Antibiotic prescription for outpatients with influenza and subsequent hospitalisation: A cohort study using insurance data.

Background: Whether prophylactic administration of antibiotics to patients with influenza reduces the hospitalisation risk is unknown. We aimed to examine the association between antibiotic prescription in outpatients with influenza infection and subsequent hospitalisation. Methods: We conducted a cohort study using health insurance records of Japanese clinic and hospital visits between 2012 and 2016. Participants were outpatients (age, 0-74 years) with confirmed influenza infection who were prescribed anti-influenza medicine. The primary outcomes were the hospitalisation risk from all causes and pneumonia and the duration of hospitalisation due to pneumonia. Results: We analysed 903,104 outpatient records with 2469 hospitalisations. The risk of hospitalisation was greater in outpatients prescribed anti-influenza medicine plus antibiotics (0.31% for all causes and 0.18% for pneumonia) than in those prescribed anti-influenza medicine only (0.27% and 0.17%, respectively). However, the risk of hospitalisation was significantly lower in patients prescribed peramivir and antibiotics than in those prescribed peramivir only. Patients who received add-on antibiotics had a significantly longer hospital stay (4.12 days) than those who received anti-influenza medicine only (3.77 days). In all age groups, the hospitalisation risk from pneumonia tended to be greater in those who received antibiotics than in those prescribed anti-influenza medicine only. However, among older patients (65-74 years), those provided add-on antibiotics had an average 5.24-day shorter hospitalisation due to pneumonia than those provided anti-influenza medicine only (not significant). Conclusions: In outpatient cases of influenza, patients who are prescribed antibiotics added to antiviral medicines have a higher risk of hospitalisation and longer duration of hospitalisation due to pneumonia.

Feasibility and Acceptability of Community Coronavirus Disease 2019 Testing Strategies (FACTS) in a University Setting.

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in 2020, the UK government began a mass severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing program. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and acceptability of organized regular self-testing for SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods observational cohort study in asymptomatic students and staff at University of Oxford, who performed SARS-CoV-2 antigen lateral flow self-testing. Data on uptake and adherence, acceptability, and test interpretation were collected via a smartphone app, an online survey, and qualitative interviews. RESULTS: Across 3 main sites, 551 participants (25% of those invited) performed 2728 tests during a follow-up of 5.6 weeks; 447 participants (81%) completed at least 2 tests, and 340 (62%) completed at least 4. The survey, completed by 214 participants (39%), found that 98% of people were confident to self-test and believed self-testing to be beneficial. Acceptability of self-testing was high, with 91% of ratings being acceptable or very acceptable. A total of 2711 (99.4%) test results were negative, 9 were positive, and 8 were inconclusive. Results from 18 qualitative interviews with students and staff revealed that participants valued regular testing, but there were concerns about test accuracy that impacted uptake and adherence. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to assess feasibility and acceptability of regular SARS-CoV-2 self-testing. It provides evidence to inform recruitment for, adherence to, and acceptability of regular SARS-CoV-2 self-testing programs for asymptomatic individuals using lateral flow tests. We found that self-testing is acceptable and people were able to interpret results accurately.

Oseltamivir and influenza-related complications in children: a retrospective cohort in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Influenza and influenza-like illness (ILI) place considerable burden on healthcare systems, especially during influenza epidemics and pandemics. During the 2009/10 H1N1 influenza pandemic, UK national guidelines recommended antiviral medications for patients presenting within 72 h of ILI onset. However, it is not clear whether antiviral treatment was associated with reductions in influenza-related complications. METHODS: Our study population consisted of a retrospective cohort of children aged ≤17 years who presented with influenza/ILI at UK primary care practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink during the 2009/10 pandemic. We used doubly robust inverse-probability weighted propensity scores and physician prior prescribing instrumental variable methods to estimate the causal effect of oseltamivir prescribing on influenza-related complications. Secondary outcomes were complications requiring intervention, pneumonia, pneumonia or hospitalisation, influenza-related hospitalisation and all-cause hospitalisation. RESULTS: We included 16 162 children, of whom 4028 (24.9%) were prescribed oseltamivir, and 753 (4.7%) had recorded complications. Under propensity score analyses oseltamivir prescriptions were associated with reduced influenza-related complications (risk difference (RD) -0.015, 95% CI -0.022--0.008), complications requiring further intervention, pneumonia, pneumonia or hospitalisation and influenza-related hospitalisation, but not all-cause hospitalisation. Adjusted instrumental variable analyses estimated reduced influenza-related complications (RD -0.032, 95% CI -0.051--0.013), pneumonia or hospitalisation, all-cause and influenza-related hospitalisations. CONCLUSIONS: Based on causal inference analyses of observational data, oseltamivir treatment in children with influenza/ILI was associated with a small but statistically significant reduction in influenza-related complications during an influenza pandemic.

Incidence of hospitalisation for severe complications of influenza virus infection in Japanese patients between 2012 and 2016: a cross-sectional study using routinely collected administrative data.

