Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 118(6): 1069-1079, 2023 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20239981

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Acute infectious gastroenteritis (AGE) is a common reason for outpatient visits and hospitalizations in the United States. This study aimed to understand the demographic and clinical characteristics, common pathogens detected, health care resource utilization (HRU), and cost among adult outpatients with AGE visiting US health systems. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using one of the largest hospital discharge databases (PINC AI Healthcare Database) in the United States. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with a principal diagnosis of AGE during an outpatient visit between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2021, were included. Pathogen detection analysis was performed in those with microbiology data available. RESULTS: Among 248,896 patients, the mean age was 44.3 years (range 18-89+ years), 62.9% were female, and 68.5% were White. More than half (62.0%) of the patients did not have any preexisting comorbidity, and only 18.3% underwent stool workup at the hospital. Most patients (84.7%) were seen in the emergency department, and most (96.4%) were discharged home. Within 30 days of discharge, 1.0% were hospitalized, and 2.8% had another outpatient visit due to AGE. The mean cost of the index visit plus 30-day AGE-related follow-up was $1,338 per patient, amounting to $333,060,182 for the total study population. Among patients with microbiology data available (n = 12,469), common pathogens detected were Clostridioides difficile (32.2%), norovirus (6.3%), and Campylobacter spp. (4.0%). DISCUSSION: AGE is a common and costly disease affecting adults of all ages and more females than males, including individuals with or without baseline conditions in a hospital-based outpatient setting. C. difficile was the most common pathogen detected.


Subject(s)
Clostridioides difficile , Gastroenteritis , Male , Adult , Humans , Female , United States/epidemiology , Adolescent , Young Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Outpatients , Retrospective Studies , Financial Stress , Gastroenteritis/epidemiology
2.
J Infect ; 86(5): 462-475, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2289420

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The clinical impact of rapid sample-to-answer "syndromic" multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for respiratory viruses is not clearly established. We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to evaluate this impact for patients with possible acute respiratory tract infection in the hospital setting. METHODS: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases from 2012 to present and conference proceedings from 2021 for studies comparing clinical impact outcomes between multiplex PCR testing and standard testing. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies with 17,321 patient encounters were included in this review. Rapid multiplex PCR testing was associated with a reduction of - 24.22 h (95% CI -28.70 to -19.74 h) in the time to results. Hospital length of stay was decreased by -0.82 days (95% CI -1.52 to -0.11 days). Among influenza positive patients, antivirals were more likely to be given (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.06-1.48) and appropriate infection control facility use was more common with rapid multiplex PCR testing (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.16-2.07). CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates a reduction in time to results and length of stay for patients overall along with improvements in appropriate antiviral and infection control management among influenza-positive patients. This evidence supports the routine use of rapid sample-to-answer multiplex PCR testing for respiratory viruses in the hospital setting.


Subject(s)
Influenza, Human , Respiratory Tract Infections , Viruses , Humans , Influenza, Human/diagnosis , Influenza, Human/drug therapy , Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Viruses/genetics , Respiratory Tract Infections/diagnosis , Respiratory Tract Infections/drug therapy , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use
3.
J Clin Microbiol ; 61(2): e0162822, 2023 02 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2300346

ABSTRACT

A retrospective observational study was performed to assess the relationship between diagnostic method (traditional work-up [TW], multiplex PCR panel with < 12 target pathogens [PCR < 12], or multiplex PCR panel with ≥ 12 target pathogens [PCR12]), and diagnostic yield, health care resource use (HRU), and cost in adult outpatients visiting U.S. hospitals for acute infectious gastroenteritis (AGE). Using data from PINC AI Healthcare Database during January 1, 2016-June 30, 2021, we analyzed adult patients with an AGE diagnosis and stool testing performed during an outpatient visit. Detection rates for different pathogens were analyzed for those with microbiology data available. Among 36,787 patients, TW was most often performed (57.0%). PCR12 testing was more frequent in patients from large, urban, and teaching hospitals, compared to TW (all P < 0.01). PCR12 was associated with a higher mean index visit cost (by $97) but lower mean 30-day AGE-related follow-up cost (by $117) than TW. Patients with PCR12 had a lower 30-day AGE-related hospitalization risk than TW (1.7% versus 2.7% P < 0.01). Among the 8,451 patients with microbiology data, PCR12 was associated with fewer stool tests per patient (mean 1.61 versus 1.26), faster turnaround time (mean 6.3 versus 25.7 h) and lower likelihood of receiving in-hospital antibiotics (39.4% versus 47.1%, all P < 0.01) than TW. A higher percentage of patients with PCR12 had a target pathogen detected (73.1%) compared to PCR < 12 (63.6%) or TW (45.4%, P < 0.01). Thus, we found that large multiplex PCR panels were associated with lower 30-day AGE-related follow-up cost and risk of AGE-related hospitalization, and increased diagnostic yield compared to TW.


Subject(s)
Gastroenteritis , Outpatients , Humans , Adult , Gastroenteritis/diagnosis , Hospitals , Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction , Delivery of Health Care , Feces/microbiology , Diarrhea/diagnosis
4.
Antimicrob Steward Healthc Epidemiol ; 3(1): e60, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2284135
5.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis ; 101(3): 115476, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1544965

ABSTRACT

Among critically ill COVID-19 patients, bacterial coinfections may occur, and timely appropriate therapy may be limited with culture-based microbiology due to turnaround time and diagnostic yield challenges (e.g. antibiotic pre-exposure). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia Panel in detecting bacteria and clinical management among critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. Seven studies with 558 patients were included. Antibiotic use before respiratory sampling occurred in 28-79% of cases. The panel incidence of detections was 33% (95% CI 0.25 to 0.41, I2=32%) while culture yielded 18% (95% CI 0.02 to 0.45; I2=93%). The panel was associated with approximately a 1 and 2 day decrease in turnaround for identification and common resistance targets, respectively. The panel may be an important tool for clinicians to improve antimicrobial use in critically ill COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/pathology , Coinfection/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Bacterial/complications , Pneumonia, Bacterial/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Critical Illness , Humans , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques , Pneumonia, Bacterial/microbiology , Sensitivity and Specificity
6.
Clin Infect Dis ; 71(10): 2744-2751, 2020 12 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1066273

ABSTRACT

The clinical signs and symptoms of acute respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are not pathogen specific. Highly sensitive and specific nucleic acid amplification tests have become the diagnostic reference standard for viruses, and translation of bacterial assays from basic research to routine clinical practice represents an exciting advance in respiratory medicine. Most recently, molecular diagnostics have played an essential role in the global health response to the novel coronavirus pandemic. How best to use newer molecular tests for RTI in combination with clinical judgment and traditional methods can be bewildering given the plethora of available assays and rapidly evolving technologies. Here, we summarize the current state of the art with respect to the diagnosis of viral and bacterial RTIs, provide a practical framework for diagnostic decision making using selected patient-centered vignettes, and make recommendations for future studies to advance the field.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Tract Infections , Viruses , Humans , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques , Respiratory Tract Infections/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2 , Viruses/genetics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL