scarce and for Veteran patients, nonexistent. We aimed to explore if published results of an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of a KAP survey in emergency department (ED) patients and an online sample would approximate results in outpatient Veterans.

Methods

After cognitive testing in Veterans and healthcare providers, we omitted 13 of the 46 questions from the published KAP survey deemed confusing or with low factor loadings. We mailed the 33-item survey to Veterans seen for URI at 18 Veterans Affairs clinics from January 2018 to December 2019. We excluded Veterans not evaluated in-person, with documented dementia, or who died prior to study start. We excluded surveys with &gt; 3 unanswered questions.

We used principal component factor analysis (PCFA) with orthogonal varimax rotation (Fig. 1) to assess Veteran responses and Cronbach’s alpha to assess each factor’s internal consistency. We removed questions to reach alpha of &gt;0.7 (Fig. 2). We repeated PCFA and compared results to published EFA factors and loadings for the ED patients and online sample.

Results

Of 1329 eligible Veterans invited, 474 (36%) returned the survey; 407 met inclusion criteria (Table 1). PCFA of Veterans’ responses yielded 7 Factors (Fig 2). Like ED patients and the online sample, Veteran responses about side effects clustered together. Veteran responses about “antibiotics help” and “antibiotics don’t hurt” clustered together like ED patients. They grouped separately in the online sample. Veteran responses about safety and efficacy (Factors 3 & 5) and knowledge about viruses and bacteria, (Factors 4 & 5) clustered separately (Fig. 2). For ED patients and the online sample, safety and efficacy and virus and bacteria responses clustered together, respectively (Fig. 1).

Conclusion

While Veterans did share some KAPs around antibiotics for URIs with ED patients and the online sample, this study shows they also have distinct views. Further testing in Veteran and non-Veteran populations should validate and assess reliability of this survey as an antimicrobial stewardship tool.

Disclosures

Carlos G. Grijalva, MD, MPH, AHRQ: Grant/Research Support|Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health: Grant/Research Support|CDC: Grant/Research Support|FDA: Grant/Research Support|Merck: Advisor/Consultant|NIH: Grant/Research Support|Pfizer: Advisor/Consultant|Sanofi: Grant/Research Support|Sanofi-Pasteur: Advisor/Consultant Milner B. Staub, MD, MPH, Gilead: Stocks/Bonds|Johnson & Johnson: Stocks/Bonds.

How do Hispanics/Latinos Perceive and Value the Return of Research Results?

Introduction: Interest in the return of research results has been increasing; however, little is known about how Hispanics/Latinos perceive and value receiving results. This study examined differences among Hispanics/Latinos by education and income in the experience and expectations about the return of research results, perceived value of specific types of information, and the least and most valuable specific information. Method: Retrospective observational design using a cross-sectional national survey sample of Hispanics/Latinos (n = 327). Results: Higher educational attainment was positively associated with the expectation to receive research results, likelihood to participate in research if given study findings, and likelihood to trust researchers if given results. Higher income was positively associated with the perceived value of getting results. Respondents with higher education specifically perceived greater value in information about how lifestyle and genetics affect their risk of disease, how genetics affect how they respond to medications, their ancestry, available clinical trials near them, and how to connect with other study participants. Respondents with higher income perceived greater value in information about how genetics affect their risk of disease and how they respond to medications. Conclusion: The findings offer important insights for planning research initiatives and for developing culturally targeted educational materials for Hispanics/Latinos.

