Early dynamic changes to monocytes following major surgery are associated with subsequent infections.

Background: Post-operative infections are a common cause of morbidity following major surgery. Little is understood about how major surgery perturbs immune function leading to heightened risk of subsequent infection. Through analysis of paired blood samples obtained immediately before and 24 h following surgery, we evaluated changes in circulating immune cell phenotype and function across the first 24 h, to identify early immune changes associated with subsequent infection. Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study of adult patients undergoing major elective gastrointestinal, gynecological, or maxillofacial surgery requiring planned admission to the post-anesthetic care unit. Patients were followed up to hospital discharge or death. Outcome data collected included mortality, length of stay, unplanned intensive care unit admission, and post-operative infections (using the standardized endpoints in perioperative medicine-core outcome measures for perioperative and anesthetic care criteria). Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were isolated prior to and 24 h following surgery from which cellular immune traits including activation and functional status were assessed by multi-parameter flow cytometry and serum immune analytes compared by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Results: Forty-eight patients were recruited, 26 (54%) of whom developed a post-operative infection. We observed reduced baseline pre- and post-operative monocyte CXCR4 and CD80 expression (chemokine receptors and co-stimulation markers, respectively) in patients who subsequently developed an infection as well as a profound and selective post-operative increase in CD4+ lymphocyte IL-7 receptor expression in the infection group only. Higher post-operative monocyte count was significantly associated with the development of post-operative infection (false discovery rate < 1%; adjusted p-value = 0.001) with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.84 (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Lower monocyte chemotaxis markers, higher post-operative circulating monocyte counts, and reduced co-stimulatory signals are associated with subsequent post-operative infections. Identifying the underlying mechanisms and therapeutics to reverse defects in immune cell function requires further exploration.

Respiratory fluoroquinolone monotherapy vs. ß-lactam plus macrolide combination therapy for hospitalized adults with community-acquired pneumonia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Guidelines recommend respiratory fluoroquinolone monotherapy or ß-lactam plus macrolide combination therapy as first-line options for hospitalized adults with mild-to-moderate community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Efficacy of these regimens has not been adequately evaluated. METHODS: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing respiratory fluoroquinolone monotherapy and ß-lactam plus macrolide combination therapy in hospitalised adults with CAP was performed. A meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. The primary outcome was clinical cure rate. Quality of evidence (QoE) was evaluated using GRADE methodology. RESULTS: A total of 4140 participants in 18 RCTs were included. Levofloxacin (11 trials) or moxifloxacin (6 trials) were the predominant respiratory fluoroquinolones evaluated, and the ß-lactam plus macrolide group used ceftriaxone plus a macrolide (10 trials), cefuroxime plus azithromycin (5 trials), and amoxicillin/clavulanate plus a macrolide (2 trials). Patients receiving respiratory fluoroquinolone monotherapy had a significantly higher clinical cure rate (86.5% vs. 81.5%; odds ratio [OR] 1.47; 95% confidence interval [95% CI: 1.17-1.83]; P = 0.0008; I2 = 0%; 17 RCTs; moderate QoE) and microbiological eradication rate (86.0% vs. 81.0%; OR 1.51 [95% CI: 1.00-2.26]; P = 0.05; I2 = 0%; 15 RCTs; moderate QoE) than patients receiving ß-lactam plus macrolide combination therapy. All-cause mortality (7.2% vs. 7.7%; OR 0.88 [95% CI: 0.67-1.17]; I2 = 0%; low QoE) and adverse events (24.8% vs. 28.1%; OR 0.87 [95% CI: 0.69-1.09]; I2 = 0%; low QoE] were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSION: Respiratory fluoroquinolone monotherapy demonstrated an advantage in clinical cure and microbiological eradication; however, it did not impact mortality.

Effect of Corticosteroids on Mortality and Clinical Cure in Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Meta-regression of Randomized Control Trials.

BACKGROUND: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Corticosteroids may be a beneficial adjunct in the treatment of bacterial pneumonia. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is there any benefit of corticosteroid therapy in the management of bacterial CAP among patients requiring hospitalization? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched to identify randomized controlled trials assessing the use of systemic corticosteroids compared with standard care in the management of CAP. A systematic review, meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) were performed. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, treatment failure, readmission, and adverse events. Data are presented as risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI, P value, heterogeneity (I2), and TSA-adjusted CIs. RESULTS: Sixteen trials met the eligibility criteria. All-cause mortality (16 studies [3,842 patients]; RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.67-1.07]; P = .17; I2 = 14%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.61-1.09), ICU admission (six studies [2,619 patients]; RR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.45-0.97]; P = .04; I2 = 0%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.37-1.12), treatment failure (six studies [2,093 patients]; RR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.37-1.67]; P = .52; I2 = 68%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.02-25.5), and the incidence of adverse events (six studies [2,487 patients]; RR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.97-1.25]; P = .14; I2 = 53%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.82-2.41) were similar between patients receiving corticosteroids and patients assigned to the control group. The need for mechanical ventilation (eight studies [1,457 patients]; RR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.33-0.77]; P = .001; I2 = 0%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.20-0.85) was lower among patients receiving corticosteroids compared with those receiving standard care. However, corticosteroid use may be associated with higher rates of hospital readmission (five studies [2,853 patients]; RR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.05-1.38]; P = .008; I2 = 0%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.89-1.98). INTERPRETATION: Corticosteroid therapy is associated with a lower incidence of progression to requiring mechanical ventilation among patients hospitalized with CAP. No association was found between corticosteroid therapy and mortality, treatment failure, or adverse events. TRIAL REGISTRY: PROSPERO; No.: CRD42021279359; URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

Efficacy of Doxycycline for Mild-to-Moderate Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Doxycycline has been recommended as a treatment option for non-severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in adults. We sought to review the evidence for the efficacy of doxycycline in adult patients with mild-to-moderate CAP. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of doxycycline versus comparator to assess the clinical efficacy. The primary outcome was the clinical cure rate. Random effects model meta-analyses were used to generate pooled odds ratio (OR) and evaluate heterogeneity (I2). Risk of bias (RoB) and quality of evidence (QoE) were evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool and GRADE methods, respectively. RESULTS: We included 6 RCTs with 834 clinically evaluable patients. The trials were performed between 1984 and 2004. Comparators were 3 macrolides (roxithromycin, spiramycin, and erythromycin) and 3 fluoroquinolones (ofloxacin, fleroxacin, and levofloxacin). Four trials had an overall high RoB. The clinical cure rate was similar between the doxycycline and comparator groups (87.2% [381/437] vs 82.6% [328/397]; OR 1.29 [95% confidence interval {CI}: .73-2.28]; I2 = 30%; low QoE). Subgroup analysis of two studies with a low RoB showed significantly higher clinical cure rates in the doxycyline group (87.1% [196/225] vs 77.8% [165/212]; OR 1.92 [95% CI: 1.15-3.21]; P = .01; I2 = 0%). Adverse event rates were comparable between the doxycycline and comparator groups. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of doxycycline was comparable to macrolides or fluoroquinolones in mild-to-moderate CAP and thus represents a viable treatment option. Considering the lack of recent trials, it warrants large-scale clinical trials.

Mortality and clinical cure rates for pneumonia: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis of randomized control trials comparing bactericidal and bacteriostatic antibiotic treatments.

BACKGROUND: Bactericidal antibiotics are generally assumed to be superior to bacteriostatic antibiotics as first-line treatment for pneumonia. OBJECTIVES: We performed a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis (TSA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of bactericidal versus bacteriostatic antibiotics to ascertain clinical superiority. Clinical cure rate was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, microbiological eradication, treatment failure, and relapse rates. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and MedRxiv STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized control trials. PARTICIAPANTS: Adult patients with bacterial pneumonia treated with antibiotics in the community or in-hospital. INTERVENTIONS: Bacteriostatic versus bactericidal antibiotics. ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS: The Cochrane Collaboration assessing risk of bias 2 tool. METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Data on dichotomous outcomes are presented as risk ratio (RR). A random-effects model with the generic Mantel-Haenszel method was used for integrating RRs for generalizability of findings. The I2 method was used to assess the magnitude of variation secondary to heterogeneity. RESULTS: Forty-three RCTs involving 10 752 patients met the eligibility criteria. The clinical cure rate (42 studies, 10 312 patients; RR: 1.02; 95% CI, 0.99-1.05; I2: 37%; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.99-1.05), all-cause mortality (25 studies, 8302 patients; RR: 1.07; 95% CI, 0.81-1.42; I2: 57%), microbiological eradication (24 studies, 2776 patients; RR: 1.00; 95% CI, 0.97-1.03; I2: 0%), treatment failure (31 studies, 7296 patients; RR: 0.96; 95% CI, 0.83-1.11; I2: 42%), and relapse rate (5 studies, 1111 patients; RR: 1.15; 95% CI, 0.50-2.63; I2: 0%) were similar between bactericidal and bacteriostatic antibiotic treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Bactericidal agents are not associated with any statistical difference in clinical cure rates, mortality, microbiological eradication, treatment failure, or relapse rates compared with bacteriostatic antibiotics in the treatment of pneumonia.

