Allowed Publications
Slot System
Featured Buckets
Featured Buckets Admin

Post-TAVR anticoagulation alone fails to cut stroke risk in AFib

Timely results, but further investigations required
Article Type
Changed
Tue, 08/20/2019 - 09:40

 

In patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib) who have undergone transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and had a CHA2DS2-VASc score of at least 2, oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy alone was not linked to reduced stroke risk.

By contrast, antiplatelet therapy was linked to a reduced risk of stroke in those AFib-TAVR patients, regardless of whether an oral anticoagulant was on board, according to results of a substudy of the randomized PARTNER II (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve II) trial and its associated registries.

“Anticoagulant therapy was associated with a reduced risk of stroke and the composite of death or stroke when used concomitantly with uninterrupted antiplatelet therapy following TAVR,” concluded authors of the analysis, led by Ioanna Kosmidou, MD, PhD, of Columbia University in New York.

Taken together, these findings suggest OAC alone is “not sufficient” to prevent cerebrovascular events after TAVR in patients with AFib, Dr. Kosmidou and colleagues reported in JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions.

The analysis of the PARTNER II substudy included a total of 1,621 patients with aortic stenosis treated with TAVR who had a history of AFib and an absolute indication for anticoagulation as evidenced by a CHA2DS2-VASc score of at least 2.

Despite the absolute indication for anticoagulation, more than 40% of these patients were not prescribed an OAC upon discharge, investigators wrote, though the rate of nonprescribing decreased over the 5-year enrollment period of 2011-2015.



OAC therapy alone was not linked to reduced stroke risk in this cohort, investigators said. After 2 years, the rate of stroke was 6.6% for AFib-TAVR patients on anticoagulant therapy, and 5.6% for those who were not on anticoagulant therapy, a nonsignificant difference at P = 0.53, according to the reported data.

By contrast, uninterrupted antiplatelet therapy reduced both risk of stroke and risk of the composite endpoint of stroke and death at 2 years “irrespective of concomitant anticoagulation,” Dr. Kosmidou and coinvestigators wrote in the report.

The stroke rates were 5.4% for antiplatelet therapy plus OAC, versus 11.1% for those receiving neither antithrombotic treatment (P = 0.03), while the rates of stroke or death were 29.7% and 40.1%, respectively (P = 0.01), according to investigators.

After adjustment, stroke risk was not significantly reduced for OAC when compared with no OAC or antiplatelet therapy (HR, 0.61; P = .16), whereas stroke risk was indeed reduced for antiplatelet therapy alone (HR, 0.32; P = .002) and antiplatelet therapy with oral anticoagulation (HR, 0.44; P = .018).

The PARTNER II study was funded by Edwards Lifesciences. Senior author Martin B. Leon, MD, and several other study coauthors reported disclosures related to Edwards Lifesciences, in addition to Abbott Vascular, Cordis, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and other companies. Dr. Kosmidou reported no disclosures.

SOURCE: Kosmidou I et al. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12:1580-9.

Body

 

Results of this PARTNER II substudy investigation by Kosmidou and colleagues are timely and thought provoking because they imply that some current recommendations may be insufficient for preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Specifically, the results showed no difference in risk of stroke or the composite of death and stroke at 2 years in oral anticoagulant (OAC) and non-OAC patient groups, whereas by contrast, antiplatelet therapy was linked with reduced stroke risk versus no antithrombotic therapy, whether or not the patients received OAC.

The substudy reinforces the understanding that TAVR itself is a determinant of stroke because of mechanisms that go beyond thrombus formation in the left atrial appendage and are essentially platelet mediated.

How to manage antithrombotic therapy in patients with AFib who undergo TAVR remains a residual field of ambiguity.

However, observational studies cannot be conclusive, they said, so results of relevant prospective, randomized trials are eagerly awaited.

For example, the effects of novel oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists will be evaluated in the ENVISAGE-TAVI study, as well as the ATLANTIS trial, which will additionally include non-OAC patients.

The relative benefits of OAC alone versus OAC plus antiplatelet therapy will be evaluated in the AVATAR study, which will include AFib-TAVR patients randomized to OAC versus OAC plus aspirin, while the POPular-TAVI and CLOE trials will also include cohorts that help provide a more eloquent answer regarding the benefit-risk ratio of combining antiplatelet therapy and OAC in these patients.
 

Davide Capodanno, MD, PhD, and Antonio Greco, MD, of the University of Catania (Italy) made these comments in an accompanying editorial (JACC: Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Aug 19. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.07.004). Dr. Capodanno reported disclosures related to Abbott Vascular, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Sanofi. Dr. Greco reported having no relevant disclosures.

Publications
Topics
Sections
Body

 

Results of this PARTNER II substudy investigation by Kosmidou and colleagues are timely and thought provoking because they imply that some current recommendations may be insufficient for preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Specifically, the results showed no difference in risk of stroke or the composite of death and stroke at 2 years in oral anticoagulant (OAC) and non-OAC patient groups, whereas by contrast, antiplatelet therapy was linked with reduced stroke risk versus no antithrombotic therapy, whether or not the patients received OAC.

The substudy reinforces the understanding that TAVR itself is a determinant of stroke because of mechanisms that go beyond thrombus formation in the left atrial appendage and are essentially platelet mediated.

How to manage antithrombotic therapy in patients with AFib who undergo TAVR remains a residual field of ambiguity.

However, observational studies cannot be conclusive, they said, so results of relevant prospective, randomized trials are eagerly awaited.

For example, the effects of novel oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists will be evaluated in the ENVISAGE-TAVI study, as well as the ATLANTIS trial, which will additionally include non-OAC patients.

The relative benefits of OAC alone versus OAC plus antiplatelet therapy will be evaluated in the AVATAR study, which will include AFib-TAVR patients randomized to OAC versus OAC plus aspirin, while the POPular-TAVI and CLOE trials will also include cohorts that help provide a more eloquent answer regarding the benefit-risk ratio of combining antiplatelet therapy and OAC in these patients.
 

Davide Capodanno, MD, PhD, and Antonio Greco, MD, of the University of Catania (Italy) made these comments in an accompanying editorial (JACC: Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Aug 19. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.07.004). Dr. Capodanno reported disclosures related to Abbott Vascular, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Sanofi. Dr. Greco reported having no relevant disclosures.

Body

 

Results of this PARTNER II substudy investigation by Kosmidou and colleagues are timely and thought provoking because they imply that some current recommendations may be insufficient for preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Specifically, the results showed no difference in risk of stroke or the composite of death and stroke at 2 years in oral anticoagulant (OAC) and non-OAC patient groups, whereas by contrast, antiplatelet therapy was linked with reduced stroke risk versus no antithrombotic therapy, whether or not the patients received OAC.

The substudy reinforces the understanding that TAVR itself is a determinant of stroke because of mechanisms that go beyond thrombus formation in the left atrial appendage and are essentially platelet mediated.

How to manage antithrombotic therapy in patients with AFib who undergo TAVR remains a residual field of ambiguity.

However, observational studies cannot be conclusive, they said, so results of relevant prospective, randomized trials are eagerly awaited.

For example, the effects of novel oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists will be evaluated in the ENVISAGE-TAVI study, as well as the ATLANTIS trial, which will additionally include non-OAC patients.

The relative benefits of OAC alone versus OAC plus antiplatelet therapy will be evaluated in the AVATAR study, which will include AFib-TAVR patients randomized to OAC versus OAC plus aspirin, while the POPular-TAVI and CLOE trials will also include cohorts that help provide a more eloquent answer regarding the benefit-risk ratio of combining antiplatelet therapy and OAC in these patients.
 

Davide Capodanno, MD, PhD, and Antonio Greco, MD, of the University of Catania (Italy) made these comments in an accompanying editorial (JACC: Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Aug 19. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.07.004). Dr. Capodanno reported disclosures related to Abbott Vascular, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Sanofi. Dr. Greco reported having no relevant disclosures.

Title
Timely results, but further investigations required
Timely results, but further investigations required

 

In patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib) who have undergone transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and had a CHA2DS2-VASc score of at least 2, oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy alone was not linked to reduced stroke risk.

By contrast, antiplatelet therapy was linked to a reduced risk of stroke in those AFib-TAVR patients, regardless of whether an oral anticoagulant was on board, according to results of a substudy of the randomized PARTNER II (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve II) trial and its associated registries.

“Anticoagulant therapy was associated with a reduced risk of stroke and the composite of death or stroke when used concomitantly with uninterrupted antiplatelet therapy following TAVR,” concluded authors of the analysis, led by Ioanna Kosmidou, MD, PhD, of Columbia University in New York.

Taken together, these findings suggest OAC alone is “not sufficient” to prevent cerebrovascular events after TAVR in patients with AFib, Dr. Kosmidou and colleagues reported in JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions.

The analysis of the PARTNER II substudy included a total of 1,621 patients with aortic stenosis treated with TAVR who had a history of AFib and an absolute indication for anticoagulation as evidenced by a CHA2DS2-VASc score of at least 2.

Despite the absolute indication for anticoagulation, more than 40% of these patients were not prescribed an OAC upon discharge, investigators wrote, though the rate of nonprescribing decreased over the 5-year enrollment period of 2011-2015.



OAC therapy alone was not linked to reduced stroke risk in this cohort, investigators said. After 2 years, the rate of stroke was 6.6% for AFib-TAVR patients on anticoagulant therapy, and 5.6% for those who were not on anticoagulant therapy, a nonsignificant difference at P = 0.53, according to the reported data.

By contrast, uninterrupted antiplatelet therapy reduced both risk of stroke and risk of the composite endpoint of stroke and death at 2 years “irrespective of concomitant anticoagulation,” Dr. Kosmidou and coinvestigators wrote in the report.

The stroke rates were 5.4% for antiplatelet therapy plus OAC, versus 11.1% for those receiving neither antithrombotic treatment (P = 0.03), while the rates of stroke or death were 29.7% and 40.1%, respectively (P = 0.01), according to investigators.

After adjustment, stroke risk was not significantly reduced for OAC when compared with no OAC or antiplatelet therapy (HR, 0.61; P = .16), whereas stroke risk was indeed reduced for antiplatelet therapy alone (HR, 0.32; P = .002) and antiplatelet therapy with oral anticoagulation (HR, 0.44; P = .018).

The PARTNER II study was funded by Edwards Lifesciences. Senior author Martin B. Leon, MD, and several other study coauthors reported disclosures related to Edwards Lifesciences, in addition to Abbott Vascular, Cordis, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and other companies. Dr. Kosmidou reported no disclosures.

SOURCE: Kosmidou I et al. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12:1580-9.

 

In patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib) who have undergone transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and had a CHA2DS2-VASc score of at least 2, oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy alone was not linked to reduced stroke risk.

By contrast, antiplatelet therapy was linked to a reduced risk of stroke in those AFib-TAVR patients, regardless of whether an oral anticoagulant was on board, according to results of a substudy of the randomized PARTNER II (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve II) trial and its associated registries.

“Anticoagulant therapy was associated with a reduced risk of stroke and the composite of death or stroke when used concomitantly with uninterrupted antiplatelet therapy following TAVR,” concluded authors of the analysis, led by Ioanna Kosmidou, MD, PhD, of Columbia University in New York.

Taken together, these findings suggest OAC alone is “not sufficient” to prevent cerebrovascular events after TAVR in patients with AFib, Dr. Kosmidou and colleagues reported in JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions.

The analysis of the PARTNER II substudy included a total of 1,621 patients with aortic stenosis treated with TAVR who had a history of AFib and an absolute indication for anticoagulation as evidenced by a CHA2DS2-VASc score of at least 2.

Despite the absolute indication for anticoagulation, more than 40% of these patients were not prescribed an OAC upon discharge, investigators wrote, though the rate of nonprescribing decreased over the 5-year enrollment period of 2011-2015.



OAC therapy alone was not linked to reduced stroke risk in this cohort, investigators said. After 2 years, the rate of stroke was 6.6% for AFib-TAVR patients on anticoagulant therapy, and 5.6% for those who were not on anticoagulant therapy, a nonsignificant difference at P = 0.53, according to the reported data.

By contrast, uninterrupted antiplatelet therapy reduced both risk of stroke and risk of the composite endpoint of stroke and death at 2 years “irrespective of concomitant anticoagulation,” Dr. Kosmidou and coinvestigators wrote in the report.

The stroke rates were 5.4% for antiplatelet therapy plus OAC, versus 11.1% for those receiving neither antithrombotic treatment (P = 0.03), while the rates of stroke or death were 29.7% and 40.1%, respectively (P = 0.01), according to investigators.

After adjustment, stroke risk was not significantly reduced for OAC when compared with no OAC or antiplatelet therapy (HR, 0.61; P = .16), whereas stroke risk was indeed reduced for antiplatelet therapy alone (HR, 0.32; P = .002) and antiplatelet therapy with oral anticoagulation (HR, 0.44; P = .018).

The PARTNER II study was funded by Edwards Lifesciences. Senior author Martin B. Leon, MD, and several other study coauthors reported disclosures related to Edwards Lifesciences, in addition to Abbott Vascular, Cordis, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and other companies. Dr. Kosmidou reported no disclosures.

SOURCE: Kosmidou I et al. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12:1580-9.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

FROM JACC: CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Differential monocytic HLA-DR expression prognostically useful in PICU

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 02/14/2023 - 13:04

 

– During their first 4 days in the pediatric ICU, critically ill children have significantly reduced human leukocyte antigen (HLA)–DR expression within all three major subsets of monocytes. The reductions are seen regardless of whether the children were admitted for sepsis, trauma, or after surgery, Navin Boeddha, MD, PhD, reported in his PIDJ Award Lecture at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News
Dr. Navin P. Boeddha

The PIDJ Award is given annually by the editors of the Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal in recognition of what they deem the most important study published in the journal during the prior year. This one stood out because it identified promising potential laboratory markers that have been sought as a prerequisite to developing immunostimulatory therapies aimed at improving outcomes in severely immunosuppressed children.