Surveillance and Correlation of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Viral RNA, Antigen, Virus Isolation, and Self-Reported Symptoms in a Longitudinal Study With Daily Sampling

The novel coronavirus pandemic incited unprecedented demand for assays that detect viral nucleic acids, viral proteins, and corresponding antibodies. The 320 molecular diagnostics in receipt of US Food and Drug Administration emergency use authorization mainly focus on viral detection; however, no currently approved test can be used to infer infectiousness, that is, the presence of replicable virus. As the number of tests conducted increased, persistent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA positivity by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in some individuals led to concerns over quarantine guidelines. To this end, we attempted to design an assay that reduces the frequency of positive test results from individuals who do not shed culturable virus. We describe multiplex quantitative RT-PCR assays that detect genomic RNA (gRNA) and subgenomic RNA (sgRNA) species of SARS-CoV-2, including spike, nucleocapsid, membrane, envelope, and ORF8. Viral RNA abundances calculated from these assays were compared with antigen presence, self-reported symptoms, and culture outcome (virus isolation) using samples from a 14-day longitudinal household transmission study. By characterizing the clinical and molecular dynamics of infection, we show that sgRNA detection has higher predictive value for culture outcome compared to detection of gRNA alone. Our findings suggest that sgRNA presence correlates with active infection and may help identify individuals shedding culturable virus.

Effectiveness of two and three mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses against Omicron- and Delta-Related outpatient illness among adults, October 2021-February 2022

Background

We estimated SARS-CoV-2 Delta- and Omicron-specific effectiveness of two and three mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses in adults against symptomatic illness in US outpatient settings.

Methods

Between October 1, 2021, and February 12, 2022, research staff consented and enrolled eligible participants who had fever, cough, or loss of taste or smell and sought outpatient medical care or clinical SARS-CoV-2 testing within 10 days of illness onset. Using the test-negative design, we compared the odds of receiving two or three mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses among SARS-CoV-2 cases versus controls using logistic regression. Regression models were adjusted for study site, age, onset week, and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was calculated as (1 - adjusted odds ratio) × 100%.

Results

Among 3847 participants included for analysis, 574 (32%) of 1775 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the Delta predominant period and 1006 (56%) of 1794 participants tested positive during the Omicron predominant period. When Delta predominated, VE against symptomatic illness in outpatient settings was 63% (95% CI: 51% to 72%) among mRNA two-dose recipients and 96% (95% CI: 93% to 98%) for three-dose recipients. When Omicron predominated, VE was 21% (95% CI: -6% to 41%) among two-dose recipients and 62% (95% CI: 48% to 72%) among three-dose recipients.

Conclusions

In this adult population, three mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses provided substantial protection against symptomatic illness in outpatient settings when the Omicron variant became the predominant cause of COVID-19 in the United States. These findings support the recommendation for a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose.

COVID-19 and Acute Neurologic Complications in Children

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the epidemiology and outcomes of neurologic complications associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study of children 2 months to <18 years of age with COVID-19 discharged from 52 children's hospitals from March 2020 to March 2022. Neurologic complications were defined as encephalopathy, encephalitis, aseptic meningitis, febrile seizure, nonfebrile seizure, brain abscess and bacterial meningitis, Reye's syndrome, and cerebral infarction. We assessed length of stay (LOS), ICU admission, 30 day readmissions, deaths, and hospital costs. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with neurologic complications.

RESULTS

Of 15 137 children hospitalized with COVID-19, 1060 (7.0%) had a concurrent diagnosis of a neurologic complication. The most frequent neurologic complications were febrile seizures (3.9%), nonfebrile seizures (2.3%), and encephalopathy (2.2%). Hospital LOS, ICU admission, ICU LOS, 30 day readmissions, deaths, and hospital costs were higher in children with neurologic complications compared with those without complications. Factors associated with lower odds of neurologic complications included: younger age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96-0.98), occurrence during delta variant predominant time period (aOR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.57-0.87), presence of a nonneurologic complex chronic condition (aOR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.69-0.94). The presence of a neurologic complex chronic condition was associated with higher odds of neurologic complication (aOR 4.14, 95% CI 3.48-4.92).

CONCLUSIONS

Neurologic complications are common in children hospitalized with COVID-19 and are associated with worse hospital outcomes. Our findings emphasize the importance of COVID-19 immunization in children, especially in high-risk populations, such as those with neurologic comorbidity.

