Identifying the Sickest During Triage: Using Point-of-Care Severity Scores to Predict Prognosis in Emergency Department Patients With Suspected Sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis progresses rapidly and is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Bedside risk stratification scores can quickly identify patients at greatest risk of poor outcomes; however, there is lack of consensus on the best scale to use. OBJECTIVE: To compare the ability of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), the National Early Warning System (NEWS2), and the Shock Index-which does not require mental status assessment-to predict poor outcomes among patients with suspected sepsis during triage. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study of adults presenting to an academic emergency department (ED) from June 2012 to December 2018 who had blood cultures and intravenous antibiotics within 24 hours. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Clinical data were collected from the electronic health record. Patients were considered positive at qSOFA ≥2, Shock Index >0.7, or NEWS2 ≥5 scores. We calculated test characteristics and area under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUROCs) to predict in-hospital mortality and ED-to-intensive care unit (ICU) admission. RESULTS: We included 23,837 ED patients; 1,921(8.1%) were qSOFA-positive, 4,273 (17.9%) Shock Index-positive, and 11,832 (49.6%) NEWS2-positive. There were 1,427 (6.0%) deaths and 3,149 (13.2%) ED-to-ICU admissions in the sample. NEWS2 had the highest sensitivity for in-hospital mortality (76.0%) and ED-to-ICU admission (78.9%). qSOFA had the highest specificity for in-hospital mortality (93.4%) and ED-to-ICU admission (95.2%). Shock Index exhibited the highest AUROC for in-hospital mortality (0.648; 95 CI, 0.635-0.662) and ED-to-ICU admission (0.680; 95% CI, 0.617-0.689). Test characteristics were similar among those with sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: Institution priorities should drive score selection, balancing sensitivity and specificity. In our study, qSOFA was highly specific and NEWS2 was the most sensitive for ruling out patients at high risk. Performance of the Shock Index fell between qSOFA and NEWS2 and could be considered because it is easy to implement.

Parabacteroides distasonis: intriguing aerotolerant gut anaerobe with emerging antimicrobial resistance and pathogenic and probiotic roles in human health.

Parabacteroides distasonis is the type strain for the genus Parabacteroides, a group of gram-negative anaerobic bacteria that commonly colonize the gastrointestinal tract of numerous species. First isolated in the 1930s from a clinical specimen as Bacteroides distasonis, the strain was re-classified to form the new genus Parabacteroides in 2006. Currently, the genus consists of 15 species, 10 of which are listed as 'validly named' (P. acidifaciens, P. chartae, P. chinchillae, P. chongii, P. distasonis, P. faecis, P. goldsteinii, P. gordonii, P. johnsonii, and P. merdae) and 5 'not validly named' (P. bouchesdurhonensis, P. massiliensis, P. pacaensis, P. provencensis, and P. timonensis) by the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature. The Parabacteroides genus has been associated with reports of both beneficial and pathogenic effects in human health. Herein, we review the literature on the history, ecology, diseases, antimicrobial resistance, and genetics of this bacterium, illustrating the effects of P. distasonis on human and animal health.

Clinical features, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients presenting with acute respiratory illness: a comparison of patients with and without COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Emerging data on the clinical presentation, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 have largely been presented as case series. Few studies have compared these clinical features and outcomes of COVID-19 to other acute respiratory illnesses. METHODS: We examined all patients presenting to an emergency department in San Francisco, California between February 3 and March 31, 2020 with an acute respiratory illness who were tested for SARS-CoV-2. We determined COVID-19 status by PCR and metagenomic next generation sequencing (mNGS). We compared demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, vital signs, and laboratory results including viral diagnostics using PCR and mNGS. Among those hospitalized, we determined differences in treatment (antibiotics, antivirals, respiratory support) and outcomes (ICU admission, ICU interventions, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cardiac injury). FINDINGS: In a cohort of 316 patients, 33 (10%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2; 31 patients, all without COVID-19, tested positive for another respiratory virus (16%). Among patients with additional viral testing, no co-infections with SARS-CoV-2 were identified by PCR or mNGS. Patients with COVID-19 reported longer symptoms duration (median 7 vs. 3 days), and were more likely to report fever (82% vs. 44%), fatigue (85% vs. 50%), and myalgias (61% vs 27%); p<0.001 for all comparisons. Lymphopenia (55% vs 34%, p=0.018) and bilateral opacities on initial chest radiograph (55% vs. 24%, p=0.001) were more common in patients with COVID-19. Patients with COVID-19 were more often hospitalized (79% vs. 56%, p=0.014). Of 186 hospitalized patients, patients with COVID-19 had longer hospitalizations (median 10.7d vs. 4.7d, p<0.001) and were more likely to develop ARDS (23% vs. 3%, p<0.001). Most comorbidities, home medications, signs and symptoms, vital signs, laboratory results, treatment, and outcomes did not differ by COVID-19 status. INTERPRETATION: While we found differences in clinical features of COVID-19 compared to other acute respiratory illnesses, there was significant overlap in presentation and comorbidities. Patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be admitted to the hospital, have longer hospitalizations and develop ARDS, and were unlikely to have co-existent viral infections. These findings enhance understanding of the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in comparison to other acute respiratory illnesses. .