Researchers are particularly eager to explore this investigative treatment strategy because the mortality and long-term morbidity of pediatric sepsis, in particular, remain unacceptably high. The hope now is that HLA-DR expression on monocyte subsets will be helpful in directing granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, interferon-gamma, and other immunostimulatory therapies to the pediatric ICU patients with the most favorable benefit/risk ratio, according to Dr. Boeddha of Sophia Children’s Hospital and Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

He reported on 37 critically ill children admitted to a pediatric ICU – 12 for sepsis, 11 post surgery, 10 for trauma, and 4 for other reasons – as well as 37 healthy controls. HLA-DR expression on monocyte subsets was measured by flow cytometry upon admission and again on each of the following 3 days.

The impetus for this study is that severe infection, major surgery, and severe trauma are often associated with immunosuppression. And while prior work in septic adults has concluded that decreased monocytic HLA-DR expression is a marker for immunosuppression – and that the lower the level of such expression, the greater the risk of nosocomial infection and death – this phenomenon hasn’t been well studied in critically ill children, he explained.

Dr. Boeddha and coinvestigators found that monocytic HLA-DR expression, which plays a major role in presenting antigens to T cells, decreased over time during the critically ill children’s first 4 days in the pediatric ICU. Moreover, it was lower than in controls at all four time points. This was true both for the percentage of HLA-DR–expressing monocytes of all subsets, as well as for HLA-DR mean fluorescence intensity.

In the critically ill study population as a whole, the percentage of classical monocytes – that is, CD14++ CD16– monocytes – was significantly greater at admission than in healthy controls by margins of 95% and 87%, while the percentage of nonclassical CD14+/-CD16++ monocytes was markedly lower at 2% than the 9% figure in controls.

The biggest discrepancy in monocyte subset distribution was seen in patients admitted for sepsis. Their percentage of classical monocytes was lower than in controls by a margin of 82% versus 87%; however, their proportion of intermediate monocytes (CD14++ CD16+) upon admission was twice that of controls, and it climbed further to 14% on day 2.

Among the key findings in the Rotterdam study: 13 of 37 critically ill patients experienced at least one nosocomial infection while in the pediatric ICU. Their day 2 percentage of HLA-DR–expressing classical monocytes was 42%, strikingly lower than the 78% figure in patients who didn’t develop an infection. Also, the 6 patients who died had only a 33% rate of HLA-DR–expressing classical monocytes on day 3 after pediatric ICU admission versus a 63% rate in survivors of their critical illness.

Thus, low HLA-DR expression on classical monocytes early during the course of a pediatric ICU stay may be the sought-after biomarker that identifies a particularly high-risk subgroup of critically ill children in whom immunostimulatory therapies should be studied. However, future confirmatory studies should monitor monocytic HLA-DR expression in a larger critically ill patient population for a longer period in order to establish the time to recovery of low expression and its impact on long-term complications, the physician said.

Dr. Boeddha reported having no financial conflicts regarding the award-winning study, supported by the European Union and Erasmus University.
 

SOURCE: Boeddha NP et al. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2018 Oct;37(10):1034-40.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– During their first 4 days in the pediatric ICU, critically ill children have significantly reduced human leukocyte antigen (HLA)–DR expression within all three major subsets of monocytes. The reductions are seen regardless of whether the children were admitted for sepsis, trauma, or after surgery, Navin Boeddha, MD, PhD, reported in his PIDJ Award Lecture at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News
Dr. Navin P. Boeddha

The PIDJ Award is given annually by the editors of the Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal in recognition of what they deem the most important study published in the journal during the prior year. This one stood out because it identified promising potential laboratory markers that have been sought as a prerequisite to developing immunostimulatory therapies aimed at improving outcomes in severely immunosuppressed children.

Researchers are particularly eager to explore this investigative treatment strategy because the mortality and long-term morbidity of pediatric sepsis, in particular, remain unacceptably high. The hope now is that HLA-DR expression on monocyte subsets will be helpful in directing granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, interferon-gamma, and other immunostimulatory therapies to the pediatric ICU patients with the most favorable benefit/risk ratio, according to Dr. Boeddha of Sophia Children’s Hospital and Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

He reported on 37 critically ill children admitted to a pediatric ICU – 12 for sepsis, 11 post surgery, 10 for trauma, and 4 for other reasons – as well as 37 healthy controls. HLA-DR expression on monocyte subsets was measured by flow cytometry upon admission and again on each of the following 3 days.

The impetus for this study is that severe infection, major surgery, and severe trauma are often associated with immunosuppression. And while prior work in septic adults has concluded that decreased monocytic HLA-DR expression is a marker for immunosuppression – and that the lower the level of such expression, the greater the risk of nosocomial infection and death – this phenomenon hasn’t been well studied in critically ill children, he explained.

Dr. Boeddha and coinvestigators found that monocytic HLA-DR expression, which plays a major role in presenting antigens to T cells, decreased over time during the critically ill children’s first 4 days in the pediatric ICU. Moreover, it was lower than in controls at all four time points. This was true both for the percentage of HLA-DR–expressing monocytes of all subsets, as well as for HLA-DR mean fluorescence intensity.

In the critically ill study population as a whole, the percentage of classical monocytes – that is, CD14++ CD16– monocytes – was significantly greater at admission than in healthy controls by margins of 95% and 87%, while the percentage of nonclassical CD14+/-CD16++ monocytes was markedly lower at 2% than the 9% figure in controls.

The biggest discrepancy in monocyte subset distribution was seen in patients admitted for sepsis. Their percentage of classical monocytes was lower than in controls by a margin of 82% versus 87%; however, their proportion of intermediate monocytes (CD14++ CD16+) upon admission was twice that of controls, and it climbed further to 14% on day 2.

Among the key findings in the Rotterdam study: 13 of 37 critically ill patients experienced at least one nosocomial infection while in the pediatric ICU. Their day 2 percentage of HLA-DR–expressing classical monocytes was 42%, strikingly lower than the 78% figure in patients who didn’t develop an infection. Also, the 6 patients who died had only a 33% rate of HLA-DR–expressing classical monocytes on day 3 after pediatric ICU admission versus a 63% rate in survivors of their critical illness.

Thus, low HLA-DR expression on classical monocytes early during the course of a pediatric ICU stay may be the sought-after biomarker that identifies a particularly high-risk subgroup of critically ill children in whom immunostimulatory therapies should be studied. However, future confirmatory studies should monitor monocytic HLA-DR expression in a larger critically ill patient population for a longer period in order to establish the time to recovery of low expression and its impact on long-term complications, the physician said.

Dr. Boeddha reported having no financial conflicts regarding the award-winning study, supported by the European Union and Erasmus University.
 

SOURCE: Boeddha NP et al. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2018 Oct;37(10):1034-40.

 

– During their first 4 days in the pediatric ICU, critically ill children have significantly reduced human leukocyte antigen (HLA)–DR expression within all three major subsets of monocytes. The reductions are seen regardless of whether the children were admitted for sepsis, trauma, or after surgery, Navin Boeddha, MD, PhD, reported in his PIDJ Award Lecture at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News
Dr. Navin P. Boeddha

The PIDJ Award is given annually by the editors of the Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal in recognition of what they deem the most important study published in the journal during the prior year. This one stood out because it identified promising potential laboratory markers that have been sought as a prerequisite to developing immunostimulatory therapies aimed at improving outcomes in severely immunosuppressed children.

Researchers are particularly eager to explore this investigative treatment strategy because the mortality and long-term morbidity of pediatric sepsis, in particular, remain unacceptably high. The hope now is that HLA-DR expression on monocyte subsets will be helpful in directing granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, interferon-gamma, and other immunostimulatory therapies to the pediatric ICU patients with the most favorable benefit/risk ratio, according to Dr. Boeddha of Sophia Children’s Hospital and Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

He reported on 37 critically ill children admitted to a pediatric ICU – 12 for sepsis, 11 post surgery, 10 for trauma, and 4 for other reasons – as well as 37 healthy controls. HLA-DR expression on monocyte subsets was measured by flow cytometry upon admission and again on each of the following 3 days.

The impetus for this study is that severe infection, major surgery, and severe trauma are often associated with immunosuppression. And while prior work in septic adults has concluded that decreased monocytic HLA-DR expression is a marker for immunosuppression – and that the lower the level of such expression, the greater the risk of nosocomial infection and death – this phenomenon hasn’t been well studied in critically ill children, he explained.

Dr. Boeddha and coinvestigators found that monocytic HLA-DR expression, which plays a major role in presenting antigens to T cells, decreased over time during the critically ill children’s first 4 days in the pediatric ICU. Moreover, it was lower than in controls at all four time points. This was true both for the percentage of HLA-DR–expressing monocytes of all subsets, as well as for HLA-DR mean fluorescence intensity.

In the critically ill study population as a whole, the percentage of classical monocytes – that is, CD14++ CD16– monocytes – was significantly greater at admission than in healthy controls by margins of 95% and 87%, while the percentage of nonclassical CD14+/-CD16++ monocytes was markedly lower at 2% than the 9% figure in controls.

The biggest discrepancy in monocyte subset distribution was seen in patients admitted for sepsis. Their percentage of classical monocytes was lower than in controls by a margin of 82% versus 87%; however, their proportion of intermediate monocytes (CD14++ CD16+) upon admission was twice that of controls, and it climbed further to 14% on day 2.

Among the key findings in the Rotterdam study: 13 of 37 critically ill patients experienced at least one nosocomial infection while in the pediatric ICU. Their day 2 percentage of HLA-DR–expressing classical monocytes was 42%, strikingly lower than the 78% figure in patients who didn’t develop an infection. Also, the 6 patients who died had only a 33% rate of HLA-DR–expressing classical monocytes on day 3 after pediatric ICU admission versus a 63% rate in survivors of their critical illness.

Thus, low HLA-DR expression on classical monocytes early during the course of a pediatric ICU stay may be the sought-after biomarker that identifies a particularly high-risk subgroup of critically ill children in whom immunostimulatory therapies should be studied. However, future confirmatory studies should monitor monocytic HLA-DR expression in a larger critically ill patient population for a longer period in order to establish the time to recovery of low expression and its impact on long-term complications, the physician said.

Dr. Boeddha reported having no financial conflicts regarding the award-winning study, supported by the European Union and Erasmus University.
 

SOURCE: Boeddha NP et al. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2018 Oct;37(10):1034-40.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM ESPID 2019

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

To be, or not to be ... on backup?

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 08/23/2019 - 15:42

A staffing backup system is essential

 

It was late 2011. We were a practice of around 20 physicians, and just starting to integrate advanced practice providers into our practice. Our average daily census was about 100 patients and slightly more than 50% of our services were resident services.

Dr. Romil Chadha

My boss, colleague, friend, and mentor – Charles “Chuck” Sargent, MD, and I were on service together early one Saturday morning; Chuck gets a phone call that one of our colleagues was ill. With just 10 physicians working and 10 off, it was an ordeal for Chuck to call all 10 colleagues. Unlike most times, no one could come to moonlight that day. In the end Chuck and I took care of our colleague’s patients.

Yes, it was an exhausting few days, but illness and family needs do not come announced. Now, close to a decade later, we are a practice of 70 physicians and 16 advanced practice providers, our average daily census is about 270 patients, and we have two backup physicians every day – known as Jeopardy-1 and Jeopardy-2. Paternity leave, maternity leave, minor illness, minor trauma, surgery, and family needs are common for our practice. We considered it a good year when we utilized our Jeopardy-1 and Jeopardy-2 for 10% and 1% respectively; and for the past year with a lot of needs, we employed Jeopardy-1 and Jeopardy-2 for 25% and 10%, respectively.



A staffing backup system is a necessary tool for almost every practice. Not having a formal backup system doesn’t mean you don’t need one or you don’t have one – it is just called “no formal backup system.” The Society of Hospital Medicine’s State of Hospital Medicine Reports (SoHM) have been providing data about staffing backup systems every other year. Backup systems come in three flavors. The first system is no formal backup, which means the leaders of the program scramble for coverage every time there is a need. The second is a voluntary backup system in which clinicians volunteer to be on a backup schedule, and the third is a mandatory system in which all or most clinicians are required to be on the backup schedule.

The cumulative data reported in the 2014, 2016, and 2018 SoHM for hospital medicine groups serving adults only, children only, and both adults and children (weighted for number of groups reporting), suggests that 48.3% of respondent practices had no formal backup system, 31.7% had a voluntary system, and 20% had a mandatory backup system.

When we look at different populations served, the trend of “no formal backup system” responses is in decline. The 2014, 2016, and 2018 SoHM reports for hospital medicine groups serving adults, children, and both adults and children, reinforce such trends. The SoHM 2018 report shows 65.6% of hospital medicine groups serving children, 41.6% of groups serving adults, and only 25% of groups serving both adults and children have “no formal backup system.” Our medicine-pediatrics colleagues seem to be leading the trend and have already deduced that, for a solid practice, a backup system is a necessity.

It is also important to see the trend of “no formal backup system” based on geographic area, employer type, academic status, or total number of full-time employees. As we would have predicted, the larger the group the more likely they are to have a backup system. For academic practices a similar trend was seen; they had a higher percentage of some type of backup system year after year.