Vaccine effectiveness of primary series and booster doses against covid-19 associated hospital admissions in the United States: living test negative design study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of a primary covid-19 vaccine series plus booster doses with a primary series alone for the prevention of hospital admission with omicron related covid-19 in the United States.

DESIGN

Multicenter observational case-control study with a test negative design.

SETTING

Hospitals in 18 US states.

PARTICIPANTS

4760 adults admitted to one of 21 hospitals with acute respiratory symptoms between 26 December 2021 and 30 June 2022, a period when the omicron variant was dominant. Participants included 2385 (50.1%) patients with laboratory confirmed covid-19 (cases) and 2375 (49.9%) patients who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 (controls).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome was vaccine effectiveness against hospital admission with covid-19 for a primary series plus booster doses and a primary series alone by comparing the odds of being vaccinated with each of these regimens versus being unvaccinated among cases versus controls. Vaccine effectiveness analyses were stratified by immunosuppression status (immunocompetent, immunocompromised). The primary analysis evaluated all covid-19 vaccine types combined, and secondary analyses evaluated specific vaccine products.

RESULTS

Overall, median age of participants was 64 years (interquartile range 52-75 years), 994 (20.8%) were immunocompromised, 85 (1.8%) were vaccinated with a primary series plus two boosters, 1367 (28.7%) with a primary series plus one booster, and 1875 (39.3%) with a primary series alone, and 1433 (30.1%) were unvaccinated. Among immunocompetent participants, vaccine effectiveness for prevention of hospital admission with omicron related covid-19 for a primary series plus two boosters was 63% (95% confidence interval 37% to 78%), a primary series plus one booster was 65% (58% to 71%), and for a primary series alone was 37% (25% to 47%) (P<0.001 for the pooled boosted regimens compared with a primary series alone). Vaccine effectiveness was higher for a boosted regimen than for a primary series alone for both mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech): 73% (44% to 87%) for primary series plus two boosters, 64% (55% to 72%) for primary series plus one booster, and 36% (21% to 48%) for primary series alone (P<0.001); mRNA-1273 (Moderna): 68% (17% to 88%) for primary series plus two boosters, 65% (55% to 73%) for primary series plus one booster, and 41% (25% to 54%) for primary series alone (P=0.001)). Among immunocompromised patients, vaccine effectiveness for a primary series plus one booster was 69% (31% to 86%) and for a primary series alone was 49% (30% to 63%) (P=0.04).

CONCLUSION

During the first six months of 2022 in the US, booster doses of a covid-19 vaccine provided additional benefit beyond a primary vaccine series alone for preventing hospital admissions with omicron related covid-19.

READERS' NOTE

This article is a living test negative design study that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication.

mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness Against Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospitalization Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

The study objective was to evaluate 2- and 3-dose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization among adult solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients.

METHODS

We conducted a 21-site case-control analysis of 10 425 adults hospitalized in March to December 2021. Cases were hospitalized with COVID-19; controls were hospitalized for an alternative diagnosis (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-negative). Participants were classified as follows: SOT recipient (n = 440), other immunocompromising condition (n = 1684), or immunocompetent (n = 8301). The VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was calculated as 1-adjusted odds ratio of prior vaccination among cases compared with controls.

RESULTS

Among SOT recipients, VE was 29% (95% confidence interval [CI], -19% to 58%) for 2 doses and 77% (95% CI, 48% to 90%) for 3 doses. Among patients with other immunocompromising conditions, VE was 72% (95% CI, 64% to 79%) for 2 doses and 92% (95% CI, 85% to 95%) for 3 doses. Among immunocompetent patients, VE was 88% (95% CI, 87% to 90%) for 2 doses and 96% (95% CI, 83% to 99%) for 3 doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines was lower for SOT recipients than immunocompetent adults and those with other immunocompromising conditions. Among SOT recipients, vaccination with 3 doses of an mRNA vaccine led to substantially greater protection than 2 doses.

