Epidemiology of influenza-associated hospitalization in adults, Toronto, 2007/8

The purpose of this investigation was to identify when diagnostic testing and empirical antiviral therapy should be considered for adult patients requiring hospitalization during influenza seasons. During the 2007/8 influenza season, six acute care hospitals in the Greater Toronto Area participated in active surveillance for laboratory-confirmed influenza requiring hospitalization. Nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs were obtained from patients presenting with acute respiratory or cardiac illness, or with febrile illness without clear non-respiratory etiology. Predictors of influenza were analyzed by multivariable logistic regression analysis and likelihoods of influenza infection in various patient groups were calculated. Two hundred and eighty of 3,917 patients were found to have influenza. Thirty-five percent of patients with influenza presented with a triage temperature >or=38.0 degrees C, 80% had respiratory symptoms in the emergency department, and 76% were >or=65 years old. Multivariable analysis revealed a triage temperature >or=38.0 degrees C (odds ratio [OR] 3.1; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.3-4.1), the presence of respiratory symptoms (OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.2-2.4), admission diagnosis of respiratory infection (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.3-2.4), admission diagnosis of exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)/asthma or respiratory failure (OR 2.3; 95% CI 1.6-3.4), and admission in peak influenza weeks (OR 4.2; 95% CI 3.1-5.7) as independent predictors of influenza. The likelihood of influenza exceeded 15% in patients with respiratory infection or exacerbation of COPD/asthma if the triage temperature was >or=38.0 degrees C or if they were admitted in the peak weeks during the influenza season. During influenza season, diagnostic testing and empiric antiviral therapy should be considered in patients requiring hospitalization if respiratory infection or exacerbation of COPD/asthma are suspected and if either the triage temperature is >or=38.0 degrees C or admission is during the weeks of peak influenza activity.

Abilities of APTIMA, AMPLICOR, and ProbeTec assays to detect Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in PreservCyt ThinPrep Liquid-based Pap samples

Infections with Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae are often asymptomatic. Liquid-based Pap (L-Pap) screening may provide samples for testing by commercial assays. Women attending a health clinic or a street youth clinic had a PreservCyt ThinPrep sample and a cervical swab (CS) collected. The L-Pap sample was tested for cytopathology; then 1 ml was transferred to an L-Pap specimen transfer tube for testing by the Gen-Probe APTIMA assays (APTIMA Combo 2 [AC2], APTIMA C. trachomatis [ACT], and APTIMA N. gonorrhoeae [AGC]). The residual L-Pap sample was tested for C. trachomatis and N. gonorrhoeae using Roche AMPLICOR (AMP) and Becton Dickinson ProbeTec (PT). The CS was tested by AC2. A patient was considered infected if two specimens were positive or if a single specimen was positive in two tests. The prevalence of infection was 10% (29/290) for C. trachomatis and 2.4% (7/290) for N. gonorrhoeae. Most of the positive patients had specimens that were reactive in all assays (20/29 for C. trachomatis; 6/7 for N. gonorrhoeae). Four patients had double infections. The sensitivities and specificities of the various tests for the specimens tested were as follows. For C. trachomatis on L-Pap, sensitivity and specificity were 100 and 98.1%, respectively, for ACT, 93.1 and 98.8% for AC2, 86.2 and 91.2% for AMP, and 72.4 and 92.7% for PT. For N. gonorrhoeae on L-Pap, sensitivity and specificity were 100% for both AGC and AC2, 85.7 and 100% for AMP, and 85.7 and 100% for PT. For AC2 with CSs, sensitivity and specificity were 93.1 and 98.5%, respectively, for C. trachomatis, and both were 100% for N. gonorrhoeae. There were significant differences in sensitivity and specificity (P < 0.001). The APTIMA assays were more sensitive and specific than AMP or PT for detecting women's C. trachomatis and/or N. gonorrhoeae infections by testing ThinPrep samples.

Decreased prevalence of virulence factors among ciprofloxacin-resistant uropathogenic Escherichia coli isolates

Ciprofloxacin resistance was identified in 18% and 6% of consecutively collected, clinically significant urinary tract isolates of Escherichia coli from inpatients and outpatients, respectively. In comparison to ciprofloxacin-susceptible isolates, there were fewer resistant isolates that expressed beta-hemolysis (outpatient, 9% versus 87%, P < 0.0001; inpatient, 4% versus 76%, P < 0.0001) and that had a papEF genotype, genes encoding P fimbriae (outpatient, 30% versus 70%, P = 0.0004; inpatient, 26% versus 70%, P < 0.0001).

Adjudicating ventilator-associated pneumonia in a randomized trial of critically ill patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate an adjudication strategy for diagnosing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in a randomized trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a double-blind trial of sucralfate versus ranitidine, one of four pairs of adjudicators examined each case of clinically suspected VAP. Nurse and physician notes and all relevant laboratory data were allocated to each adjudication pair in groups of five patients. Each reader in the pair decided whether the patient had VAP; differences were resolved by consensus discussion.

RESULTS

The overall unadjusted study odds ratio for VAP was 0.82 (P = .21) representing a trend toward less pneumonia with sucralfate compared with ranitidine. The odds ratio adjusted for adjudication pair was 0.85 (P = .27). The proportion of charts adjudicated as VAP positive among pairs ranged from 50% to 92%; crude agreement between readers in each pair varied from 50% to 82%. When adjudicators disagreed, the final consensus was split evenly between the two adjudicators' initial opinions in two pairs; in the other two pairs, the final decision reflected one dominant initial opinion. Personnel time to adjudicate all patients with a suspicion of VAP was 74 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Though adjudication of outcomes such as VAP is time-consuming, consistent decision-making requires strict criteria, training, and calibration. Patients should be assigned to adjudication teams through random allocation.

Inadequacy of intravenous heparin therapy in the initial management of venous thromboembolism

To determine the adequacy of initial anticoagulation by intravenous heparin for patients who have deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and the factors that influence delayed anticoagulation, independent, duplicate chart review of 63 consecutive patients who had venography-proven DVT was conducted. Adequate heparinization (AH) was defined as an activated partial thromboplastin time (PTT) of more than 1.5 times the normal laboratory control. The proportions of patients achieving AH within 24 hours and 48 hours of initial heparin bolus were 46% and 62%, respectively. Patients who weighed more were less likely to achieve AH (p < 0.05), while patients receiving care from the thromboembolism service were more likely to achieve AH (p < 0.05). Low initial infusion rate was strongly but not significantly predictive of inadequate anticoagulation (p = 0.06). The mean heparin bolus and initial infusion rates were significantly lower than those suggested in the literature (p < 0.01). The AH rates were comparable to historical controls but suboptimal compared with the rates of 66% at 24 hours and 81% at 48 hours reported in association with heparin nomogram use (p < 0.05). A heparin nomogram is likely to achieve consistently higher rates of adequate heparinization.

Epidural analgesia for post-caesarean pain relief: a comparison between morphine and fentanyl

In 20 post-operative patients who had undergone caesarean section, morphine 2 mg or fentanyl 75 micrograms in 0.9% saline were given epidurally in a randomized study, to compare their effectiveness in providing post-operative pain relief and the incidence of untoward reaction. There was a faster onset of action (P less than 0.01) and the quality of pain relief was substantially better after epidural fentanyl (P less than 0.01). However, the duration of action was markedly longer after epidural morphine (P less than 0.01). There was a significantly greater incidence of urinary retention after morphine administration (P less than 0.05). It is suggested that fentanyl gives better relief of pain than morphine when given epidurally.