When it comes to compensation for backup work, four patterns were explored by the SoHM over the years. The most common type of arrangement was “no additional compensation for being on the backup schedule, but additional compensation was provided when called into work.” This kind of arrangement would be easiest to negotiate when the hospitalist and the employer sit across a table. There is nothing at risk for the employer when there isn’t a need, or when there is a need to fill a shift.

The least common method was “additional compensation for being on the backup schedule, but no additional compensation if called into work.” From employers’ perspectives, this is an extra expense and is not ideal for the hospitalist either. In the middle of the pack were “no additional compensation associated with the backup plan” (the second most common model), while the third most common model was “additional compensation for being on the backup schedule, as well as additional compensation if called into work.”

Once you have seen one hospital medicine practice, you have seen one hospital medicine practice. There are different needs for every group, and the backup system – as well its compensation model – has to be designed for it. Thankfully, the SoHM reports reveal the patterns and trends so that we don’t have to reinvent the wheel. For our practice, we decreased a week of clinical service for 2 weeks a year of backup. Every time we activate our backup system, the person coming in receives extra compensation or a similar shift off. In the long run, our backup system didn’t kill us, but rather made us stronger as a group.

Dr. Chadha is interim division chief in the division of hospital medicine at the University of Kentucky HealthCare in Lexington. He actively leads efforts of recruiting, scheduling, practice analysis, and operation of the group. He is a first-time member of the SHM Practice Analysis Committee. Ms. Babb is administrative support associate in the division of hospital medicine at University of Kentucky HealthCare.

Publications
Topics
Sections

A staffing backup system is essential

A staffing backup system is essential

 

It was late 2011. We were a practice of around 20 physicians, and just starting to integrate advanced practice providers into our practice. Our average daily census was about 100 patients and slightly more than 50% of our services were resident services.

Dr. Romil Chadha

My boss, colleague, friend, and mentor – Charles “Chuck” Sargent, MD, and I were on service together early one Saturday morning; Chuck gets a phone call that one of our colleagues was ill. With just 10 physicians working and 10 off, it was an ordeal for Chuck to call all 10 colleagues. Unlike most times, no one could come to moonlight that day. In the end Chuck and I took care of our colleague’s patients.

Yes, it was an exhausting few days, but illness and family needs do not come announced. Now, close to a decade later, we are a practice of 70 physicians and 16 advanced practice providers, our average daily census is about 270 patients, and we have two backup physicians every day – known as Jeopardy-1 and Jeopardy-2. Paternity leave, maternity leave, minor illness, minor trauma, surgery, and family needs are common for our practice. We considered it a good year when we utilized our Jeopardy-1 and Jeopardy-2 for 10% and 1% respectively; and for the past year with a lot of needs, we employed Jeopardy-1 and Jeopardy-2 for 25% and 10%, respectively.



A staffing backup system is a necessary tool for almost every practice. Not having a formal backup system doesn’t mean you don’t need one or you don’t have one – it is just called “no formal backup system.” The Society of Hospital Medicine’s State of Hospital Medicine Reports (SoHM) have been providing data about staffing backup systems every other year. Backup systems come in three flavors. The first system is no formal backup, which means the leaders of the program scramble for coverage every time there is a need. The second is a voluntary backup system in which clinicians volunteer to be on a backup schedule, and the third is a mandatory system in which all or most clinicians are required to be on the backup schedule.

The cumulative data reported in the 2014, 2016, and 2018 SoHM for hospital medicine groups serving adults only, children only, and both adults and children (weighted for number of groups reporting), suggests that 48.3% of respondent practices had no formal backup system, 31.7% had a voluntary system, and 20% had a mandatory backup system.

When we look at different populations served, the trend of “no formal backup system” responses is in decline. The 2014, 2016, and 2018 SoHM reports for hospital medicine groups serving adults, children, and both adults and children, reinforce such trends. The SoHM 2018 report shows 65.6% of hospital medicine groups serving children, 41.6% of groups serving adults, and only 25% of groups serving both adults and children have “no formal backup system.” Our medicine-pediatrics colleagues seem to be leading the trend and have already deduced that, for a solid practice, a backup system is a necessity.

It is also important to see the trend of “no formal backup system” based on geographic area, employer type, academic status, or total number of full-time employees. As we would have predicted, the larger the group the more likely they are to have a backup system. For academic practices a similar trend was seen; they had a higher percentage of some type of backup system year after year.

When it comes to compensation for backup work, four patterns were explored by the SoHM over the years. The most common type of arrangement was “no additional compensation for being on the backup schedule, but additional compensation was provided when called into work.” This kind of arrangement would be easiest to negotiate when the hospitalist and the employer sit across a table. There is nothing at risk for the employer when there isn’t a need, or when there is a need to fill a shift.

The least common method was “additional compensation for being on the backup schedule, but no additional compensation if called into work.” From employers’ perspectives, this is an extra expense and is not ideal for the hospitalist either. In the middle of the pack were “no additional compensation associated with the backup plan” (the second most common model), while the third most common model was “additional compensation for being on the backup schedule, as well as additional compensation if called into work.”

Once you have seen one hospital medicine practice, you have seen one hospital medicine practice. There are different needs for every group, and the backup system – as well its compensation model – has to be designed for it. Thankfully, the SoHM reports reveal the patterns and trends so that we don’t have to reinvent the wheel. For our practice, we decreased a week of clinical service for 2 weeks a year of backup. Every time we activate our backup system, the person coming in receives extra compensation or a similar shift off. In the long run, our backup system didn’t kill us, but rather made us stronger as a group.

Dr. Chadha is interim division chief in the division of hospital medicine at the University of Kentucky HealthCare in Lexington. He actively leads efforts of recruiting, scheduling, practice analysis, and operation of the group. He is a first-time member of the SHM Practice Analysis Committee. Ms. Babb is administrative support associate in the division of hospital medicine at University of Kentucky HealthCare.

 

It was late 2011. We were a practice of around 20 physicians, and just starting to integrate advanced practice providers into our practice. Our average daily census was about 100 patients and slightly more than 50% of our services were resident services.

Dr. Romil Chadha

My boss, colleague, friend, and mentor – Charles “Chuck” Sargent, MD, and I were on service together early one Saturday morning; Chuck gets a phone call that one of our colleagues was ill. With just 10 physicians working and 10 off, it was an ordeal for Chuck to call all 10 colleagues. Unlike most times, no one could come to moonlight that day. In the end Chuck and I took care of our colleague’s patients.

Yes, it was an exhausting few days, but illness and family needs do not come announced. Now, close to a decade later, we are a practice of 70 physicians and 16 advanced practice providers, our average daily census is about 270 patients, and we have two backup physicians every day – known as Jeopardy-1 and Jeopardy-2. Paternity leave, maternity leave, minor illness, minor trauma, surgery, and family needs are common for our practice. We considered it a good year when we utilized our Jeopardy-1 and Jeopardy-2 for 10% and 1% respectively; and for the past year with a lot of needs, we employed Jeopardy-1 and Jeopardy-2 for 25% and 10%, respectively.



A staffing backup system is a necessary tool for almost every practice. Not having a formal backup system doesn’t mean you don’t need one or you don’t have one – it is just called “no formal backup system.” The Society of Hospital Medicine’s State of Hospital Medicine Reports (SoHM) have been providing data about staffing backup systems every other year. Backup systems come in three flavors. The first system is no formal backup, which means the leaders of the program scramble for coverage every time there is a need. The second is a voluntary backup system in which clinicians volunteer to be on a backup schedule, and the third is a mandatory system in which all or most clinicians are required to be on the backup schedule.

The cumulative data reported in the 2014, 2016, and 2018 SoHM for hospital medicine groups serving adults only, children only, and both adults and children (weighted for number of groups reporting), suggests that 48.3% of respondent practices had no formal backup system, 31.7% had a voluntary system, and 20% had a mandatory backup system.

When we look at different populations served, the trend of “no formal backup system” responses is in decline. The 2014, 2016, and 2018 SoHM reports for hospital medicine groups serving adults, children, and both adults and children, reinforce such trends. The SoHM 2018 report shows 65.6% of hospital medicine groups serving children, 41.6% of groups serving adults, and only 25% of groups serving both adults and children have “no formal backup system.” Our medicine-pediatrics colleagues seem to be leading the trend and have already deduced that, for a solid practice, a backup system is a necessity.

It is also important to see the trend of “no formal backup system” based on geographic area, employer type, academic status, or total number of full-time employees. As we would have predicted, the larger the group the more likely they are to have a backup system. For academic practices a similar trend was seen; they had a higher percentage of some type of backup system year after year.

When it comes to compensation for backup work, four patterns were explored by the SoHM over the years. The most common type of arrangement was “no additional compensation for being on the backup schedule, but additional compensation was provided when called into work.” This kind of arrangement would be easiest to negotiate when the hospitalist and the employer sit across a table. There is nothing at risk for the employer when there isn’t a need, or when there is a need to fill a shift.

The least common method was “additional compensation for being on the backup schedule, but no additional compensation if called into work.” From employers’ perspectives, this is an extra expense and is not ideal for the hospitalist either. In the middle of the pack were “no additional compensation associated with the backup plan” (the second most common model), while the third most common model was “additional compensation for being on the backup schedule, as well as additional compensation if called into work.”

Once you have seen one hospital medicine practice, you have seen one hospital medicine practice. There are different needs for every group, and the backup system – as well its compensation model – has to be designed for it. Thankfully, the SoHM reports reveal the patterns and trends so that we don’t have to reinvent the wheel. For our practice, we decreased a week of clinical service for 2 weeks a year of backup. Every time we activate our backup system, the person coming in receives extra compensation or a similar shift off. In the long run, our backup system didn’t kill us, but rather made us stronger as a group.

Dr. Chadha is interim division chief in the division of hospital medicine at the University of Kentucky HealthCare in Lexington. He actively leads efforts of recruiting, scheduling, practice analysis, and operation of the group. He is a first-time member of the SHM Practice Analysis Committee. Ms. Babb is administrative support associate in the division of hospital medicine at University of Kentucky HealthCare.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Presepsin can rule out invasive bacterial infection in infants

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 08/19/2019 - 16:47

 

– A point-of-care presepsin measurement in the emergency department displayed powerful accuracy for early rule-out of invasive bacterial infection in infants less than 3 months old presenting with fever without a source, based on results of a phase 3 multicenter Italian study.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News
Dr. Luca Pierantoni

“P-SEP [presepsin] is a promising new biomarker. P-SEP accuracy for invasive bacterial infection is comparable to procalcitonin, even though P-SEP, like procalcitonin, is probably not accurate enough to be used as a stand-alone marker to rule-in an invasive bacterial infection,” Luca Pierantoni, MD, said in presenting the preliminary study results at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases.

The presepsin test is a rapid point-of-care test well-suited for the ED setting, with a cost equal to that of point-of-care procalcitonin.

Presepsin is a form of soluble CD14 that is released from the surface of macrophages, monocytes, and neutrophils when these immune cells are stimulated by pathogens. “We think it may be a reliable diagnostic and prognostic marker of sepsis in adults and neonates,” explained Dr. Pierantoni of the University of Bologna, Italy.

Indeed, studies in adults suggest presepsin has better sensitivity and specificity than other biomarkers for early diagnosis of sepsis, and that it provides useful information on severity and prognosis as well. But, Dr. Pierantoni and his coworkers wondered, how does it perform in febrile young infants?

The Italian study was designed to address an unmet need: Fever accounts for about one-third of ED visits in infants up to age 3 months, 20% of whom are initially categorized as having fever without source. Yet ultimately 10%-20% of those youngsters having fever without source are found to have an invasive bacterial infection – that is, sepsis or meningitis – or a severe bacterial infection such as pneumonia, a urinary tract infection, or an infected umbilical cord. The sooner these infants can be identified and appropriately treated, the better.

The study enrolled 284 children less than 3 months old who had fever without cause of a mean 10.5 hours duration and presented to the emergency departments of six Italian medical centers. Children were eligible for the study regardless of whether they appeared toxic or well. Presepsin, procalcitonin, and C-reactive protein levels were immediately measured in all participants. Ultimately, 5.6% of subjects were diagnosed with an invasive bacterial infection, and another 21.2% had a severe bacterial infection.

Using a cutoff value of 449 pg/mL, P-SEP had good diagnostic accuracy for invasive bacterial infection, with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.81, essentially the same as the 0.82 value for procalcitonin. P-SEP had a sensitivity and specificity of 87% and 75%, respectively, placing it in the same ballpark as the 82% and 86% values for procalcitonin. The strong point for P-SEP was its 99% negative predictive value, as compared to 91% for procalcitonin. The positive predictive values were 17% for P-SEP and 20% for procalcitonin.

In response to an audience question, Dr. Pierantoni speculated that the best use for P-SEP in the setting of fever of unknown origin may be in combination with procalcitonin rather than as a replacement for it. The research team is now in the process of analyzing their study data to see if that is indeed the case.

He reported having no financial conflicts regarding his study, conducted free of commercial support.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– A point-of-care presepsin measurement in the emergency department displayed powerful accuracy for early rule-out of invasive bacterial infection in infants less than 3 months old presenting with fever without a source, based on results of a phase 3 multicenter Italian study.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News
Dr. Luca Pierantoni

“P-SEP [presepsin] is a promising new biomarker. P-SEP accuracy for invasive bacterial infection is comparable to procalcitonin, even though P-SEP, like procalcitonin, is probably not accurate enough to be used as a stand-alone marker to rule-in an invasive bacterial infection,” Luca Pierantoni, MD, said in presenting the preliminary study results at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases.

The presepsin test is a rapid point-of-care test well-suited for the ED setting, with a cost equal to that of point-of-care procalcitonin.