Medications and Adherence to Treatment Guidelines Among Children Hospitalized With Acute COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment guidelines rapidly evolved during the pandemic. The December 2020 Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guideline, endorsed by the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, recommended steroids for critical disease, and suggested steroids and remdesivir for severe disease. We evaluated how medications for children hospitalized with COVID-19 changed after guideline publication.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of children aged 30 days to <18 years hospitalized with acute COVID-19 at 42 tertiary care US children's hospitals April 2020 to December 2021. We compared medication use before and after the December 2020 IDSA guideline (pre- and postguideline) stratified by COVID-19 disease severity (mild-moderate, severe, critical) with interrupted time series.

RESULTS

Among 18 364 patients who met selection criteria, 80.3% were discharged in the postguideline period. Remdesivir and steroid use increased postguideline relative to the preguideline period, although the trend slowed. Postguideline, among patients with severe disease, 75.4% received steroids and 55.2% remdesivir, and in those with critical disease, 82.4% received steroids and 41.4% remdesivir. Compared with preguideline, enoxaparin use increased overall but decreased among patients with critical disease. Postguideline, tocilizumab use increased and hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, anakinra, and antibiotic use decreased. Antibiotic use remained high in severe (51.7%) and critical disease (81%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although utilization of COVID-19 medications changed after December 2020 IDSA guidelines, there was a decline in uptake and incomplete adherence for children with severe and critical disease. Efforts should enhance reliable delivery of guideline-directed therapies to children hospitalized with COVID-19 and assess their effectiveness.

Respiratory virus testing and clinical outcomes among children hospitalized with pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Despite the increased availability of diagnostic tests for respiratory viruses, their clinical utility for children with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To identify patterns of respiratory virus testing across children's hospitals prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and to determine whether hospital-level rates of viral testing were associated with clinical outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Multicenter retrospective cohort study of children hospitalized for CAP at 19 children's hospitals in the United States from 2010-2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Using a novel method to identify the performance of viral testing, we assessed time trends in the use of viral tests, both overall and stratified by testing method. Adjusted proportions of encounters with viral testing were compared across hospitals and were correlated with length of stay, antibiotic and oseltamivir use, and performance of ancillary laboratory testing.

RESULTS

There were 46,038 hospitalizations for non-severe CAP among children without complex chronic conditions. The proportion with viral testing increased from 38.8% to 44.2% during the study period (p < .001). Molecular testing increased (27.2% to 40.0%, p < .001) and antigen testing decreased (33.2% to 7.8%, p < .001). Hospital-specific adjusted proportions of testing ranged from 10.0% to 83.5% and were not associated with length of stay, antibiotic use, or antiviral use. Hospitals that performed more viral testing did not have lower rates of ancillary laboratory testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Viral testing practices varied widely across children's hospitals and were not associated with clinically important process or outcome measures. Viral testing may not influence clinical management for many children hospitalized with CAP.

Red Blood Cell Distribution Width and Pediatric Community-Acquired Pneumonia Disease Severity

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

No standardized risk assessment tool exists for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in children. This study aims to investigate the association between red blood cell distribution width (RDW) and pediatric CAP.

METHODS

Data prospectively collected by the Etiology of Pneumonia in the Community study (2010-2012) was used. Study population was pediatric patients admitted to tertiary care hospitals in Nashville and Memphis, Tennessee with clinically and radiographically confirmed CAP. The earliest measured RDW value on admission was used, in quintiles and also as a continuous variable. Outcomes analyzed were: severe CAP (requiring ICU, mechanical ventilation, vasopressor support, or death) or moderate CAP (hospital admission only). Analysis used multivariable logistic regression and restricted cubic splines modeling.

