Differentiating severe and non-severe lower respiratory tract illness in patients hospitalized with influenza: Development of the Influenza Disease Evaluation and Assessment of Severity (IDEAS) scale

Performance of established disease severity scores in predicting severe outcomes among adults hospitalized with influenza-FluSurv-NET, 2017-2018

Background

Influenza is a substantial cause of annual morbidity and mortality; however, correctly identifying those patients at increased risk for severe disease is often challenging. Several severity indices have been developed; however, these scores have not been validated for use in patients with influenza. We evaluated the discrimination of three clinical disease severity scores in predicting severe influenza-associated outcomes.

Methods

We used data from the Influenza Hospitalization Surveillance Network to assess outcomes of patients hospitalized with influenza in the United States during the 2017-2018 influenza season. We computed patient scores at admission for three widely used disease severity scores: CURB-65, Quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), and the Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI). We then grouped patients with severe outcomes into four severity tiers, ranging from ICU admission to death, and calculated receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for each severity index in predicting these tiers of severe outcomes.

Results

Among 8252 patients included in this study, we found that all tested severity scores had higher discrimination for more severe outcomes, including death, and poorer discrimination for less severe outcomes, such as ICU admission. We observed the highest discrimination for PSI against in-hospital mortality, at 0.78.

Conclusions

We observed low to moderate discrimination of all three scores in predicting severe outcomes among adults hospitalized with influenza. Given the substantial annual burden of influenza disease in the United States, identifying a prediction index for severe outcomes in adults requiring hospitalization with influenza would be beneficial for patient triage and clinical decision-making.

Clinical Evaluation of the ButterfLife Device for Simultaneous Multiparameter Telemonitoring in Hospital and Home Settings

We conducted a two-phase study to test the reliability and usability of an all-in-one artificial intelligence-based device (ButterfLife), which allows simultaneous monitoring of five vital signs. The first phase of the study aimed to test the agreement between measurements performed with ButterfLife vs. standard of care (SoC) in 42 hospitalized patients affected by acute respiratory failure. In this setting, the greatest discordance between ButterfLife and SoC was in respiratory rate (mean difference -4.69 bpm). Significantly close correlations were observed for all parameters except diastolic blood pressure and oxygen saturation (Spearman's Rho -0.18 mmHg; p = 0.33 and 0.20%; p = 0.24, respectively). The second phase of the study was conducted on eight poly-comorbid patients using ButterfLife at home, to evaluate the number of clinical conditions detected, as well as the patients' compliance and satisfaction. The average proportion of performed tests compared with the scheduled number was 67.4%, and no patients reported difficulties with use. Seven conditions requiring medical attention were identified, with a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 88.9%. The median patient satisfaction was 9.5/10. In conclusion, ButterfLife proved to be a reliable and easy-to-use device, capable of simultaneously assessing five vital signs in both hospital and home settings.