Presepsin is a form of soluble CD14 that is released from the surface of macrophages, monocytes, and neutrophils when these immune cells are stimulated by pathogens. “We think it may be a reliable diagnostic and prognostic marker of sepsis in adults and neonates,” explained Dr. Pierantoni of the University of Bologna, Italy.

Indeed, studies in adults suggest presepsin has better sensitivity and specificity than other biomarkers for early diagnosis of sepsis, and that it provides useful information on severity and prognosis as well. But, Dr. Pierantoni and his coworkers wondered, how does it perform in febrile young infants?

The Italian study was designed to address an unmet need: Fever accounts for about one-third of ED visits in infants up to age 3 months, 20% of whom are initially categorized as having fever without source. Yet ultimately 10%-20% of those youngsters having fever without source are found to have an invasive bacterial infection – that is, sepsis or meningitis – or a severe bacterial infection such as pneumonia, a urinary tract infection, or an infected umbilical cord. The sooner these infants can be identified and appropriately treated, the better.

The study enrolled 284 children less than 3 months old who had fever without cause of a mean 10.5 hours duration and presented to the emergency departments of six Italian medical centers. Children were eligible for the study regardless of whether they appeared toxic or well. Presepsin, procalcitonin, and C-reactive protein levels were immediately measured in all participants. Ultimately, 5.6% of subjects were diagnosed with an invasive bacterial infection, and another 21.2% had a severe bacterial infection.

Using a cutoff value of 449 pg/mL, P-SEP had good diagnostic accuracy for invasive bacterial infection, with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.81, essentially the same as the 0.82 value for procalcitonin. P-SEP had a sensitivity and specificity of 87% and 75%, respectively, placing it in the same ballpark as the 82% and 86% values for procalcitonin. The strong point for P-SEP was its 99% negative predictive value, as compared to 91% for procalcitonin. The positive predictive values were 17% for P-SEP and 20% for procalcitonin.

In response to an audience question, Dr. Pierantoni speculated that the best use for P-SEP in the setting of fever of unknown origin may be in combination with procalcitonin rather than as a replacement for it. The research team is now in the process of analyzing their study data to see if that is indeed the case.

He reported having no financial conflicts regarding his study, conducted free of commercial support.

 

– A point-of-care presepsin measurement in the emergency department displayed powerful accuracy for early rule-out of invasive bacterial infection in infants less than 3 months old presenting with fever without a source, based on results of a phase 3 multicenter Italian study.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News
Dr. Luca Pierantoni

“P-SEP [presepsin] is a promising new biomarker. P-SEP accuracy for invasive bacterial infection is comparable to procalcitonin, even though P-SEP, like procalcitonin, is probably not accurate enough to be used as a stand-alone marker to rule-in an invasive bacterial infection,” Luca Pierantoni, MD, said in presenting the preliminary study results at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases.

The presepsin test is a rapid point-of-care test well-suited for the ED setting, with a cost equal to that of point-of-care procalcitonin.

Presepsin is a form of soluble CD14 that is released from the surface of macrophages, monocytes, and neutrophils when these immune cells are stimulated by pathogens. “We think it may be a reliable diagnostic and prognostic marker of sepsis in adults and neonates,” explained Dr. Pierantoni of the University of Bologna, Italy.

Indeed, studies in adults suggest presepsin has better sensitivity and specificity than other biomarkers for early diagnosis of sepsis, and that it provides useful information on severity and prognosis as well. But, Dr. Pierantoni and his coworkers wondered, how does it perform in febrile young infants?

The Italian study was designed to address an unmet need: Fever accounts for about one-third of ED visits in infants up to age 3 months, 20% of whom are initially categorized as having fever without source. Yet ultimately 10%-20% of those youngsters having fever without source are found to have an invasive bacterial infection – that is, sepsis or meningitis – or a severe bacterial infection such as pneumonia, a urinary tract infection, or an infected umbilical cord. The sooner these infants can be identified and appropriately treated, the better.

The study enrolled 284 children less than 3 months old who had fever without cause of a mean 10.5 hours duration and presented to the emergency departments of six Italian medical centers. Children were eligible for the study regardless of whether they appeared toxic or well. Presepsin, procalcitonin, and C-reactive protein levels were immediately measured in all participants. Ultimately, 5.6% of subjects were diagnosed with an invasive bacterial infection, and another 21.2% had a severe bacterial infection.

Using a cutoff value of 449 pg/mL, P-SEP had good diagnostic accuracy for invasive bacterial infection, with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.81, essentially the same as the 0.82 value for procalcitonin. P-SEP had a sensitivity and specificity of 87% and 75%, respectively, placing it in the same ballpark as the 82% and 86% values for procalcitonin. The strong point for P-SEP was its 99% negative predictive value, as compared to 91% for procalcitonin. The positive predictive values were 17% for P-SEP and 20% for procalcitonin.

In response to an audience question, Dr. Pierantoni speculated that the best use for P-SEP in the setting of fever of unknown origin may be in combination with procalcitonin rather than as a replacement for it. The research team is now in the process of analyzing their study data to see if that is indeed the case.

He reported having no financial conflicts regarding his study, conducted free of commercial support.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM ESPID 2019

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: A rapid point-of-care measurement of presepsin in the ED can rule out invasive bacterial infection with 99% accuracy in young infants with fever of unknown source.

Major finding: The negative predictive value of a presepsin level below the cutoff value of 449 pg/mL was 99%.

Study details: This was a multicenter Italian observational study of 284 infants less than 3 months old who presented to emergency departments with fever without source.

Disclosures: The presenter reported having no financial conflicts regarding his study, conducted free of commercial support.
 

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

‘Substantial burden’ of enterovirus meningitis in young infants

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 08/19/2019 - 16:48

 

– A prospective international surveillance study has provided new insights into the surprisingly substantial clinical burden of viral meningitis caused by enteroviruses and human parechoviruses in young infants, Seilesh Kadambari, MBBS, PhD, said in his ESPID Young Investigator Award Lecture at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases.

This comprehensive study captured all cases of laboratory-confirmed enterovirus (EV) and human parechovirus (HPeV) meningitis in infants less than 90 days old seen by pediatricians in the United Kingdom and Ireland during a 13-month period starting in July 2014, a time free of outbreaks. Dr. Kadambari, a pediatrician at the University of Oxford (England), was first author of the study. It was for this project, as well as his earlier studies shedding light on congenital viral infections, that he received the Young Investigator honor.

Among the key findings of the U.K./Ireland surveillance study: The incidence of EV/HPeV meningitis was more than twice that of bacterial meningitis in the same age group and more than fivefold higher than that of group B streptococcal meningitis, the No. 1 cause of bacterial meningitis in early infancy. Moreover, more than one-half of infants with EV/HPeV meningitis had low levels of inflammatory markers and no cerebrospinal fluid pleocytosis, which underscores the importance of routinely testing the cerebrospinal fluid for viral causes of meningitis in such patients using modern molecular tools such as multiplex polymerase chain reaction, according to Dr. Kadambari.

“Also, not a single one of the patients with EV/HPeV meningitis had a secondary bacterial infection – and that has important implications for management of our antibiotic stewardship programs,” he observed.

The study (Arch Dis Child. 2019 Jun;104(6):552-7) identified 668 cases of EV meningitis and 35 of HPeV meningitis, for an incidence of 0.79 and 0.04 per 1,000 live births, respectively. The most common clinical presentations were those generally seen in meningitis: fever, irritability, and reduced feeding. Circulatory shock was present in 43% of the infants with HPeV and 27% of the infants with EV infections.



Of infants with EV meningitis, 11% required admission to an intensive care unit, as did 23% of those with HPeV meningitis. Two babies with EV meningitis died and four others had continued neurologic complications at 12 months of follow-up. In contrast, all infants with HPeV survived without long-term sequelae.

Reassuringly, none of the 189 infants who underwent formal hearing testing had sensorineural hearing loss.

The surveillance study data have played an influential role in evidence-based guidelines for EV diagnosis and characterization published by the European Society of Clinical Virology (J Clin Virol. 2018 Apr;101:11-7).

An earlier study led by Dr. Kadambari documented a hefty sevenfold increase in the rate of laboratory-confirmed viral meningo-encephalitis in England and Wales during 2004-2013 across all age groups (J Infect. 2014 Oct;69[4]:326-32).

He attributed this increase to improved diagnosis of viral forms of meningitis through greater use of polymerase chain reaction. The study, based upon National Health Service hospital records, showed that more than 90% of all cases of viral meningo-encephalitis in infants less than 90 days old were caused by EV, a finding that prompted the subsequent prospective U.K./Ireland surveillance study.

Dr. Kadambari closed by noting the past decade had seen a greatly improved ability to diagnose congenital viral infections, but those improvements are not good enough.

“In the decade ahead, we hope to improve the management of this poorly understood group of infections,” the pediatrician promised.

Planned efforts include a cost-effectiveness analysis of a cytomegalovirus vaccine, an ESPID-funded research project aimed at identifying which EV/HPeV strains are most responsible for outbreaks and isolated severe disease, and gaining insight into the host-immunity factors associated with a proclivity to develop EV/HPeV meningitis in early infancy.

Dr. Kadambari reported having no financial conflicts regarding his studies, which was funded largely by Public Health England and university grants.

 

SOURCE: Kadambari S et al. Arch Dis Child. 2019;104:552-7.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– A prospective international surveillance study has provided new insights into the surprisingly substantial clinical burden of viral meningitis caused by enteroviruses and human parechoviruses in young infants, Seilesh Kadambari, MBBS, PhD, said in his ESPID Young Investigator Award Lecture at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases.

This comprehensive study captured all cases of laboratory-confirmed enterovirus (EV) and human parechovirus (HPeV) meningitis in infants less than 90 days old seen by pediatricians in the United Kingdom and Ireland during a 13-month period starting in July 2014, a time free of outbreaks. Dr. Kadambari, a pediatrician at the University of Oxford (England), was first author of the study. It was for this project, as well as his earlier studies shedding light on congenital viral infections, that he received the Young Investigator honor.

Among the key findings of the U.K./Ireland surveillance study: The incidence of EV/HPeV meningitis was more than twice that of bacterial meningitis in the same age group and more than fivefold higher than that of group B streptococcal meningitis, the No. 1 cause of bacterial meningitis in early infancy. Moreover, more than one-half of infants with EV/HPeV meningitis had low levels of inflammatory markers and no cerebrospinal fluid pleocytosis, which underscores the importance of routinely testing the cerebrospinal fluid for viral causes of meningitis in such patients using modern molecular tools such as multiplex polymerase chain reaction, according to Dr. Kadambari.

“Also, not a single one of the patients with EV/HPeV meningitis had a secondary bacterial infection – and that has important implications for management of our antibiotic stewardship programs,” he observed.

The study (Arch Dis Child. 2019 Jun;104(6):552-7) identified 668 cases of EV meningitis and 35 of HPeV meningitis, for an incidence of 0.79 and 0.04 per 1,000 live births, respectively. The most common clinical presentations were those generally seen in meningitis: fever, irritability, and reduced feeding. Circulatory shock was present in 43% of the infants with HPeV and 27% of the infants with EV infections.



Of infants with EV meningitis, 11% required admission to an intensive care unit, as did 23% of those with HPeV meningitis. Two babies with EV meningitis died and four others had continued neurologic complications at 12 months of follow-up. In contrast, all infants with HPeV survived without long-term sequelae.

Reassuringly, none of the 189 infants who underwent formal hearing testing had sensorineural hearing loss.

The surveillance study data have played an influential role in evidence-based guidelines for EV diagnosis and characterization published by the European Society of Clinical Virology (J Clin Virol. 2018 Apr;101:11-7).

An earlier study led by Dr. Kadambari documented a hefty sevenfold increase in the rate of laboratory-confirmed viral meningo-encephalitis in England and Wales during 2004-2013 across all age groups (J Infect. 2014 Oct;69[4]:326-32).

He attributed this increase to improved diagnosis of viral forms of meningitis through greater use of polymerase chain reaction. The study, based upon National Health Service hospital records, showed that more than 90% of all cases of viral meningo-encephalitis in infants less than 90 days old were caused by EV, a finding that prompted the subsequent prospective U.K./Ireland surveillance study.

Dr. Kadambari closed by noting the past decade had seen a greatly improved ability to diagnose congenital viral infections, but those improvements are not good enough.

“In the decade ahead, we hope to improve the management of this poorly understood group of infections,” the pediatrician promised.

Planned efforts include a cost-effectiveness analysis of a cytomegalovirus vaccine, an ESPID-funded research project aimed at identifying which EV/HPeV strains are most responsible for outbreaks and isolated severe disease, and gaining insight into the host-immunity factors associated with a proclivity to develop EV/HPeV meningitis in early infancy.

Dr. Kadambari reported having no financial conflicts regarding his studies, which was funded largely by Public Health England and university grants.

 

SOURCE: Kadambari S et al. Arch Dis Child. 2019;104:552-7.

 

– A prospective international surveillance study has provided new insights into the surprisingly substantial clinical burden of viral meningitis caused by enteroviruses and human parechoviruses in young infants, Seilesh Kadambari, MBBS, PhD, said in his ESPID Young Investigator Award Lecture at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases.

This comprehensive study captured all cases of laboratory-confirmed enterovirus (EV) and human parechovirus (HPeV) meningitis in infants less than 90 days old seen by pediatricians in the United Kingdom and Ireland during a 13-month period starting in July 2014, a time free of outbreaks. Dr. Kadambari, a pediatrician at the University of Oxford (England), was first author of the study. It was for this project, as well as his earlier studies shedding light on congenital viral infections, that he received the Young Investigator honor.

