Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 16(6): 1133-1140, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2001656

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) result in millions of illnesses and hundreds of thousands of hospitalizations annually in the United States. The responsible viruses include influenza, parainfluenza, human metapneumovirus, coronaviruses, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and human rhinoviruses. This study estimated the population-based hospitalization burden of those respiratory viruses (RVs) over 4 years, from July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2019, among adults ≥18 years of age for Allegheny County (Pittsburgh), Pennsylvania. METHODS: We used population-based statewide hospital discharge data, health system electronic medical record (EMR) data for RV tests, census data, and a published method to calculate burden. RESULTS: Among 26,211 eligible RV tests, 67.6% were negative for any virus. The viruses detected were rhinovirus/enterovirus (2552; 30.1%), influenza A (2,299; 27.1%), RSV (1082; 12.7%), human metapneumovirus (832; 9.8%), parainfluenza (601; 7.1%), influenza B (565; 6.7%), non-SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus (420; 4.9% 1.5 years of data available), and adenovirus (136; 1.6%). Most tests were among female (58%) and White (71%) patients with 60% of patients ≥65 years, 24% 50-64 years, and 16% 18-49 years. The annual burden ranged from 137-174/100,000 population for rhinovirus/enterovirus; 99-182/100,000 for influenza A; and 56-81/100,000 for RSV. Among adults <65 years, rhinovirus/enterovirus hospitalization burden was higher than influenza A; whereas the reverse was true for adults ≥65 years. RV hospitalization burden increased with increasing age. CONCLUSIONS: These virus-specific ARI population-based hospital burden estimates showed significant non-influenza burden. These estimates can serve as the basis for several areas of research that are essential for setting funding priorities and guiding public health policy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza, Human , Metapneumovirus , Paramyxoviridae Infections , Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human , Respiratory Tract Infections , Viruses , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Infant , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Paramyxoviridae Infections/epidemiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology
2.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; 17(4): 1109-1112, 2021 04 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-880766

ABSTRACT

The introduction and rapid transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the United States resulted in methods to assess, mitigate, and contain the resulting COVID-19 disease derived from limited knowledge. Screening for testing has been based on symptoms typically observed in inpatients, yet outpatient symptoms may differ. Classification and regression trees recursive partitioning created a decision tree classifying participants into laboratory-confirmed cases and non-cases. Demographic and symptom data from patients ages 18-87 years enrolled from March 29-June 8, 2020 were included. Presence or absence of SARS-CoV-2 was the target variable. Of 832 tested, 77 (9.3%) tested positive. Cases significantly more often reported diarrhea (12 percentage points (PP)), fever (15 PP), nausea/vomiting (9 PP), loss of taste/smell (52 PP), and contact with a COVID-19 case (54 PP), but less frequently reported sore throat (-27 PP). The 4-terminal node optimal tree had sensitivity of 69%, specificity of 78%, positive predictive value of 20%, negative predictive value of 97%, and AUC of 76%. Among those referred for testing, negative responses to two questions could classify about half (49%) of tested persons with low risk for SARS-CoV-2 and would save limited testing resources. Outpatient symptoms of COVID-19 appear to be broader than the inpatient syndrome.Initial supplies of anticipated COVID-19 vaccines may be limited and administration of first such available vaccines may need to be prioritized for essential workers, the most vulnerable, or those likely to have a robust response to vaccine. Another priority group could be those not previously infected. Those who screen out of testing may be less likely to have been infected by SARS-CoV-2 virus thus may be prioritized for vaccination when supplies are limited.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Decision Trees , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/methods , Middle Aged , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL