Antibiotic Use in Acute Upper Respiratory Tract Infections.

Upper respiratory tract infections are responsible for millions of physician visits in the United States annually. Although viruses cause most acute upper respiratory tract infections, studies show that many infections are unnecessarily treated with antibiotics. Because inappropriate antibiotic use results in adverse events, contributes to antibiotic resistance, and adds unnecessary costs, family physicians must take an evidence-based, judicious approach to the use of antibiotics in patients with upper respiratory tract infections. Antibiotics should not be used for the common cold, influenza, COVID-19, or laryngitis. Evidence supports antibiotic use in most cases of acute otitis media, group A beta-hemolytic streptococcal pharyngitis, and epiglottitis and in a limited percentage of acute rhinosinusitis cases. Several evidence-based strategies have been identified to improve the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing for acute upper respiratory tract infections.

Chronic Nonallergic Rhinitis.

Chronic nonallergic rhinitis encompasses a group of rhinitis subtypes without allergic or infectious etiologies. Although chronic nonallergic rhinitis represents about one-fourth of rhinitis cases and impacts 20 to 30 million patients in the United States, its pathophysiology is unclear and diagnostic testing is not available. Characteristics such as no evidence of allergy or defined triggers help define clinical subtypes. There are eight subtypes with overlapping presentations, including nonallergic rhinopathy, nonallergic rhinitis with nasal eosinophilia syndrome, atrophic rhinitis, senile or geriatric rhinitis, gustatory rhinitis, drug-induced rhinitis, hormonal rhinitis, and occupational rhinitis. Treatment is symptom-driven and similar to that of allergic rhinitis. Patients should avoid known triggers when possible. First-line therapies include intranasal corticosteroids, intranasal antihistamines, and intranasal ipratropium. Combination therapy with decongestants and first-generation antihistamines can be considered if monotherapy does not adequately control symptoms. Nasal irrigation and intranasal capsaicin may be helpful but need further investigation.

Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis.

Allergic rhinitis is a common and chronic immunoglobulin E-mediated respiratory illness that can affect quality of life and productivity, as well as exacerbate other conditions such as asthma. Treatment should be based on the patient's age and severity of symptoms. Patients should be educated about their condition and advised to avoid known allergens. Intranasal corticosteroids are the most effective treatment and should be first-line therapy for persistent symptoms affecting quality of life. More severe disease that does not respond to intranasal corticosteroids should be treated with second-line therapies, including antihistamines, decongestants, cromolyn, leukotriene receptor antagonists, and nonpharmacologic therapies such as nasal irrigation. Subcutaneous or sublingual immunotherapy should be considered if usual treatments do not adequately control symptoms and in patients with allergic asthma. Evidence does not support the use of mite-proof impermeable mattresses and pillow covers, breastfeeding, air filtration systems, or delayed exposure to solid foods in infancy or to pets in childhood.

Staff versus physician vaccine protocols for influenza immunization during pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant women and their fetuses are known to be at increased risk for influenza-associated morbidity and mortality. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and others have recommended influenza vaccination for all pregnant women at any gestational age, but vaccination rates for pregnant women remain low, near 45%. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed at each of 4 sites during the 2010 to 2011 and 2011 to 2012 influenza seasons to examine the rates of flu vaccination offering and provision. The 4 separate clinics used for this study included 3 sites within a large university academic center and one private community practice. A nurse-driven (licensed vocational nurse or medical assistant staff) protocol for offering the flu vaccine was used at one site the first year of review and then used at 2 sites during the second year of review. We compared the vaccination offering and provision rates when nurse-driven or physician-driven protocols were used. RESULTS: With the nurse-driven protocol, the average offering rate was 99.7%, but of those who were offered the vaccine, only 38.2% received it, for a total effective vaccination rate of 38.1% of the patients. With the physician-driven protocol, 54.5% patients were offered the vaccine, and 70.7% of those received it, for an effective total vaccination rate of 38.5%. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective observational report, a nurse-driven protocol did not improve vaccination rates across varying practice sites. Thus, a simple protocol change to staff alone offering vaccine is unlikely to improve rates of maternal influenza vaccination. Additional studies looking at interventions to increase the number of pregnant women vaccinated against influenza are needed.

Treatment of allergic rhinitis.

Allergic rhinitis is a common chronic respiratory illness that affects quality of life, productivity, and other comorbid conditions, including asthma. Treatment should be based on the patient's age and severity of symptoms. Patients should be advised to avoid known allergens and be educated about their condition. Intranasal corticosteroids are the most effective treatment and should be first-line therapy for mild to moderate disease. Moderate to severe disease not responsive to intranasal corticosteroids should be treated with second-line therapies, including antihistamines, decongestants, cromolyn, leukotriene receptor antagonists, and nonpharmacologic therapies (e.g., nasal irrigation). With the exception of cetirizine, second-generation antihistamines are less likely to cause sedation and impair performance. Immunotherapy should be considered in patients with a less than adequate response to usual treatments. Evidence does not support the use of mite-proof impermeable covers, air filtration systems, or delayed exposure to solid foods in infancy.

Evaluating fever of unidentifiable source in young children.

Most children will have been evaluated for a febrile illness by 36 months of age. Although the majority will have a self-limited viral illness, studies done before the use of Haemophilus influenzae type b and Streptococcus pneumoniae vaccines showed that approximately 10 percent of children younger than 36 months without evident sources of fever had occult bacteremia and serious bacterial infection. More recent studies have found lower rates of bacterial infection (1.6 to 1.8 percent). Any infant younger than 29 days and any child that appears toxic should undergo a complete sepsis work-up. However, nontoxic-appearing children one to 36 months of age, who have a fever with no apparent source and who have received the appropriate vaccinations, could undergo screening laboratory analysis and be sent home with close follow-up. Empiric intramuscular antibiotics are suggested for some children; however, cerebrospinal fluid studies should be obtained first. Because immunizations have recently decreased infection rates for S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae type b, the recommendations for evaluation and treatment of febrile children are evolving and could involve fewer tests and less-presumptive treatment in the future. A cautious approach should still be taken based on the potential for adverse consequences of unrecognized and untreated serious bacterial infection.

Increasing rates of influenza vaccination during pregnancy: a multisite interventional study.

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy is a high-risk indication for influenza vaccination; however, rates of vaccination fall short of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-recommended guidelines. METHODS: Brief educational sessions with family physicians and obstetricians were undertaken in the fall of 2002. Notes reading "Think Flu Vaccine" were placed on active obstetric charts during the study period. Charts were reviewed at the end of influenza season for documentation of discussion or administration of influenza vaccination. Charts for the same period during the previous 2 years were also reviewed for baseline. RESULTS: Baseline rates of vaccination or discussion averaged 1.5% over the 2000-2002 influenza seasons. After intervention, the 2002-2003 rate of vaccination or discussion demonstrated an almost 15-fold increase to 21.9%. This was greater in family practices (3.2% to 44.9%) versus obstetric practices (1.2% to 19.4%), and in small (3.3% to 46.7%) versus large (1.1% to 16%) practices (all values were P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Provider education with simple chart prompts seems an effective way to increase rates of physician discussion of influenza vaccination with pregnant women. The increased rates seen in this study across various practice settings also suggest that inclusion of influenza vaccination on standardized prenatal care flowsheets may achieve similar goals with less individualized effort and should be considered.

Influenza vaccination in pregnancy: current practices in a suburban community.

PURPOSE: The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) identify women in their second and third trimesters as a high-risk population warranting influenza vaccination. This study attempted to characterize understanding of these guidelines and obstacles to their implementation in a suburban community. METHODS: Family physicians and obstetricians with admitting privileges to a community-based hospital were surveyed regarding estimated vaccine availability and administration in their practices and regarding knowledge of indications and contraindications to influenza vaccination in pregnancy. RESULTS: Of the 20 obstetricians and 66 family physicians completing the survey, 68.4% of obstetricians and 90.5% of family physicians carried the vaccine in their offices (P =.027). Both obstetricians and family physicians incorrectly perceived multiple factors as contraindications to influenza vaccination in pregnancy. Obstetricians and family physicians reported similar proportions of their pregnant patients received the vaccine (35 versus 40%). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, more family physicians had the influenza vaccine available than obstetricians, but there was no difference in estimated rates of vaccination during pregnancy or in the understanding of its indications and contraindications. Finally, no physicians in our community reported providing influenza vaccination in pregnancy at recommended frequencies. Further research is needed to clarify methods of improving vaccination rates in both family practice and obstetric settings.

Vaccinations in pregnancy.

Adult immunization rates have fallen short of national goals partly because of misconceptions about the safety and benefits of current vaccines. The danger of these misconceptions is magnified during pregnancy, when concerned physicians are hesitant to administer vaccines and patients are reluctant to accept them. Routine vaccines that generally are safe to administer during pregnancy include diphtheria, tetanus, influenza, and hepatitis B. Other vaccines, such as meningococcal and rabies, may be considered. Vaccines that are contraindicated, because of the theoretic risk of fetal transmission, include measles, mumps, and rubella; varicella; and bacille Calmette-Guerin. A number of other vaccines have not yet been adequately studied; therefore, theoretic risks of vaccination must be weighed against the risks of the disease to mother and fetus. Inadvertent administration of any of these vaccinations, however, is not considered an indication for termination of the pregnancy.