Among the key findings of the U.K./Ireland surveillance study: The incidence of EV/HPeV meningitis was more than twice that of bacterial meningitis in the same age group and more than fivefold higher than that of group B streptococcal meningitis, the No. 1 cause of bacterial meningitis in early infancy. Moreover, more than one-half of infants with EV/HPeV meningitis had low levels of inflammatory markers and no cerebrospinal fluid pleocytosis, which underscores the importance of routinely testing the cerebrospinal fluid for viral causes of meningitis in such patients using modern molecular tools such as multiplex polymerase chain reaction, according to Dr. Kadambari.

“Also, not a single one of the patients with EV/HPeV meningitis had a secondary bacterial infection – and that has important implications for management of our antibiotic stewardship programs,” he observed.

The study (Arch Dis Child. 2019 Jun;104(6):552-7) identified 668 cases of EV meningitis and 35 of HPeV meningitis, for an incidence of 0.79 and 0.04 per 1,000 live births, respectively. The most common clinical presentations were those generally seen in meningitis: fever, irritability, and reduced feeding. Circulatory shock was present in 43% of the infants with HPeV and 27% of the infants with EV infections.



Of infants with EV meningitis, 11% required admission to an intensive care unit, as did 23% of those with HPeV meningitis. Two babies with EV meningitis died and four others had continued neurologic complications at 12 months of follow-up. In contrast, all infants with HPeV survived without long-term sequelae.

Reassuringly, none of the 189 infants who underwent formal hearing testing had sensorineural hearing loss.

The surveillance study data have played an influential role in evidence-based guidelines for EV diagnosis and characterization published by the European Society of Clinical Virology (J Clin Virol. 2018 Apr;101:11-7).

An earlier study led by Dr. Kadambari documented a hefty sevenfold increase in the rate of laboratory-confirmed viral meningo-encephalitis in England and Wales during 2004-2013 across all age groups (J Infect. 2014 Oct;69[4]:326-32).

He attributed this increase to improved diagnosis of viral forms of meningitis through greater use of polymerase chain reaction. The study, based upon National Health Service hospital records, showed that more than 90% of all cases of viral meningo-encephalitis in infants less than 90 days old were caused by EV, a finding that prompted the subsequent prospective U.K./Ireland surveillance study.

Dr. Kadambari closed by noting the past decade had seen a greatly improved ability to diagnose congenital viral infections, but those improvements are not good enough.

“In the decade ahead, we hope to improve the management of this poorly understood group of infections,” the pediatrician promised.

Planned efforts include a cost-effectiveness analysis of a cytomegalovirus vaccine, an ESPID-funded research project aimed at identifying which EV/HPeV strains are most responsible for outbreaks and isolated severe disease, and gaining insight into the host-immunity factors associated with a proclivity to develop EV/HPeV meningitis in early infancy.

Dr. Kadambari reported having no financial conflicts regarding his studies, which was funded largely by Public Health England and university grants.

 

SOURCE: Kadambari S et al. Arch Dis Child. 2019;104:552-7.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM ESPID 2019

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Social determinants of health gaining prominence

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 08/26/2019 - 17:17

 

Fragmented, essentializing, simplistic. That’s how students at Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, described their required course on cultural competence. Lectures and discussions about cultural groups and communication issues weren’t providing them with the skills they needed to navigate doctor-patient relationships.

Courtesy Penn Medicine
Matthew Duda, Emily Keyes, and Mitchell Johnson, students in the Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

Their criticism was a wake-up call that Horace Delisser, MD, associate dean for diversity and inclusion at the school, took to heart. He enlisted medical students to help reinvent the curriculum. The result, Introduction to Medicine and Society, launched in 2013 and described in an article published in 2017 (Acad Med. 2017;92[3]:335-43), emphasizes self-awareness and reflection about one’s own biases and the adoption of a less hierarchical and more respectful “other-oriented” approach to the patient relationship.

The course examines social determinants of health (SDHs) – the influences of society, government, culture, and health systems. Students analyze how health and health outcomes are affected by a patient’s income, education, and living and working conditions, as well as access to healthy food, safe water, and transportation.

The Perelman School of Medicine is just one of the many medical schools across the country that is revising training, both didactic and experiential, to teach students about SDHs. A host of policy makers, advisory groups, and organized medicine groups have called in recent years for educational efforts to boost all physicians’ working knowledge of health inequities and SDHs.

Dr. Delisser, associate professor of medicine who also practices as a pulmonologist at the Harron Lung Center in the Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, said SDHs play into daily care.

Dr. Horace Delisser


Consider the patient who is chronically late for appointments. “It may not be an issue of the patient being disinterested in their health care, but maybe the public transportation system is unreliable, or maybe the patient has to take two buses and a subway to get there. I need [this knowledge] to inform my care and to engage my patient. I need to know, ‘what does it take for you to get here?’ That factors into how I [make the care plan],” said Dr. Delisser.

Malika Fair, MD, MPH, who teaches a longitudinal professional development class at George Washington University, Washington, and is senior director of health equity partnerships and programs at the American Association of Medical Colleges, provided the example of how her medical students intervened during their rotation in the emergency department on behalf of a newly-diagnosed patient with diabetes who had been unable to fill a prescribed medication. After determining where the patient lived, the students ensured that she had transportation and was able to get the needed medication at a local grocery store. They asked about her barriers to healthy eating, researched local grocery stores, and made practical recommendations that the patient was amenable to implementing. They identified a clinic closer to the patient’s home, and worked with her on making an appointment at a time when she could take off from work.

Dr. Malika Fair


“Because of their training, these students were able to identify and address social risks in their first month on the ward,” said Dr. Fair, who also practices emergency medicine. They had learned about how to ask about food access and how safe it was for the patient to walk and exercise in her neighborhood.

At Perelman, most students work in student-led community clinics, and some fourth-year students participate in an elective rotation as apprentices to community health workers, learning to address SDHs and develop the cultural humility that they learned about in the classroom. The rotation was similarly created in 2013 and is described in a 2018 article (J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2018;29[2]:581-90).“Being a good physician involves being technically competent as well as what I call relationally competent,” Dr. Delisser said. “And [this involves] being aware that my relationship with a patient doesn’t exist in a vacuum ... that there’s a bigger, broader social and structural context that I need to know and understand. I [then need] to use that to inform how I mediate and empower that relationship.”

Aletha Maybank, MD, who became the American Medical Association’s first chief health equity officer earlier this year, explained that “the medical profession had a very strong social context at one point in time,” but this was dampened by the Flexner Report of 1910.*

Dr. Aletha Maybank


The report revolutionized medical education by increasing its rigor, but “it was really focused on clinical and basic science and took out the social context, the context of what medicine is about,” said Dr. Maybank, a pediatrician with a board certification in preventive medicine/public health. “[Now] we’re asking, how do we revolutionize medical education again at this point in time, recognizing the confluence of information and data that we now have available to us about inequities and disparities ... and the sense of urgency from students.”


 

 

 

Students driving practice change

Students nationally are “the most important” drivers of the increasing focus on SDHs in medical education, according to Dr. Fair. “They are demanding experiences to learn about the entire patient. We know that only 20% of a patient’s health is dependent on their health care. Our students are demanding education about the other 80%.”

More and more, communities are identifying needs and “students will then come up with initiatives to meet those needs,” Dr. Fair said.

Others interviewed for this story predicted this trend will only intensify, since not-for-profit hospitals are required under the Affordable Care Act regulations to assess community health needs every few years and to intervene accordingly.

Education on health care systems is also advancing. Penn State University, for instance, utilized a million-dollar grant from the AMA’s Accelerating Change in Medical Education initiative to design and implement a 4-year curriculum on the health system sciences that started in 2014. The curriculum includes an immersive experience in patient navigation.

“Students were taught to be patient navigators, and they were assigned within the clinical context to work on issues like, why are [patients] having trouble getting their medications?” said Susan E. Skochelak, MD, MPH, who leads the 6-year-old Accelerating Change initiative as vice president for medical education at the AMA.

From the start, she noted, students at Penn State are encouraged to question inequities, social and structural barriers to health, and faults in the health care system. “The message given at their white coat ceremony is ‘Welcome to medicine. Now that you’re here, you’re a member of the health care team, and we want you to speak up if you think there are things that need to be addressed. We want you to tell us when the system is working and not working,’ ” said Dr Skochelak, who previously served as the senior associate dean for academic affairs at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, where she had been a tenured professor of family medicine.
 

Tomorrow’s physician partners

Approximately 80% of medical school graduates who participated in the AAMC’s 2018 survey of graduates said they had received significant training on health disparities—up from 71% in 2014.

“There’s a huge amount [of innovation] happening, but on the flip side, there’s not really a set of accepted tools and practices, and certainly no robust evaluation [of the training],” said Philip M. Alberti, PhD, senior director for health equity research and policy at the American Association of Medical Colleges. A recently published review (J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34[5]:720-30) shows growing interest in the teaching of SDHs in undergraduate medical education but variable content, strategies, and instructional practices.

Dr. Philip M. Alberti


Health care systems and practicing physicians are still very much feeling their way with SDHs. Screening tools are being developed and tested, and academic medical centers are trying to determine their roles in addressing issues such as transportation and housing – and what funding and structural levers can be pulled to fulfill these roles. “As we learn more about [these issues], it will become clearer what the right baseline set of competencies might be for all physicians,” Dr. Alberti noted.

In the meantime, some basic expectations for medical education are taking root officially. The National Board of Medical Examiners, with whom the AMA has partnered in its Accelerating Change initiative, has included questions in the United States Medical Licensing Examination on population health and SDHs, and plans to add more exam content on these topics and on health systems science, said Dr. Skochelak.

And through its site visit program (the Clinical Learning Environment Review program), the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has “made it pretty clear that there’s an expectation that residents and fellows are learning about the health system’s approach to identifying and addressing health care disparities – and that they’re given opportunities to develop quality improvement initiatives that target those disparities,” Dr. Alberti said.

In hopes of achieving consistency across medical specialties and in national accreditation and board certifications exams, the American Association of Medical Colleges is developing its first set of competencies in quality improvement and patient safety, with health equity being one of these competencies’ domains .

The competencies are tiered for medical school graduates, residency graduates, and faculty physicians who are 3-5 years post residency. At this point in time, said Dr. Alberti, the consensus among medical educators has been that physicians “need to be able to understand and consider [social, economic, and structural] contexts when they’re seeing patients, when they’re developing care plans, when they’re talking with caregivers, and when they’re looking at their own quality data.”

Elisabeth Poorman, MD, MPH, an internist at UW Medicine in Kent, Washington, said she worries that the passion of medical students for SDHs will too often be crushed, especially during residency and with immersion in the productivity-focused health care system. Studies show a drop in mental wellness and empathy and a rise in cynicism as training advances, said Dr. Poorman, who also writes about health care and issues of equity and serves on the editorial advisory board of Internal Medicine News.

With similar concerns, the AMA has recently launched a “Reimagining Residency” initiative that aims to improve transitions from medical school to residency and the wellness of residents and faculty, and expand educational content relating to SDHs.

Dr. Fair is optimistic that new physicians’ knowledge of SDHs will permeate medical practices.

“Physicians who are out practicing are going to be working with our graduates, and they’re going to be asking in [job] interviews, do you have flexible hours for patients? What community partnerships do you have? Are there other professionals on staff to help us address social determinants of health? What data [relating to SDHs] are you collecting?” she said.

Correction, 8/26/2019: An earlier version of this story misstated the title of Aletha Maybank, MD. Dr. Maybank's correct title is the first chief health equity officer of the American Medical Association.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Fragmented, essentializing, simplistic. That’s how students at Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, described their required course on cultural competence. Lectures and discussions about cultural groups and communication issues weren’t providing them with the skills they needed to navigate doctor-patient relationships.

Courtesy Penn Medicine
Matthew Duda, Emily Keyes, and Mitchell Johnson, students in the Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

Their criticism was a wake-up call that Horace Delisser, MD, associate dean for diversity and inclusion at the school, took to heart. He enlisted medical students to help reinvent the curriculum. The result, Introduction to Medicine and Society, launched in 2013 and described in an article published in 2017 (Acad Med. 2017;92[3]:335-43), emphasizes self-awareness and reflection about one’s own biases and the adoption of a less hierarchical and more respectful “other-oriented” approach to the patient relationship.

The course examines social determinants of health (SDHs) – the influences of society, government, culture, and health systems. Students analyze how health and health outcomes are affected by a patient’s income, education, and living and working conditions, as well as access to healthy food, safe water, and transportation.

The Perelman School of Medicine is just one of the many medical schools across the country that is revising training, both didactic and experiential, to teach students about SDHs. A host of policy makers, advisory groups, and organized medicine groups have called in recent years for educational efforts to boost all physicians’ working knowledge of health inequities and SDHs.

Dr. Delisser, associate professor of medicine who also practices as a pulmonologist at the Harron Lung Center in the Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, said SDHs play into daily care.

Dr. Horace Delisser


Consider the patient who is chronically late for appointments. “It may not be an issue of the patient being disinterested in their health care, but maybe the public transportation system is unreliable, or maybe the patient has to take two buses and a subway to get there. I need [this knowledge] to inform my care and to engage my patient. I need to know, ‘what does it take for you to get here?’ That factors into how I [make the care plan],” said Dr. Delisser.

Malika Fair, MD, MPH, who teaches a longitudinal professional development class at George Washington University, Washington, and is senior director of health equity partnerships and programs at the American Association of Medical Colleges, provided the example of how her medical students intervened during their rotation in the emergency department on behalf of a newly-diagnosed patient with diabetes who had been unable to fill a prescribed medication. After determining where the patient lived, the students ensured that she had transportation and was able to get the needed medication at a local grocery store. They asked about her barriers to healthy eating, researched local grocery stores, and made practical recommendations that the patient was amenable to implementing. They identified a clinic closer to the patient’s home, and worked with her on making an appointment at a time when she could take off from work.

Dr. Malika Fair


“Because of their training, these students were able to identify and address social risks in their first month on the ward,” said Dr. Fair, who also practices emergency medicine. They had learned about how to ask about food access and how safe it was for the patient to walk and exercise in her neighborhood.

At Perelman, most students work in student-led community clinics, and some fourth-year students participate in an elective rotation as apprentices to community health workers, learning to address SDHs and develop the cultural humility that they learned about in the classroom. The rotation was similarly created in 2013 and is described in a 2018 article (J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2018;29[2]:581-90).“Being a good physician involves being technically competent as well as what I call relationally competent,” Dr. Delisser said. “And [this involves] being aware that my relationship with a patient doesn’t exist in a vacuum ... that there’s a bigger, broader social and structural context that I need to know and understand. I [then need] to use that to inform how I mediate and empower that relationship.”

Aletha Maybank, MD, who became the American Medical Association’s first chief health equity officer earlier this year, explained that “the medical profession had a very strong social context at one point in time,” but this was dampened by the Flexner Report of 1910.*

Dr. Aletha Maybank


The report revolutionized medical education by increasing its rigor, but “it was really focused on clinical and basic science and took out the social context, the context of what medicine is about,” said Dr. Maybank, a pediatrician with a board certification in preventive medicine/public health. “[Now] we’re asking, how do we revolutionize medical education again at this point in time, recognizing the confluence of information and data that we now have available to us about inequities and disparities ... and the sense of urgency from students.”


 

 

 

Students driving practice change

Students nationally are “the most important” drivers of the increasing focus on SDHs in medical education, according to Dr. Fair. “They are demanding experiences to learn about the entire patient. We know that only 20% of a patient’s health is dependent on their health care. Our students are demanding education about the other 80%.”

More and more, communities are identifying needs and “students will then come up with initiatives to meet those needs,” Dr. Fair said.

Others interviewed for this story predicted this trend will only intensify, since not-for-profit hospitals are required under the Affordable Care Act regulations to assess community health needs every few years and to intervene accordingly.

Education on health care systems is also advancing. Penn State University, for instance, utilized a million-dollar grant from the AMA’s Accelerating Change in Medical Education initiative to design and implement a 4-year curriculum on the health system sciences that started in 2014. The curriculum includes an immersive experience in patient navigation.

“Students were taught to be patient navigators, and they were assigned within the clinical context to work on issues like, why are [patients] having trouble getting their medications?” said Susan E. Skochelak, MD, MPH, who leads the 6-year-old Accelerating Change initiative as vice president for medical education at the AMA.

From the start, she noted, students at Penn State are encouraged to question inequities, social and structural barriers to health, and faults in the health care system. “The message given at their white coat ceremony is ‘Welcome to medicine. Now that you’re here, you’re a member of the health care team, and we want you to speak up if you think there are things that need to be addressed. We want you to tell us when the system is working and not working,’ ” said Dr Skochelak, who previously served as the senior associate dean for academic affairs at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, where she had been a tenured professor of family medicine.
 

Tomorrow’s physician partners

Approximately 80% of medical school graduates who participated in the AAMC’s 2018 survey of graduates said they had received significant training on health disparities—up from 71% in 2014.

“There’s a huge amount [of innovation] happening, but on the flip side, there’s not really a set of accepted tools and practices, and certainly no robust evaluation [of the training],” said Philip M. Alberti, PhD, senior director for health equity research and policy at the American Association of Medical Colleges. A recently published review (J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34[5]:720-30) shows growing interest in the teaching of SDHs in undergraduate medical education but variable content, strategies, and instructional practices.

Dr. Philip M. Alberti


Health care systems and practicing physicians are still very much feeling their way with SDHs. Screening tools are being developed and tested, and academic medical centers are trying to determine their roles in addressing issues such as transportation and housing – and what funding and structural levers can be pulled to fulfill these roles. “As we learn more about [these issues], it will become clearer what the right baseline set of competencies might be for all physicians,” Dr. Alberti noted.

In the meantime, some basic expectations for medical education are taking root officially. The National Board of Medical Examiners, with whom the AMA has partnered in its Accelerating Change initiative, has included questions in the United States Medical Licensing Examination on population health and SDHs, and plans to add more exam content on these topics and on health systems science, said Dr. Skochelak.

And through its site visit program (the Clinical Learning Environment Review program), the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has “made it pretty clear that there’s an expectation that residents and fellows are learning about the health system’s approach to identifying and addressing health care disparities – and that they’re given opportunities to develop quality improvement initiatives that target those disparities,” Dr. Alberti said.

In hopes of achieving consistency across medical specialties and in national accreditation and board certifications exams, the American Association of Medical Colleges is developing its first set of competencies in quality improvement and patient safety, with health equity being one of these competencies’ domains .

The competencies are tiered for medical school graduates, residency graduates, and faculty physicians who are 3-5 years post residency. At this point in time, said Dr. Alberti, the consensus among medical educators has been that physicians “need to be able to understand and consider [social, economic, and structural] contexts when they’re seeing patients, when they’re developing care plans, when they’re talking with caregivers, and when they’re looking at their own quality data.”

Elisabeth Poorman, MD, MPH, an internist at UW Medicine in Kent, Washington, said she worries that the passion of medical students for SDHs will too often be crushed, especially during residency and with immersion in the productivity-focused health care system. Studies show a drop in mental wellness and empathy and a rise in cynicism as training advances, said Dr. Poorman, who also writes about health care and issues of equity and serves on the editorial advisory board of Internal Medicine News.

With similar concerns, the AMA has recently launched a “Reimagining Residency” initiative that aims to improve transitions from medical school to residency and the wellness of residents and faculty, and expand educational content relating to SDHs.

Dr. Fair is optimistic that new physicians’ knowledge of SDHs will permeate medical practices.

“Physicians who are out practicing are going to be working with our graduates, and they’re going to be asking in [job] interviews, do you have flexible hours for patients? What community partnerships do you have? Are there other professionals on staff to help us address social determinants of health? What data [relating to SDHs] are you collecting?” she said.

Correction, 8/26/2019: An earlier version of this story misstated the title of Aletha Maybank, MD. Dr. Maybank's correct title is the first chief health equity officer of the American Medical Association.

 

Fragmented, essentializing, simplistic. That’s how students at Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, described their required course on cultural competence. Lectures and discussions about cultural groups and communication issues weren’t providing them with the skills they needed to navigate doctor-patient relationships.

Courtesy Penn Medicine
Matthew Duda, Emily Keyes, and Mitchell Johnson, students in the Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

Their criticism was a wake-up call that Horace Delisser, MD, associate dean for diversity and inclusion at the school, took to heart. He enlisted medical students to help reinvent the curriculum. The result, Introduction to Medicine and Society, launched in 2013 and described in an article published in 2017 (Acad Med. 2017;92[3]:335-43), emphasizes self-awareness and reflection about one’s own biases and the adoption of a less hierarchical and more respectful “other-oriented” approach to the patient relationship.

The course examines social determinants of health (SDHs) – the influences of society, government, culture, and health systems. Students analyze how health and health outcomes are affected by a patient’s income, education, and living and working conditions, as well as access to healthy food, safe water, and transportation.

The Perelman School of Medicine is just one of the many medical schools across the country that is revising training, both didactic and experiential, to teach students about SDHs. A host of policy makers, advisory groups, and organized medicine groups have called in recent years for educational efforts to boost all physicians’ working knowledge of health inequities and SDHs.

Dr. Delisser, associate professor of medicine who also practices as a pulmonologist at the Harron Lung Center in the Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, said SDHs play into daily care.

Dr. Horace Delisser


Consider the patient who is chronically late for appointments. “It may not be an issue of the patient being disinterested in their health care, but maybe the public transportation system is unreliable, or maybe the patient has to take two buses and a subway to get there. I need [this knowledge] to inform my care and to engage my patient. I need to know, ‘what does it take for you to get here?’ That factors into how I [make the care plan],” said Dr. Delisser.

Malika Fair, MD, MPH, who teaches a longitudinal professional development class at George Washington University, Washington, and is senior director of health equity partnerships and programs at the American Association of Medical Colleges, provided the example of how her medical students intervened during their rotation in the emergency department on behalf of a newly-diagnosed patient with diabetes who had been unable to fill a prescribed medication. After determining where the patient lived, the students ensured that she had transportation and was able to get the needed medication at a local grocery store. They asked about her barriers to healthy eating, researched local grocery stores, and made practical recommendations that the patient was amenable to implementing. They identified a clinic closer to the patient’s home, and worked with her on making an appointment at a time when she could take off from work.

Dr. Malika Fair


“Because of their training, these students were able to identify and address social risks in their first month on the ward,” said Dr. Fair, who also practices emergency medicine. They had learned about how to ask about food access and how safe it was for the patient to walk and exercise in her neighborhood.

At Perelman, most students work in student-led community clinics, and some fourth-year students participate in an elective rotation as apprentices to community health workers, learning to address SDHs and develop the cultural humility that they learned about in the classroom. The rotation was similarly created in 2013 and is described in a 2018 article (J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2018;29[2]:581-90).“Being a good physician involves being technically competent as well as what I call relationally competent,” Dr. Delisser said. “And [this involves] being aware that my relationship with a patient doesn’t exist in a vacuum ... that there’s a bigger, broader social and structural context that I need to know and understand. I [then need] to use that to inform how I mediate and empower that relationship.”

Aletha Maybank, MD, who became the American Medical Association’s first chief health equity officer earlier this year, explained that “the medical profession had a very strong social context at one point in time,” but this was dampened by the Flexner Report of 1910.*

Dr. Aletha Maybank


The report revolutionized medical education by increasing its rigor, but “it was really focused on clinical and basic science and took out the social context, the context of what medicine is about,” said Dr. Maybank, a pediatrician with a board certification in preventive medicine/public health. “[Now] we’re asking, how do we revolutionize medical education again at this point in time, recognizing the confluence of information and data that we now have available to us about inequities and disparities ... and the sense of urgency from students.”


 

 

 

Students driving practice change

Students nationally are “the most important” drivers of the increasing focus on SDHs in medical education, according to Dr. Fair. “They are demanding experiences to learn about the entire patient. We know that only 20% of a patient’s health is dependent on their health care. Our students are demanding education about the other 80%.”

More and more, communities are identifying needs and “students will then come up with initiatives to meet those needs,” Dr. Fair said.

Others interviewed for this story predicted this trend will only intensify, since not-for-profit hospitals are required under the Affordable Care Act regulations to assess community health needs every few years and to intervene accordingly.

Education on health care systems is also advancing. Penn State University, for instance, utilized a million-dollar grant from the AMA’s Accelerating Change in Medical Education initiative to design and implement a 4-year curriculum on the health system sciences that started in 2014. The curriculum includes an immersive experience in patient navigation.

“Students were taught to be patient navigators, and they were assigned within the clinical context to work on issues like, why are [patients] having trouble getting their medications?” said Susan E. Skochelak, MD, MPH, who leads the 6-year-old Accelerating Change initiative as vice president for medical education at the AMA.

From the start, she noted, students at Penn State are encouraged to question inequities, social and structural barriers to health, and faults in the health care system. “The message given at their white coat ceremony is ‘Welcome to medicine. Now that you’re here, you’re a member of the health care team, and we want you to speak up if you think there are things that need to be addressed. We want you to tell us when the system is working and not working,’ ” said Dr Skochelak, who previously served as the senior associate dean for academic affairs at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, where she had been a tenured professor of family medicine.
 

Tomorrow’s physician partners

Approximately 80% of medical school graduates who participated in the AAMC’s 2018 survey of graduates said they had received significant training on health disparities—up from 71% in 2014.

“There’s a huge amount [of innovation] happening, but on the flip side, there’s not really a set of accepted tools and practices, and certainly no robust evaluation [of the training],” said Philip M. Alberti, PhD, senior director for health equity research and policy at the American Association of Medical Colleges. A recently published review (J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34[5]:720-30) shows growing interest in the teaching of SDHs in undergraduate medical education but variable content, strategies, and instructional practices.

Dr. Philip M. Alberti


Health care systems and practicing physicians are still very much feeling their way with SDHs. Screening tools are being developed and tested, and academic medical centers are trying to determine their roles in addressing issues such as transportation and housing – and what funding and structural levers can be pulled to fulfill these roles. “As we learn more about [these issues], it will become clearer what the right baseline set of competencies might be for all physicians,” Dr. Alberti noted.

In the meantime, some basic expectations for medical education are taking root officially. The National Board of Medical Examiners, with whom the AMA has partnered in its Accelerating Change initiative, has included questions in the United States Medical Licensing Examination on population health and SDHs, and plans to add more exam content on these topics and on health systems science, said Dr. Skochelak.

And through its site visit program (the Clinical Learning Environment Review program), the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has “made it pretty clear that there’s an expectation that residents and fellows are learning about the health system’s approach to identifying and addressing health care disparities – and that they’re given opportunities to develop quality improvement initiatives that target those disparities,” Dr. Alberti said.

In hopes of achieving consistency across medical specialties and in national accreditation and board certifications exams, the American Association of Medical Colleges is developing its first set of competencies in quality improvement and patient safety, with health equity being one of these competencies’ domains .

The competencies are tiered for medical school graduates, residency graduates, and faculty physicians who are 3-5 years post residency. At this point in time, said Dr. Alberti, the consensus among medical educators has been that physicians “need to be able to understand and consider [social, economic, and structural] contexts when they’re seeing patients, when they’re developing care plans, when they’re talking with caregivers, and when they’re looking at their own quality data.”

Elisabeth Poorman, MD, MPH, an internist at UW Medicine in Kent, Washington, said she worries that the passion of medical students for SDHs will too often be crushed, especially during residency and with immersion in the productivity-focused health care system. Studies show a drop in mental wellness and empathy and a rise in cynicism as training advances, said Dr. Poorman, who also writes about health care and issues of equity and serves on the editorial advisory board of Internal Medicine News.

With similar concerns, the AMA has recently launched a “Reimagining Residency” initiative that aims to improve transitions from medical school to residency and the wellness of residents and faculty, and expand educational content relating to SDHs.

Dr. Fair is optimistic that new physicians’ knowledge of SDHs will permeate medical practices.

“Physicians who are out practicing are going to be working with our graduates, and they’re going to be asking in [job] interviews, do you have flexible hours for patients? What community partnerships do you have? Are there other professionals on staff to help us address social determinants of health? What data [relating to SDHs] are you collecting?” she said.

Correction, 8/26/2019: An earlier version of this story misstated the title of Aletha Maybank, MD. Dr. Maybank's correct title is the first chief health equity officer of the American Medical Association.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

CDC updates recommendation for serologic Lyme disease detection

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 08/19/2019 - 13:45

 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has updated its recommendation for serologic detection of Lyme disease, according to CDC investigators.

At the 1994 Second National Conference on Serologic Diagnosis of Lyme Disease, several groups and organizations convened, recommending a two-test methodology for Lyme disease detection. First, an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) or immunofluorescence assay should be used, followed by a western immunoblot assay for specimens yielding positive or equivocal results. The guideline advised that all future tests should be evaluated against a challenge panel, and that new assays should only move forward if their specificity, sensitivity, and precision equaled or surpassed the performance of tests used in the recommended two-test procedure.

On July 29, 2019, the Food and Drug Administration approved several Lyme disease serologic assays with new indications for use based on a modified two-test methodology, with a second EIA replacing the western immunoblot assay.

“Clearance by FDA of the new Lyme disease assays indicates that test performance has been evaluated and is ‘substantially equivalent to or better than’ a legally marketed predicate test,” the CDC investigators noted (MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019 Aug 15;68(32):703).

The recommendation advises that FDA-cleared “serologic assays that utilize EIA rather than western immunoblot assay in a two-test format are acceptable alternatives for the laboratory diagnosis of Lyme disease.”

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has updated its recommendation for serologic detection of Lyme disease, according to CDC investigators.

At the 1994 Second National Conference on Serologic Diagnosis of Lyme Disease, several groups and organizations convened, recommending a two-test methodology for Lyme disease detection. First, an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) or immunofluorescence assay should be used, followed by a western immunoblot assay for specimens yielding positive or equivocal results. The guideline advised that all future tests should be evaluated against a challenge panel, and that new assays should only move forward if their specificity, sensitivity, and precision equaled or surpassed the performance of tests used in the recommended two-test procedure.

On July 29, 2019, the Food and Drug Administration approved several Lyme disease serologic assays with new indications for use based on a modified two-test methodology, with a second EIA replacing the western immunoblot assay.

“Clearance by FDA of the new Lyme disease assays indicates that test performance has been evaluated and is ‘substantially equivalent to or better than’ a legally marketed predicate test,” the CDC investigators noted (MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019 Aug 15;68(32):703).

The recommendation advises that FDA-cleared “serologic assays that utilize EIA rather than western immunoblot assay in a two-test format are acceptable alternatives for the laboratory diagnosis of Lyme disease.”

 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has updated its recommendation for serologic detection of Lyme disease, according to CDC investigators.

At the 1994 Second National Conference on Serologic Diagnosis of Lyme Disease, several groups and organizations convened, recommending a two-test methodology for Lyme disease detection. First, an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) or immunofluorescence assay should be used, followed by a western immunoblot assay for specimens yielding positive or equivocal results. The guideline advised that all future tests should be evaluated against a challenge panel, and that new assays should only move forward if their specificity, sensitivity, and precision equaled or surpassed the performance of tests used in the recommended two-test procedure.

On July 29, 2019, the Food and Drug Administration approved several Lyme disease serologic assays with new indications for use based on a modified two-test methodology, with a second EIA replacing the western immunoblot assay.

“Clearance by FDA of the new Lyme disease assays indicates that test performance has been evaluated and is ‘substantially equivalent to or better than’ a legally marketed predicate test,” the CDC investigators noted (MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019 Aug 15;68(32):703).

The recommendation advises that FDA-cleared “serologic assays that utilize EIA rather than western immunoblot assay in a two-test format are acceptable alternatives for the laboratory diagnosis of Lyme disease.”

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM THE MMWR

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

How to nearly eliminate CLABSIs in children’s hospitals

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 08/19/2019 - 14:31

– Levine Children’s Hospital, in Charlotte, N.C., dropped its central line–associated bloodstream infection rate from 1.13 per 1,000 line days to 0.67 in just a few months, with a mix of common sense steps and public accountability.

M. Alexander Otto/MDedge News
Dr. Kayla S. Koch and Dr. Ketan P. Nadkarni

Levine Children’s was at about the 50th percentile for CLABSIs, compared with other children’s hospitals, but dropped to the 10th percentile after the changes. There were 21 CLABSIs in 2017, but only 12 in 2018. The hospital went 6 straight months without a CLABSI after the changes were made. The efforts saved about $300,000 and 63 patient days.

“We really had great success,” said Kayla S. Koch, MD, a pediatric hospitalist at Levine Children’s, who presented the findings at Pediatric Hospital Medicine.

Hospital units had been working to reduce CLABSIs, but they were each doing their own thing. “Many of our units were already dabbling, so we just sort of brought them together. We standardized the process and got everyone on the same page,” said copresenter Ketan P. Nadkarni, MD, also a pediatric hospitalist at Levine Children’s.

It wasn’t hard to get buy-in. “I don’t think the units were aware that everyone was doing it differently,” and were on board once the problem was explained. Also, using the same approach throughout the hospital made it easier for nurses and physicians moving between units, he said.

Each morning, the nurse supervisor and patient nurse would partner up at the bedside to check that central venous lines were set up correctly. They examined the alcohol disinfectant caps to make sure they were clean; determined that children were getting chlorhexidine gluconate baths; checked the dressings for bleeding and soiling; noted in the electronic medical record why the patient had a central line; and discussed with hospitalists if it were still needed. Problems were addressed immediately.

These quality processes were all tracked on wall racks placed in plain sight on each unit, including the neonatal and pediatric ICUs. Each central line patient had a card that listed what needed to be done, with a green stripe on one side and a red stripe on the other. If everything was done right, the green side faced out; if even one thing was done wrong, the red side was displayed, for all to see. It brought accountability to the process, the presenters said at the meeting sponsored by the Society of Hospital Medicine, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Academic Pediatric Association.

The wall rack also had the central line audit schedule, plus diagrams that showed every failed item, the reason for it, and the unit’s compliance rate. Anyone walking by could see at a glance how the unit was doing that day and overall.

The number of dressing options was reduced from 10 to 2, a SorbaView SHIELD and a Tegaderm-like dressing, which made it easier to standardize the efforts. A protocol also was put in place to reinforce oozing dressings, instead of automatically changing them. “We were doing too many changes,” Dr. Koch said.

Compliance with the bundle was almost 90%. Staff “really got into it, and it was great to see,” she said.

The “initial success was almost unexpected, and so dramatic.” The goal now is to sustain the improvements, and roll them out to radiology and other places were central lines are placed, Dr. Nadkarni said.

There was no external funding, and the investigators had no disclosures.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

– Levine Children’s Hospital, in Charlotte, N.C., dropped its central line–associated bloodstream infection rate from 1.13 per 1,000 line days to 0.67 in just a few months, with a mix of common sense steps and public accountability.

M. Alexander Otto/MDedge News
Dr. Kayla S. Koch and Dr. Ketan P. Nadkarni

Levine Children’s was at about the 50th percentile for CLABSIs, compared with other children’s hospitals, but dropped to the 10th percentile after the changes. There were 21 CLABSIs in 2017, but only 12 in 2018. The hospital went 6 straight months without a CLABSI after the changes were made. The efforts saved about $300,000 and 63 patient days.

“We really had great success,” said Kayla S. Koch, MD, a pediatric hospitalist at Levine Children’s, who presented the findings at Pediatric Hospital Medicine.

Hospital units had been working to reduce CLABSIs, but they were each doing their own thing. “Many of our units were already dabbling, so we just sort of brought them together. We standardized the process and got everyone on the same page,” said copresenter Ketan P. Nadkarni, MD, also a pediatric hospitalist at Levine Children’s.

It wasn’t hard to get buy-in. “I don’t think the units were aware that everyone was doing it differently,” and were on board once the problem was explained. Also, using the same approach throughout the hospital made it easier for nurses and physicians moving between units, he said.

Each morning, the nurse supervisor and patient nurse would partner up at the bedside to check that central venous lines were set up correctly. They examined the alcohol disinfectant caps to make sure they were clean; determined that children were getting chlorhexidine gluconate baths; checked the dressings for bleeding and soiling; noted in the electronic medical record why the patient had a central line; and discussed with hospitalists if it were still needed. Problems were addressed immediately.

These quality processes were all tracked on wall racks placed in plain sight on each unit, including the neonatal and pediatric ICUs. Each central line patient had a card that listed what needed to be done, with a green stripe on one side and a red stripe on the other. If everything was done right, the green side faced out; if even one thing was done wrong, the red side was displayed, for all to see. It brought accountability to the process, the presenters said at the meeting sponsored by the Society of Hospital Medicine, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Academic Pediatric Association.

The wall rack also had the central line audit schedule, plus diagrams that showed every failed item, the reason for it, and the unit’s compliance rate. Anyone walking by could see at a glance how the unit was doing that day and overall.

The number of dressing options was reduced from 10 to 2, a SorbaView SHIELD and a Tegaderm-like dressing, which made it easier to standardize the efforts. A protocol also was put in place to reinforce oozing dressings, instead of automatically changing them. “We were doing too many changes,” Dr. Koch said.

Compliance with the bundle was almost 90%. Staff “really got into it, and it was great to see,” she said.

The “initial success was almost unexpected, and so dramatic.” The goal now is to sustain the improvements, and roll them out to radiology and other places were central lines are placed, Dr. Nadkarni said.

There was no external funding, and the investigators had no disclosures.

– Levine Children’s Hospital, in Charlotte, N.C., dropped its central line–associated bloodstream infection rate from 1.13 per 1,000 line days to 0.67 in just a few months, with a mix of common sense steps and public accountability.

M. Alexander Otto/MDedge News
Dr. Kayla S. Koch and Dr. Ketan P. Nadkarni

Levine Children’s was at about the 50th percentile for CLABSIs, compared with other children’s hospitals, but dropped to the 10th percentile after the changes. There were 21 CLABSIs in 2017, but only 12 in 2018. The hospital went 6 straight months without a CLABSI after the changes were made. The efforts saved about $300,000 and 63 patient days.

“We really had great success,” said Kayla S. Koch, MD, a pediatric hospitalist at Levine Children’s, who presented the findings at Pediatric Hospital Medicine.

Hospital units had been working to reduce CLABSIs, but they were each doing their own thing. “Many of our units were already dabbling, so we just sort of brought them together. We standardized the process and got everyone on the same page,” said copresenter Ketan P. Nadkarni, MD, also a pediatric hospitalist at Levine Children’s.

It wasn’t hard to get buy-in. “I don’t think the units were aware that everyone was doing it differently,” and were on board once the problem was explained. Also, using the same approach throughout the hospital made it easier for nurses and physicians moving between units, he said.

Each morning, the nurse supervisor and patient nurse would partner up at the bedside to check that central venous lines were set up correctly. They examined the alcohol disinfectant caps to make sure they were clean; determined that children were getting chlorhexidine gluconate baths; checked the dressings for bleeding and soiling; noted in the electronic medical record why the patient had a central line; and discussed with hospitalists if it were still needed. Problems were addressed immediately.

These quality processes were all tracked on wall racks placed in plain sight on each unit, including the neonatal and pediatric ICUs. Each central line patient had a card that listed what needed to be done, with a green stripe on one side and a red stripe on the other. If everything was done right, the green side faced out; if even one thing was done wrong, the red side was displayed, for all to see. It brought accountability to the process, the presenters said at the meeting sponsored by the Society of Hospital Medicine, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Academic Pediatric Association.

The wall rack also had the central line audit schedule, plus diagrams that showed every failed item, the reason for it, and the unit’s compliance rate. Anyone walking by could see at a glance how the unit was doing that day and overall.

The number of dressing options was reduced from 10 to 2, a SorbaView SHIELD and a Tegaderm-like dressing, which made it easier to standardize the efforts. A protocol also was put in place to reinforce oozing dressings, instead of automatically changing them. “We were doing too many changes,” Dr. Koch said.

Compliance with the bundle was almost 90%. Staff “really got into it, and it was great to see,” she said.

The “initial success was almost unexpected, and so dramatic.” The goal now is to sustain the improvements, and roll them out to radiology and other places were central lines are placed, Dr. Nadkarni said.

There was no external funding, and the investigators had no disclosures.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM PHM 2019

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

FDA approves drug combo to treat highly resistant TB

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 08/16/2019 - 10:28

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted special approval to a new drug combo intended for the treatment of “a limited and specific population of adult patients with extensively drug resistant, treatment-intolerant or nonresponsive multidrug-resistant pulmonary” tuberculosis, according to an FDA news release.