RESULTS

In 1459 eligible children, the median age was 29 months (interquartile range: 12-73), median RDW was 13.3% (interquartile range: 12.5-14.3), and 289 patients (19.8%) developed severe disease. In comparison with the lowest RDW quintile (Q1), the adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) for severe CAP in subsequent quintiles were, Q2: 1.20 (0.72-1.99); Q3: 1.28 (0.76-2.14); Q4: 1.69 (1.01-2.82); Q5: 1.25 (0.73-2.13). Consistently, RDW restricted cubic splines demonstrated an independent, nonlinear, positive association with CAP severity (P = .027), with rapid increases in the risk of severe CAP with RDW values up to 15%.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher presenting RDW was associated with an increased risk of severe CAP in hospitalized children. Widely available and inexpensive, RDW can serve as an objective data point to help with clinical assessments.

Antibiotics and outcomes of CF pulmonary exacerbations in children infected with MRSA and Pseudomonas aeruginosa

BACKGROUND

Limited data exist to inform antibiotic selection among people with cystic fibrosis (CF) with airway infection by multiple CF-related microorganisms. This study aimed to determine among children with CF co-infected with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Pa) if the addition of anti-MRSA antibiotics to antipseudomonal antibiotic treatment for pulmonary exacerbations (PEx) would be associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with antipseudomonal antibiotics alone.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study using data from the CF Foundation Patient Registry-Pediatric Health Information System linked dataset. The odds of returning to baseline lung function and having a subsequent PEx requiring intravenous antibiotics were compared between PEx treated with anti-MRSA and antipseudomonal antibiotics and those treated with antipseudomonal antibiotics alone, adjusting for confounding by indication using inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS

943 children with CF co-infected with MRSA and Pa contributed 2,989 PEx for analysis. Of these, 2,331 (78%) PEx were treated with both anti-MRSA and antipseudomonal antibiotics and 658 (22%) PEx were treated with antipseudomonal antibiotics alone. Compared with PEx treated with antipseudomonal antibiotics alone, the addition of anti-MRSA antibiotics to antipseudomonal antibiotic therapy was not associated with a higher odds of returning to ≥90% or ≥100% of baseline lung function or a lower odds of future PEx requiring intravenous antibiotics.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with CF co-infected with MRSA and Pa may not benefit from the addition of anti-MRSA antibiotics for PEx treatment. Prospective studies evaluating optimal antibiotic selection strategies for PEx treatment are needed to optimize clinical outcomes following PEx treatment.

Feasibility of a Centralized, Pharmacy-Led Penicillin Allergy Delabeling Program

BACKGROUND

Penicillin allergy labels are often inaccurate in children and removing unnecessary labels results in improved outcomes and lower health care costs. Although the hospital setting is a frequent point of contact for children, strategies to evaluate penicillin allergies in the hospital are lacking.

METHODS

We performed a prospective pilot study to determine the feasibility of a centralized, pharmacy-led approach to penicillin allergy evaluation. Children with a reported history of penicillin allergy admitted to our children's hospital were risk-stratified and those stratified as low-risk underwent a single-dose oral challenge by a central pharmacist, regardless of the need for antibiotics. After the completion of each patient's delabeling process, surveys were distributed to health care personnel involved in the patient's care to collect perceptions on the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of this intervention. Measures were scored by using a 5-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

Of the 23 patients who screened as low-risk, 20 underwent a penicillin allergy evaluation and an oral challenge. Of these, the penicillin allergy label was removed in 19 (95%) patients (Fig 1). The median age was 7 years (range 11 months-18 years). Participants rated the risk stratification and delabeling favorably overall, with high ratings on all 3 implementation measures: acceptability (mean 4.55, ± standard deviation [STD] 0.65), appropriateness (mean 4.58, STD ± 0.6), and feasibility (mean 4.51, STD ± 0.73). Measures of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility remained high when stratified by health care worker type and provider type.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide support for systemic implementation of penicillin allergy delabeling strategies in hospitalized children.

Associations between comorbidity-related functional limitations and pneumonia outcomes

BACKGROUND

Underlying comorbidities are common in children with pneumonia.

