Comparison of clinical presentations and burden of respiratory syncytial virus in infants across three distinct healthcare settings in Davidson County, Tennessee.

Background: The burden of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV)-associated acute respiratory illnesses among healthy infants (<1 year) in the inpatient setting is well established. The focus on RSV-associated illnesses in the outpatient (OP) and emergency department (ED) settings are however understudied. We sought to determine the spectrum of RSV illnesses in infants at three distinct healthcare settings. Methods: From 16 December 2019 through 30 April 2020, we performed an active, prospective RSV surveillance study among infants seeking medical attention from an inpatient (IP), ED, or OP clinic. Infants were eligible if they presented with fever and/or respiratory symptoms. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and illness histories were collected during parental/guardian interviews, followed by a medical chart review and illness follow-up surveys. Research nasal swabs were collected and tested for respiratory pathogens for all enrolled infants. Results: Of the 627 infants screened, 475 were confirmed eligible; 360 were enrolled and research tested. Within this final cohort, 101 (28%) were RSV-positive (IP = 37, ED = 18, and OP = 46). Of the RSV-positive infants, the median age was 4.5 months and 57% had ⩾2 healthcare encounters. The majority of RSV-positive infants were not born premature (88%) nor had underlying medical conditions (92%). RSV-positive infants, however, were more likely to have a lower respiratory tract infection than RSV-negative infants (76% vs 39%, p < 0.001). Hospitalized infants with RSV were younger, 65% required supplemental oxygen, were more likely to have lower respiratory tract symptoms, and more often had shortness of breath and rales/rhonchi than RSV-positive infants in the ED and OP setting. Conclusion: Infants with RSV illnesses seek healthcare for multiple encounters in various settings and have clinical difference across settings. Prevention measures, especially targeted toward healthy, young infants are needed to effectively reduce RSV-associated healthcare visits.

Clinical presentations of adult and pediatric SARS-CoV-2-positive cases in a community cohort, Nashville, Tennessee.

Compared to adults, the prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) illness in children has been lower and less severe. However, reports comparing SARS-CoV-2 infection among children and adults are limited. As part of our longitudinal cohort study of adults and children with SARS-CoV-2 infection and their household contacts in Nashville, Tennessee, we compared the clinical characteristics and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infections between children and adults. Children were more likely to be asymptomatically infected and had a shorter illness duration compared to adults. The differences observed in clinical presentation across ages may inform symptom-specific testing, screening, and management algorithms.

The impact of community closures among nonessential and essential workers, Nashville, Tennessee: A cross-sectional study.

Background and Aims: The effects of community closures and relaxing social distancing restrictions on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) by occupational risk remain unclear. Therefore, we evaluated the impact of community closures and reopening phases with the prevalence of testing SARS-CoV-2-positive among nonessential and essential workers. Methods: We constructed a cross-sectional cohort from March 20 to July 31, 2020, of 344 adults from Metropolitan Nashville, Tennessee. We performed an unconditional logistic regression model to evaluate the impact of community closures and phase implementation on testing SARS-CoV-2 positive by occupation to estimate adjusted prevalence odds ratios (aPORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: During a stay-at-home/Phase I order, those with non-essential occupations had 59% decreased prevalence odds (aPOR:0.41; 95% CI: 0.20-0.84) of testing SARS-CoV-2-positive compared to when no restrictions were in place. Persons with essential occupations had four times the prevalence odds of testing SARS-CoV-2-positive (aPOR:4.19; 95% CI:1.57-11.18) compared with nonessential occupations when no community restrictions were established. Conclusion: Stay-at-home restrictions were associated with a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the community for nonessential workers. Essential employees remained at increased risk for SARS-CoV-2, including when no community restrictions were in place and vaccines were not available. This study supports targeting prevention measures for these high-risk occupations.