Respiratory viral testing and antibacterial treatment in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia.

OBJECTIVE: Viruses are more common than bacteria in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia. Little is known, however, about the frequency of respiratory viral testing and its associations with antimicrobial utilization. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The study included 179 US hospitals. PATIENTS: Adults admitted with pneumonia between July 2010 and June 2015. METHODS: We assessed the frequency of respiratory virus testing and compared antimicrobial utilization, mortality, length of stay, and costs between tested versus untested patients, and between virus-positive versus virus-negative patients. RESULTS: Among 166,273 patients with pneumonia on admission, 40,787 patients (24.5%) were tested for respiratory viruses, 94.8% were tested for influenza, and 20.7% were tested for other viruses. Viral assays were positive in 5,133 of 40,787 tested patients (12.6%), typically for influenza and rhinovirus. Tested patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities than untested patients, but patients with positive viral assays were older and had more comorbidities than those with negative assays. Blood cultures were positive for bacterial pathogens in 2.7% of patients with positive viral assays versus 5.3% of patients with negative viral tests (P < .001). Antibacterial courses were shorter for virus-positive versus -negative patients overall (mean 5.5 vs 6.4 days; P < .001) but varied by bacterial testing: 8.1 versus 8.0 days (P = .60) if bacterial tests were positive; 5.3 versus 6.1 days (P < .001) if bacterial tests were negative; and 3.3 versus 5.2 days (P < .001) if bacterial tests were not obtained (interaction P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A minority of patients hospitalized with pneumonia were tested for respiratory viruses; only a fraction of potential viral pathogens were assayed; and patients with positive viral tests often received long antibacterial courses.

Mechanisms of socioeconomic differences in COVID-19 screening and hospitalizations.

BACKGROUND: Social and ecological differences in early SARS-CoV-2 pandemic screening and outcomes have been documented, but the means by which these differences have arisen are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To characterize socioeconomic and chronic disease-related mechanisms underlying these differences. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Outpatient and emergency care. PATIENTS: 12900 Cleveland Clinic Health System patients referred for SARS-CoV-2 testing between March 17 and April 15, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Nasopharyngeal PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 infection. MEASUREMENTS: Test location (emergency department, ED, vs. outpatient care), COVID-19 symptoms, test positivity and hospitalization among positive cases. RESULTS: We identified six classes of symptoms, ranging in test positivity from 3.4% to 23%. Non-Hispanic Black race/ethnicity was disproportionately represented in the group with highest positivity rates. Non-Hispanic Black patients ranged from 1.81 [95% confidence interval: 0.91-3.59] times (at age 20) to 2.37 [1.54-3.65] times (at age 80) more likely to test positive for the SARS-CoV-2 virus than non-Hispanic White patients, while test positivity was not significantly different across the neighborhood income spectrum. Testing in the emergency department (OR: 5.4 [3.9, 7.5]) and cardiovascular disease (OR: 2.5 [1.7, 3.8]) were related to increased risk of hospitalization among the 1247 patients who tested positive. LIMITATIONS: Constraints on availability of test kits forced providers to selectively test for SARS-Cov-2. CONCLUSION: Non-Hispanic Black patients and patients from low-income neighborhoods tended toward more severe and prolonged symptom profiles and increased comorbidity burden. These factors were associated with higher rates of testing in the ED. Non-Hispanic Black patients also had higher test positivity rates.