A mobile unit overcomes the challenges to monoclonal antibody infusion for COVID-19 in skilled care facilities.

BACKGROUND: Residents of nursing homes and long-term care facilities are at increased risk for severe coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) but may not be able to access monoclonal antibody therapies offered at outpatient infusion centers due to frailty and logistical issues. We describe a mobile monoclonal antibody infusion program for patients with COVID-19 in skilled nursing facilities and provide descriptive data on its outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Collaboration between Mayo Clinic and skilled nursing facilities in Southeast Minnesota was developed to administer anti-spike monoclonal antibodies under the FDA Emergency Use Authorization. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy five residents of skilled nursing facilities at high risk of COVID-19 complications. EXPOSURE: Emergency use treatment with bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab. MEASUREMENTS: Hospitalization and medically attended visits. RESULTS: The mobile infusion unit, staffed by Mayo Clinic Infusion Therapy registered nurses and supported by the skilled nursing facility staff, infused anti-spike monoclonal antibodies to 45 of 75 patients (average age, 77.8 years) in December 2020. The infusions occurred at an average of 4.3 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. Fourteen days after infusion, there were no deaths, two emergency department visits, and three hospitalizations, for a combined event rate of 11.1%. There was one reported adverse event. CONCLUSION: The implementation of a mobile infusion unit embedded in a collaborative process resulted in rapid infusion of monoclonal antibodies to high-risk COVID-19 patients in skilled nursing facilities, who would otherwise be unable to access the novel therapies. The therapies were well tolerated and appear beneficial. Further study is warranted to explore the scalability and efficacy of this program.

Electronic consultations with Video Supported PowerPoint versus in-clinic face-to-face, pre-travel consultations: A single-centre, comparative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pretravel consultation involves a face-to-face visit with a Travel Medicine expert and includes time consuming educating/counseling. Efficacy of electronic consultations for pretravel is unknown. We compared pretravel education via face-to-face consult to an electronic consultations combined with education via Video Supported PowerPoint for select travelers. METHODS: We conducted a prospective trial comparing pre-travel education via electronic consultations versus face-to-face consult. Study was conducted from May 2014 through May 2015. RESULTS: Pretravel surveys were completed by 100 in electronic consult arm and 94 in face-to-face consult arm; 67/100 (67%) in the electronic consult and 51/94 (54.2%) in the face-to-face group completed post-travel surveys. Both groups had similar baseline demographics. 36.2% of the face-to-face group felt the trip preparation could have effectively been accomplished through electronic consult, while 33% felt that a face-to-face consult was needed; in contrast, a majority (63.3%) of electronic consult group preferred the electronic consult. Pre-travel education effectiveness was similar in both groups. No statistically significant differences in responses were noted in both groups to 5 of the 6 knowledge assessment questions. A higher proportion (76/100; 76%) in the electronic consult group compared to 55.4% (51/94) (p = 0.0018) in face-to-face group chose the correct response regarding management of febrile bloody diarrhea. 53% reported behavior change to prevent travel related illnesses, with no statistically significant differences between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: electronic consultation with Video Supported PowerPoint pre-travel education is as effective as education via face-to-face consultations and provides a viable alternative to face-to-face consultations in select travelers.

A randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trial of an oral synbiotic (AKSB) for prevention of travelers' diarrhea.

BACKGROUND: Travelers' diarrhea (TD) is a significant problem for travelers. TD is treatable once it occurs, but few options for prevention exist. Probiotics have been studied for prevention or treatment of TD; however, very few combination probiotics have been studied. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine if prophylactic use of an oral synbiotic could reduce the risk of acquiring TD and reduce antibiotic use if TD occurred. METHODS: Healthy subjects traveling to an area of the world with an increased risk of TD were eligible. All subjects received pre-travel counseling and were provided antibiotics and antidiarrheals (loperamide) for use only if TD developed. The subjects were blinded and randomized to take two capsules of placebo or oral synbiotic (a combination of two probiotics and a prebiotic) called Agri-King Synbiotic (AKSB) beginning 3 days prior to departure, daily while traveling, and for 7 days after return. All subjects kept symptom and medication diaries and submitted a stool sample for pathogen carriage within 7 days of return. The study was powered to detect a 50% reduction in the incidence of TD. RESULTS: Of the 196 adults (over 18 years of age) enrolled in the study, 54.3% were female and 80.9% were younger than 60 years. The study randomized 94 people to the AKSB arm and 102 to placebo. The incidence of TD was 54.5% in the overall group with 55.3% in the AKSB arm and 53.9% in the placebo (p = 0.8864). Among the subjects who experienced diarrhea (n = 107) there was no significant difference in the proportion of subjects that took antibiotics versus those that did not take antibiotics (35% vs 29%, p = 0.68). AKSB was safe with no difference in toxicity between the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: The prophylactic oral synbiotic was safe but did not reduce the risk of developing TD among travelers, nor did it decrease the duration of TD or the use of antibiotics when TD occurred.

Improving influenza vaccine distribution in preparation for an H1N1 influenza pandemic: lessons from the field.

Vaccine distribution is an essential component of any healthcare organization's pandemic influenza plan. Variables surrounding distribution in these circumstances are often difficult to anticipate and require careful consideration. The 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic provided organizations with an opportunity to test current models and overall organizational readiness for the next influenza pandemic. This article describes the experiences at a large, midwestern, multispecialty medical system in responding to the unique circumstances surrounding distribution of the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine. We discuss challenges, variables to consider when choosing a vaccine distribution model, institutional response, and lessons learned.