OBJECTIVE: To calculate the incidence of hospitalisation due to acute respiratory failure, pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), febrile seizures and encephalitis/encephalopathy among influenza-positive patients in Japan, where point-of-care tests are routinely used to diagnose influenza. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study using routinely collected data. SETTING: Japanese clinics and hospitals between 2012 and 2016. PARTICIPANTS: Japanese patients aged 0-74 years diagnosed with influenza by a rapid test in employment-related health insurance records. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of hospitalisation per 100 000 influenza-positive episodes. RESULTS: We included over 16 million influenza-positive episodes, 1.0% of whom were hospitalised. Of these, 3361 were acute respiratory failure, 27 253 pneumonia, 18 ARDS, 2603 febrile seizure and 159 encephalitis/encephalopathy. The percentage of hospitalisations by age was 2.96% of patients aged 0-1 years, 0.77% aged 2-5, 0.51% aged 6-12, 0.78% aged 13-18, 1.36% aged 19-44, 1.19% aged 45-64, and 2.21% aged 65-74. The incidence of hospitalisations from these five complications combined was highest in influenza-positive patients aged 0-1 years (943 per 100 000) compared with 307 in those aged 2-5 years and 271 in those aged 65-74 years. For pneumonia, the incidence was highest for influenza-positive patients aged 0-5 years and 65 years or more. There were statistically significant decreasing trends over the years in the incidence of all-cause hospitalisations, pneumonia and febrile seizures. CONCLUSIONS: Japanese administrative data revealed that 1.0% of influenza-positive patients aged under 75 years were hospitalised. Male patients had a higher incidence of pulmonary complications and febrile seizures. Children aged 0-5 years and adults aged 65-74 years were at high risk of being admitted to hospital for pneumonia.

The Clinical Utility of Point-of-Care Tests for Influenza in Ambulatory Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care tests (POCTs) for influenza are diagnostically superior to clinical diagnosis, but their impact on patient outcomes is unclear. METHODS: A systematic review of influenza POCTs versus usual care in ambulatory care settings. Studies were identified by searching six databases and assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Estimates of risk ratios (RR), standardised mean differences, 95% confidence intervals and I2 were obtained by random effects meta-analyses. We explored heterogeneity with sensitivity analyses and meta-regression. RESULTS: 12,928 citations were screened. Seven randomized studies (n = 4,324) and six non-randomized studies (n = 4,774) were included. Most evidence came from paediatric emergency departments. Risk of bias was moderate in randomized studies and higher in non-randomized studies. In randomized trials, POCTs had no effect on admissions (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.61-1.42, I2 = 34%), returning for care (RR 1.00 95% CI = 0.77-1.29, I2 = 7%), or antibiotic prescribing (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.82-1.15, I2 = 70%), but increased prescribing of antivirals (RR 2.65, 95% CI 1.95-3.60; I2 = 0%). Further testing was reduced for full blood counts (FBC) (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.92 I2 = 0%), blood cultures (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.99; I2 = 0%) and chest radiography (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.96; I2 = 32%), but not urinalysis (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78-w1.07; I2 = 20%). Time in the emergency department was not changed. Fewer non-randomized studies reported these outcomes, with some findings reversed or attenuated (fewer antibiotic prescriptions and less urinalysis in tested patients). CONCLUSIONS: Point-of-care testing for influenza influences prescribing and testing decisions, particularly for children in emergency departments. Observational evidence shows challenges for real-world implementation.

Opportunities for earlier diagnosis of type 1 diabetes in children: A case-control study using routinely collected primary care records.

BACKGROUND: The epidemiology of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) suggests diagnostic delays may contribute to children developing diabetic ketoacidosis at diagnosis. We sought to quantify opportunities for earlier diagnosis of T1DM in primary care. METHODS: A matched case-control study of children (0-16 years) presenting to UK primary care, examining routinely collected primary care consultation types and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) warning signs in the 13 weeks before diagnosis. RESULTS: Our primary analysis included 1920 new T1DM cases and 7680 controls. In the week prior to diagnosis more cases than controls had medical record entries (663, 34.5% vs 1014, 13.6%, odds ratio 3.46, 95% CI 3.07-3.89; p<0.0001) and the incidence rate of face-to-face consultations was higher in cases (mean 0.32 vs 0.11, incidence rate ratio 2.90, 2.61-3.21; p<0.0001). The preceding week entries were found in 330 cases and 943 controls (17.2% vs 12.3%, OR 1.49, 1.3-1.7, p<0.0001), but face-to-face consultations were no different (IRR 1.08 (0.9-1.29, p=0.42)). INTERPRETATION: There may be opportunities to reduce time to diagnosis for up to one third of cases, by up to two weeks. Diagnostic opportunities might be maximised by measures that improve access to primary care, and public awareness of T1DM.

Risk of maltreatment-related injury: a cross-sectional study of children under five years old admitted to hospital with a head or neck injury or fracture.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the predictive value and sensitivity of demographic features and injuries (indicators) for maltreatment-related codes in hospital discharge records of children admitted with a head or neck injury or fracture. STUDY DESIGN: Population-based, cross sectional study. SETTING: NHS hospitals in England. SUBJECTS: Children under five years old admitted acutely to hospital with head or neck injury or fracture. DATA SOURCE: Hospital Episodes Statistics, 1997 to 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Maltreatment-related injury admissions, defined by ICD10 codes, were used to calculate for each indicator (demographic feature and/or type of injury): i) the predictive value (proportion of injury admissions that were maltreatment-related); ii) sensitivity (proportion of all maltreatment-related injury admissions with the indicator). RESULTS: Of 260,294 childhood admissions for fracture or head or neck injury, 3.2% (8,337) were maltreatment-related. With increasing age of the child, the predictive value for maltreatment-related injury declined but sensitivity increased. Half of the maltreatment-related admissions occurred in children older than one year, and 63% occurred in children with head injuries without fractures or intracranial injury. CONCLUSIONS: Highly predictive injuries accounted for very few maltreatment-related admissions. Protocols that focus on high-risk injuries may miss the majority of maltreated children.