Factors associated with the severity and complication of patients with malaria hospitalized between 2009 and 2013 in three municipalities of Colombia, case control study.

BACKGROUND: Malaria worldwide annual reported cases range between 250 and 500 million and nearly half a million deaths are reported every year. Colombia has a vast expanse of territory with environmental and social conditions conducive to malaria transmission, which is the reason why it has second place in Latin America for the number of cases of malaria. METHODS: This is a retrospective, paired, case-control study that compares patients with severe malaria and malaria patients without mention of complication. Medical records of patients with confirmed malaria diagnosis were reviewed. The objective of this study was to identify factors associated with complicated malaria in three municipalities of Colombia during the period 2009-2013. RESULTS: A total sample of 180 medical records was collected, 60 corresponding to cases and 120 to controls following a 1:2 ratio. From the total sample, 88.33 % (159) of subjects were originally from Tumaco, 7.78 %, most of the patients of the study (104) were diagnosed and treated in 2013. Among the laboratory findings, the platelet count was found to have statistically significant differences between cases and controls; this was also true for total bilirubin value and transaminases. The most prevalent severity finding was clinical jaundice, followed by elevated bilirubin (25 %) and elevated transaminases (44.4 %). Thrombocytopenia was found in 11/44 cases (20 %) and only five of 60 patients (8.3 %) presented severe anaemia. The multivariate analysis showed that a platelet count <100,000 and clinical jaundice not associated with organ failure, were the two variables associated with severe malaria in the patients described. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the cases studied, despite meeting criteria of severity, were shown not to be as morbid or severe as in other countries. Clinical jaundice and thrombocytopaenia are associated with severe malaria, and they can be used by general practitioners or primary care physicians to promptly identify patients who may have severe malaria.

A descriptive study of 16 severe Plasmodium vivax cases from three municipalities of Colombia between 2009 and 2013.

BACKGROUND: Plasmodium vivax, the most geographically distributed cause of malaria, accounts for more than 70% of cases in the Americas. In Colombia, P. vivax was responsible for 67.3% of cases in the last five years. Despite vivax malaria impact worldwide, historically it has been neglected and considered to be a benign disease. In the last decade medical literature reports have emerged countering this benign outlook. This study pretends to describe the clinical and paraclinical profile of severe vivax malaria cases hospitalized in Tumaco, Cali, Buenaventura between 2009 and 2013, to contribute to the knowledge regarding the behaviour and clinical expression of this disease. METHODS: This is a descriptive, retrospective case-series study of 16 severe malaria vivax cases, hospitalized between 2009 and 2013, in Colombian municipalities of Tumaco, Buenaventura and Cali. Severe malaria vivax cases were defined using criteria adapted from the national guidelines. Descriptive analyses of reason for consultation, signs and symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, paraclinical characteristics, complications, and time hospitalized, were conducted. RESULTS: Sixteen cases of severe P. vivax were analysed. Fever, chills and headache were shown to be the main admission symptoms. Elevation of total bilirubin levels in 18.75%, and severe thrombocytopaenia in 25% of cases were the main complications presented during hospitalization. All cases responded to treatment, there were no deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The following questions derived from this study could be the basis for future research: 1) Does the time to consultation have an impact on the number of days hospitalized and how cases progress during hospitalization, 2) Are the severity criteria in WHO guidelines sensitive enough to be used in clinical practice compared to national guidelines, and 3) How does malnutrition contribute to anaemia in malaria-endemic regions.