The effectiveness of the combination treatment of pretomanid tablets with bedaquiline and linezolid was shown in a clinical study of patients with extensively drug-resistant, treatment-intolerant, or nonresponsive multidrug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis of the lungs. Of 107 infected patients who were evaluated 6 months after the end of therapy, 95 (89%) were deemed successes, which significantly exceeded the historical success rates for treatment of extensively drug-resistant TB, the FDA reported. The trial is sponsored by the Global Alliance for TB Drug Development.

The most common adverse effects reported included peripheral neuropathy, anemia, nausea, vomiting, headache, increased liver enzymes, dyspepsia, rash, visual impairment, low blood sugar, and diarrhea, according to the release.

“Multidrug-resistant TB and extensively drug-resistant TB are public health threats due to limited treatment options. New treatments are important to meet patient national and global health needs,” stated FDA Principal Deputy Commissioner Amy Abernethy, MD, PhD, in the release. She also explained that the approval marked the second time a drug was approved under the “Limited Population Pathway for Antibacterial and Antifungal Drugs, a pathway advanced by Congress to spur development of drugs targeting infections that lack effective therapies.”

In 2016, the World Health Organization reported that there were an estimated 490,000 new cases of multidrug-resistant TB worldwide, with a smaller portion of cases of extensively drug-resistant TB, according to the release, demonstrating the need for new therapeutics.
 

[email protected]

SOURCE: U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Aug. 14, 2019. News release.

Publications
Topics
Sections

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted special approval to a new drug combo intended for the treatment of “a limited and specific population of adult patients with extensively drug resistant, treatment-intolerant or nonresponsive multidrug-resistant pulmonary” tuberculosis, according to an FDA news release.

The effectiveness of the combination treatment of pretomanid tablets with bedaquiline and linezolid was shown in a clinical study of patients with extensively drug-resistant, treatment-intolerant, or nonresponsive multidrug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis of the lungs. Of 107 infected patients who were evaluated 6 months after the end of therapy, 95 (89%) were deemed successes, which significantly exceeded the historical success rates for treatment of extensively drug-resistant TB, the FDA reported. The trial is sponsored by the Global Alliance for TB Drug Development.

The most common adverse effects reported included peripheral neuropathy, anemia, nausea, vomiting, headache, increased liver enzymes, dyspepsia, rash, visual impairment, low blood sugar, and diarrhea, according to the release.

“Multidrug-resistant TB and extensively drug-resistant TB are public health threats due to limited treatment options. New treatments are important to meet patient national and global health needs,” stated FDA Principal Deputy Commissioner Amy Abernethy, MD, PhD, in the release. She also explained that the approval marked the second time a drug was approved under the “Limited Population Pathway for Antibacterial and Antifungal Drugs, a pathway advanced by Congress to spur development of drugs targeting infections that lack effective therapies.”

In 2016, the World Health Organization reported that there were an estimated 490,000 new cases of multidrug-resistant TB worldwide, with a smaller portion of cases of extensively drug-resistant TB, according to the release, demonstrating the need for new therapeutics.
 

[email protected]

SOURCE: U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Aug. 14, 2019. News release.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted special approval to a new drug combo intended for the treatment of “a limited and specific population of adult patients with extensively drug resistant, treatment-intolerant or nonresponsive multidrug-resistant pulmonary” tuberculosis, according to an FDA news release.

The effectiveness of the combination treatment of pretomanid tablets with bedaquiline and linezolid was shown in a clinical study of patients with extensively drug-resistant, treatment-intolerant, or nonresponsive multidrug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis of the lungs. Of 107 infected patients who were evaluated 6 months after the end of therapy, 95 (89%) were deemed successes, which significantly exceeded the historical success rates for treatment of extensively drug-resistant TB, the FDA reported. The trial is sponsored by the Global Alliance for TB Drug Development.

The most common adverse effects reported included peripheral neuropathy, anemia, nausea, vomiting, headache, increased liver enzymes, dyspepsia, rash, visual impairment, low blood sugar, and diarrhea, according to the release.

“Multidrug-resistant TB and extensively drug-resistant TB are public health threats due to limited treatment options. New treatments are important to meet patient national and global health needs,” stated FDA Principal Deputy Commissioner Amy Abernethy, MD, PhD, in the release. She also explained that the approval marked the second time a drug was approved under the “Limited Population Pathway for Antibacterial and Antifungal Drugs, a pathway advanced by Congress to spur development of drugs targeting infections that lack effective therapies.”

In 2016, the World Health Organization reported that there were an estimated 490,000 new cases of multidrug-resistant TB worldwide, with a smaller portion of cases of extensively drug-resistant TB, according to the release, demonstrating the need for new therapeutics.
 

[email protected]

SOURCE: U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Aug. 14, 2019. News release.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

NEWS FROM THE FDA

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Study: Cardiac biomarkers predicted CV events in CAP

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 08/19/2019 - 22:31

 

Cardiac biomarkers were used to predict the likelihood of cardiovascular events at day 1 and day 30 in patients with community-acquired pneumonia, in a recently conducted study.

Thomas Northcut/Thinkstock

These biomarkers were also used to predict late cardiovascular events at day 30 of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in patients who did not have a history of cardiovascular disease, according to Rosario Menéndez, MD, from the Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe in Valencia, Spain, and colleagues.

“Some patients have still high levels of inflammatory and cardiac biomarkers at 30 days, when they are usually referred to primary care without receiving any specific additional recommendations,” Dr. Menéndez and colleagues wrote in CHEST. “Our results suggest that a change in usual practice is needed to reduce current and further cardiovascular CAP complications.”

Dr. Menéndez and colleagues prospectively followed 730 patients for 1 year who were hospitalized for CAP, measuring the cardiac biomarkers proadrenomedullin (proADM), pro b-type natriuretic peptide (proBNP), proendothelin-1, and troponin T, and the inflammatory biomarkers interleukin 6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), and procalcitonin (PCT). The researchers also collected data on age, gender, smoking status, and vaccination history, as well as whether patients had any cardiac, renal, pulmonary, neurological or diabetes-related comorbidities.

Overall, 95 patients experienced early cardiovascular events, 67 patients had long-term cardiovascular events, and 20 patients experienced both early and late events. In hospital, the mortality rate was 4.7%; the 30-day mortality rate was 5.3%, and the 1-year mortality rate was 9.9%.

With regard to biomarkers, patients who experienced both early and late cardiovascular events had significantly higher initial levels of proADM, proendothelin-1, troponin, proBNP, and IL-6. Patients who experienced later events had consistent levels of these biomarkers until day 30, except for a decrease at day 4 or day 5.

After adjustment for age, sepsis, previous cardiac disease, and a partial pressure of oxygen in the alveoli to fractional inspired oxygen ratio (PaO2/FiO2) of less than 250mm Hg, cardiac biomarkers proendothelin-1 (odds ratio, 2.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-3.79), proADM (OR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.53-4.20), proBNP (OR, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.59-4.49), and troponin T (OR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.62-4.49) significantly predicted early cardiovascular events, while proendothelin-1 (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.41-7.80), proADM (2.29; 95% CI, 1.01-5.19) and proBNP (OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.01-5.56) significantly predicted late cardiovascular events. For day 30 results, when researchers added IL-6 levels to proendothelin-1, the odds ratio for late events increased to 3.53, and when they added IL-6 levels to proADM, the odds ratio increased to 2.80.

Researchers noted the limitations of the study included that they did not analyze cardiac biomarkers to predict specific cardiovascular events, did not identify the cause for mortality at 1 year in most patients, and did not include a control group.

This study was supported in part by funding from Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Sociedad Española de Neumología y Cirugía Torácica, and the Center for Biomedical Research Network in Respiratory Diseases. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
 

SOURCE: Menéndez R et al. Chest. 2019 Aug 2. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2019.06.040.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Cardiac biomarkers were used to predict the likelihood of cardiovascular events at day 1 and day 30 in patients with community-acquired pneumonia, in a recently conducted study.

Thomas Northcut/Thinkstock

These biomarkers were also used to predict late cardiovascular events at day 30 of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in patients who did not have a history of cardiovascular disease, according to Rosario Menéndez, MD, from the Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe in Valencia, Spain, and colleagues.

“Some patients have still high levels of inflammatory and cardiac biomarkers at 30 days, when they are usually referred to primary care without receiving any specific additional recommendations,” Dr. Menéndez and colleagues wrote in CHEST. “Our results suggest that a change in usual practice is needed to reduce current and further cardiovascular CAP complications.”

Dr. Menéndez and colleagues prospectively followed 730 patients for 1 year who were hospitalized for CAP, measuring the cardiac biomarkers proadrenomedullin (proADM), pro b-type natriuretic peptide (proBNP), proendothelin-1, and troponin T, and the inflammatory biomarkers interleukin 6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), and procalcitonin (PCT). The researchers also collected data on age, gender, smoking status, and vaccination history, as well as whether patients had any cardiac, renal, pulmonary, neurological or diabetes-related comorbidities.

Overall, 95 patients experienced early cardiovascular events, 67 patients had long-term cardiovascular events, and 20 patients experienced both early and late events. In hospital, the mortality rate was 4.7%; the 30-day mortality rate was 5.3%, and the 1-year mortality rate was 9.9%.

With regard to biomarkers, patients who experienced both early and late cardiovascular events had significantly higher initial levels of proADM, proendothelin-1, troponin, proBNP, and IL-6. Patients who experienced later events had consistent levels of these biomarkers until day 30, except for a decrease at day 4 or day 5.

After adjustment for age, sepsis, previous cardiac disease, and a partial pressure of oxygen in the alveoli to fractional inspired oxygen ratio (PaO2/FiO2) of less than 250mm Hg, cardiac biomarkers proendothelin-1 (odds ratio, 2.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-3.79), proADM (OR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.53-4.20), proBNP (OR, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.59-4.49), and troponin T (OR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.62-4.49) significantly predicted early cardiovascular events, while proendothelin-1 (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.41-7.80), proADM (2.29; 95% CI, 1.01-5.19) and proBNP (OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.01-5.56) significantly predicted late cardiovascular events. For day 30 results, when researchers added IL-6 levels to proendothelin-1, the odds ratio for late events increased to 3.53, and when they added IL-6 levels to proADM, the odds ratio increased to 2.80.

Researchers noted the limitations of the study included that they did not analyze cardiac biomarkers to predict specific cardiovascular events, did not identify the cause for mortality at 1 year in most patients, and did not include a control group.

This study was supported in part by funding from Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Sociedad Española de Neumología y Cirugía Torácica, and the Center for Biomedical Research Network in Respiratory Diseases. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
 

SOURCE: Menéndez R et al. Chest. 2019 Aug 2. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2019.06.040.

 

Cardiac biomarkers were used to predict the likelihood of cardiovascular events at day 1 and day 30 in patients with community-acquired pneumonia, in a recently conducted study.

Thomas Northcut/Thinkstock

These biomarkers were also used to predict late cardiovascular events at day 30 of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in patients who did not have a history of cardiovascular disease, according to Rosario Menéndez, MD, from the Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe in Valencia, Spain, and colleagues.

“Some patients have still high levels of inflammatory and cardiac biomarkers at 30 days, when they are usually referred to primary care without receiving any specific additional recommendations,” Dr. Menéndez and colleagues wrote in CHEST. “Our results suggest that a change in usual practice is needed to reduce current and further cardiovascular CAP complications.”

Dr. Menéndez and colleagues prospectively followed 730 patients for 1 year who were hospitalized for CAP, measuring the cardiac biomarkers proadrenomedullin (proADM), pro b-type natriuretic peptide (proBNP), proendothelin-1, and troponin T, and the inflammatory biomarkers interleukin 6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), and procalcitonin (PCT). The researchers also collected data on age, gender, smoking status, and vaccination history, as well as whether patients had any cardiac, renal, pulmonary, neurological or diabetes-related comorbidities.

Overall, 95 patients experienced early cardiovascular events, 67 patients had long-term cardiovascular events, and 20 patients experienced both early and late events. In hospital, the mortality rate was 4.7%; the 30-day mortality rate was 5.3%, and the 1-year mortality rate was 9.9%.

With regard to biomarkers, patients who experienced both early and late cardiovascular events had significantly higher initial levels of proADM, proendothelin-1, troponin, proBNP, and IL-6. Patients who experienced later events had consistent levels of these biomarkers until day 30, except for a decrease at day 4 or day 5.

After adjustment for age, sepsis, previous cardiac disease, and a partial pressure of oxygen in the alveoli to fractional inspired oxygen ratio (PaO2/FiO2) of less than 250mm Hg, cardiac biomarkers proendothelin-1 (odds ratio, 2.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-3.79), proADM (OR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.53-4.20), proBNP (OR, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.59-4.49), and troponin T (OR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.62-4.49) significantly predicted early cardiovascular events, while proendothelin-1 (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.41-7.80), proADM (2.29; 95% CI, 1.01-5.19) and proBNP (OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.01-5.56) significantly predicted late cardiovascular events. For day 30 results, when researchers added IL-6 levels to proendothelin-1, the odds ratio for late events increased to 3.53, and when they added IL-6 levels to proADM, the odds ratio increased to 2.80.

Researchers noted the limitations of the study included that they did not analyze cardiac biomarkers to predict specific cardiovascular events, did not identify the cause for mortality at 1 year in most patients, and did not include a control group.

This study was supported in part by funding from Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Sociedad Española de Neumología y Cirugía Torácica, and the Center for Biomedical Research Network in Respiratory Diseases. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
 

SOURCE: Menéndez R et al. Chest. 2019 Aug 2. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2019.06.040.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Active
Sections
Article Source

FROM CHEST

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
CME ID
206378
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.