Convalescent plasma for COVID-19: a meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis, and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific antibodies, particularly those preventing interaction between the viral spike receptor-binding domain and the host angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor, may prevent viral entry into host cells and disease progression. METHODS: We performed a systematic review, meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis (TSA), and meta-regression of RCTs to evaluate the benefit of convalescent plasma for COVID-19. The primary outcome was 28-30 day mortality. Secondary outcomes included need for mechanical ventilation and ICU admission. Data sources were PubMed, Embase, MedRxiv, and the Cochrane library on July 2, 2021. RESULTS: We identified 17 RCTs that recruited 15 587 patients with 8027 (51.5%) allocated to receive convalescent plasma. Convalescent plasma use was not associated with a mortality benefit (24.7% vs 25.5%; odds ratio [OR]=0.94 [0.85-1.04]; P=0.23; I2=4%; TSA adjusted confidence interval [CI], 0.84-1.05), or reduction in need for mechanical ventilation (15.7% vs 15.4%; OR=1.01 [0.92-1.11]; P=0.82; I2=0%; TSA adjusted CI, 0.91-1.13), or ICU admission (22.4% vs 16.7%; OR=0.80 [0.21-3.09]; P=0.75; I2=63%; TSA adjusted CI, 0.0-196.05). Meta-regression did not reveal association with titre of convalescent plasma, timing of administration, or risk of death and treatment effect (P>0.05). Risk of bias was high in most studies. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19, there was no clear mortality benefit associated with convalescent plasma treatment. In patients with mild disease, convalescent plasma did not prevent either the need for mechanical ventilation or ICU admission. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRD42021234201 (PROSPERO).

Tocilizumab in COVID-19: a meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis, and meta-regression of randomized-controlled trials.

PURPOSE: Interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels discriminate between patients with mild and severe COVID-19, making IL-6 inhibition an attractive therapeutic strategy. We conducted a systematic review, meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis (TSA), and meta-regression of randomized-controlled trials to ascertain the benefit of IL-6 blockade with tocilizumab for COVID-19. METHODS: We included randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) allocating patients with COVID-19 to tocilizumab. Our control group included standard care or placebo. Trials co-administering other pharmacological interventions for COVID-19 were not excluded. Primary outcome was 28-30 day mortality. Secondary outcomes included progression-to-severe disease defined as need for mechanical ventilation, intensive-care unit (ICU) admission, or a composite. RESULTS: We identified 10 RCTs using tocilizumab, 9 of which reported primary outcome data (mortality), recruiting 6493 patients with 3358 (52.2%) allocated to tocilizumab. Tocilizumab may be associated with an improvement in mortality (24.4% vs. 29.0%; OR 0.87 [0.74-1.01]; p = 0.07; I2 = 10%; TSA adjusted CI 0.66-1.14). Meta-regression suggested a relationship between treatment effect and mortality risk, with benefit at higher levels of risk (logOR vs %risk beta = -0.018 [-0.037 to -0.002]; p = 0.07). Tocilizumab did reduce the need for mechanical ventilation and was associated with a benefit in the composite secondary outcome but did not reduce ICU admission. CONCLUSIONS: For hospitalized COVID-19 patients, there is some evidence that tocilizumab use may be associated with a short-term mortality benefit, but further high-quality data are required. Its benefits may also lie in reducing the need for mechanical ventilation.

Significance of User Participation in a Hospital Information System Success: Insights From a Case Study.

User participation in the development of a system is universally prescribed as an effective strategy to ensure the success of the resultant system. However, the existing literature on the merits of user participation only provides equivocal evidence. Various analyses of this literature point out that this equivocal evidence may be due to inconsistent operational measures of the user participation and system success constructs. Planned organizational change and participative decision making, the underlying paradigms of user participation construct, suggest that the development of some information systems may require blending of users' system-related functional expertise and developers' technical expertise to ensure system success. These paradigms also maintain that in case of well-defined, structured information systems user participation should enhance the likelihood of system success through better user understanding of the need for the system and system content and objectives, user trust, and a sense of system ownership. This research also described a case study involving the development and implementation of a medical records system for a neonatal intensive care unit in a large hospital in Texas. The case study provides evidence that in systems that require incorporation of user functional expertise user participation will enhance the likelihood of system success.

Forming design teams to develop healthcare information systems.

Healthcare information systems are assuming an increasingly critical role in providing quality patient care in an effective and efficient manner. However, the success of these systems in achieving these goals remains a lingering concern. Consequently, investigating and devising strategies to enhance the likelihood of success of a healthcare information system continues to draw research interest. One strategy recommended by both researchers and practitioners alike is the participation of the target users in the design and development of the information system. However, practical considerations mandate representative, rather than universal, participation of users. Unfortunately, the information systems literature offers few guidelines for selecting user representatives to serve on a design team. This lack of guidelines easily results in system designers talking with the wrong users or managers assigning the wrong users to the design team. On the basis of the theoretical paradigms underlying the user participation and design team concepts, the authors examined and derived user characteristics that are considered the most critical criteria for selecting user members of a design team. They then report on a field survey they conducted to validate the derived criteria in healthcare information systems context. The authors conclude that the system-related functional expertise should be the primary criterion employed to select healthcare personnel to participate in system design and development. Other criteria, such as users' communication skills, computing backgrounds, and personality traits, should be given secondary considerations. Ignoring these guidelines can render user participation superfluous, resulting in system failures.