OBJECTIVE

To determine associations between comorbidity-related functional limitations and risk for severe pneumonia outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We prospectively enrolled children <18 years with and without comorbidities presenting to the emergency department with clinical and radiographic pneumonia at two institutions. Comorbidities included chronic conditions requiring daily medications, frequent healthcare visits, or which limited age-appropriate activities. Among children with comorbidities, functional limitations were defined as none or mild, moderate, and severe.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Outcomes included an ordinal severity outcome, categorized as very severe (mechanical ventilation, shock, or death), severe (intensive care without very severe features), moderate (hospitalization without severe features), or mild (discharged home), and length of stay (LOS). Multivariable ordinal logistic regression was used to examine associations between comorbidity-related functional limitations and outcomes, while accounting for relevant covariates.

RESULTS

A cohort of 1116 children, including 452 (40.5%) with comorbidities; 200 (44.2%) had none or mild functional limitations, 93 (20.6%) moderate, and 159 (35.2%) had severe limitations. In multivariable analysis, comorbidity-related functional limitations were associated with the ordinal severity outcome and LOS (p < .001 for both). Children with severe functional limitations had tripling of the odds of a more severe ordinal (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 3.01, 95% confidence interval [2.05, 4.43]) and quadrupling of the odds for longer LOS (aOR: 4.72 [3.33, 6.70]) as compared to children without comorbidities.

CONCLUSION

Comorbidity-related functional limitations are important predictors of disease outcomes in children with pneumonia. Consideration of functional limitations, rather than the presence of comorbidity alone, is critical when assessing risk of severe outcomes.

Association of antibiotics with veteran visit satisfaction and antibiotic expectations for upper respiratory tract infections

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Veterans' Affairs (VA) healthcare providers perceive that Veterans expect and base visit satisfaction on receiving antibiotics for upper respiratory tract infections (URIs). No studies have tested this hypothesis. We sought to determine whether receiving and/or expecting antibiotics were associated with Veteran satisfaction with URI visits.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included Veterans evaluated for URI January 2018-December 2019 in an 18-clinic ambulatory VA primary-care system. We evaluated Veteran satisfaction via the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form (RAND Corporation), an 18-item 5-point Likert scale survey. Additional items assessed Veteran antibiotic expectations. Antibiotic receipt was determined via medical record review. We used multivariable regression to evaluate whether antibiotic receipt and/or Veteran antibiotic expectations were associated with satisfaction. Subgroup analyses focused on Veterans who accurately remembered antibiotic prescribing during their URI visit.

RESULTS

Of 1,329 eligible Veterans, 432 (33%) participated. Antibiotic receipt was not associated with differences in mean total satisfaction (adjusted score difference, 0.6 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.1 to 3.3). However, mean total satisfaction was lower for Veterans expecting an antibiotic (adjusted score difference -4.4 points; 95% CI -7.2 to -1.6). Among Veterans who accurately remembered the visit and did not receive an antibiotic, those who expected an antibiotic had lower mean satisfaction scores than those who did not (unadjusted score difference, -16.6 points; 95% CI, -24.6 to -8.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Veteran expectations for antibiotics, not antibiotic receipt, are associated with changes in satisfaction with outpatient URI visits. Future research should further explore patient expectations and development of patient-centered and provider-focused interventions to change patient antibiotic expectations.

Vaccine Effectiveness of Primary Series and Booster Doses against Omicron Variant COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization in the United States

Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of a primary COVID-19 vaccine series plus a booster dose with a primary series alone for the prevention of Omicron variant COVID-19 hospitalization. Design: Multicenter observational case-control study using the test-negative design to evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE). Setting: Twenty-one hospitals in the United States (US). Participants: 3,181 adults hospitalized with an acute respiratory illness between December 26, 2021 and April 30, 2022, a period of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (BA.1, BA.2) predominance. Participants included 1,572 (49%) case-patients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 and 1,609 (51%) control patients who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Median age was 64 years, 48% were female, and 21% were immunocompromised; 798 (25%) were vaccinated with a primary series plus booster, 1,326 (42%) were vaccinated with a primary series alone, and 1,057 (33%) were unvaccinated. Main Outcome Measures: VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was calculated for a primary series plus a booster and a primary series alone by comparing the odds of being vaccinated with each of these regimens versus being unvaccinated among cases versus controls. VE analyses were stratified by immune status (immunocompetent; immunocompromised) because the recommended vaccine schedules are different for these groups. The primary analysis evaluated all COVID-19 vaccine types combined and secondary analyses evaluated specific vaccine products. Results: Among immunocompetent patients, VE against Omicron COVID-19 hospitalization for a primary series plus one booster of any vaccine product dose was 77% (95% CI: 71-82%), and for a primary series alone was 44% (95% CI: 31-54%) (p<0.001). VE was higher for a boosted regimen than a primary series alone for both mRNA vaccines used in the US (BNT162b2: primary series plus booster VE 80% (95% CI: 73-85%), primary series alone VE 46% (95% CI: 30-58%) [p<0.001]; mRNA-1273: primary series plus booster VE 77% (95% CI: 67-83%), primary series alone VE 47% (95% CI: 30-60%) [p<0.001]). Among immunocompromised patients, VE for a primary series of any vaccine product against Omicron COVID-19 hospitalization was 60% (95% CI: 41-73%). Insufficient sample size has accumulated to calculate effectiveness of boosted regimens for immunocompromised patients. Conclusions: Among immunocompetent people, a booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine provided additional benefit beyond a primary vaccine series alone for preventing COVID-19 hospitalization due to the Omicron variant.

Effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson) Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccine for Preventing COVID-19 Hospitalizations and Progression to High Disease Severity in the United States

Background . Adults in the United States (US) began receiving the adenovirus vector coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson [Janssen]), in February 2021. We evaluated Ad26.COV2.S vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization and high disease severity during the first 10 months of its use. Methods . In a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults (≥18 years) hospitalized 11 March to 15 December 2021, we estimated VE against susceptibility to COVID-19 hospitalization (VEs), comparing odds of prior vaccination with a single dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine between hospitalized cases with COVID-19 and controls without COVID-19. Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we estimated VE against disease progression (VEp) to death or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), comparing odds of prior vaccination between patients with and without progression. Results . After excluding patients receiving mRNA vaccines, among 3979 COVID-19 case-patients (5% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S) and 2229 controls (13% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S), VEs of Ad26.COV2.S against COVID-19 hospitalization was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63-75%) overall, including 55% (29-72%) among immunocompromised patients, and 72% (64-77%) among immunocompetent patients, for whom VEs was similar at 14-90 days (73% [59-82%]), 91-180 days (71% [60-80%]), and 181-274 days (70% [54-81%]) postvaccination. Among hospitalized COVID-19 case-patients, VEp was 46% (18-65%) among immunocompetent patients. Conclusions . The Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine reduced the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization by 72% among immunocompetent adults without waning through 6 months postvaccination. After hospitalization for COVID-19, vaccinated immunocompetent patients were less likely to require IMV or die compared to unvaccinated immunocompetent patients.

Effectiveness of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19 Hospitalization by Age and Chronic Medical Conditions Burden Among Immunocompetent US Adults, March-August 2021

Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization was evaluated among immunocompetent adults (≥18 years) during March-August 2021 using a case-control design. Among 1669 hospitalized COVID-19 cases (11% fully vaccinated) and 1950 RT-PCR-negative controls (54% fully vaccinated), VE was 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93%-98%) among patients with no chronic medical conditions and 83% (95% CI, 76%-88%) among patients with ≥ 3 categories of conditions. VE was similar between those aged 18-64 years versus ≥65 years (P > .05). VE against severe COVID-19 was very high among adults without chronic conditions and lessened with increasing comorbidity burden.