35 research outputs found

    Pediatric Kawasaki Disease and Adult Human Immunodeficiency Virus Kawasaki-Like Syndrome Are Likely the Same Malady.

    Get PDF
    Background. Pediatric Kawasaki disease (KD) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)+ adult Kawasaki-like syndrome (KLS) are dramatic vasculitides with similar physical findings. Both syndromes include unusual arterial histopathology with immunoglobulin (Ig)A+ plasma cells, and both impressively respond to pooled Ig therapy. Their distinctive presentations, histopathology, and therapeutic response suggest a common etiology. Because blood is in immediate contact with inflamed arteries, we investigated whether KD and KLS share an inflammatory signature in serum.Methods. A custom multiplex enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) defined the serum cytokine milieu in 2 adults with KLS during acute and convalescent phases, with asymptomatic HIV+ subjects not taking antiretroviral therapy serving as controls. We then prospectively collected serum and plasma samples from children hospitalized with KD, unrelated febrile illnesses, and noninfectious conditions, analyzing them with a custom multiplex ELISA based on the KLS data.Results. Patients with KLS and KD subjects shared an inflammatory signature including acute-phase reactants reflecting tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α biologic activity (soluble TNF receptor I/II) and endothelial/smooth muscle chemokines Ccl1 (Th2), Ccl2 (vascular inflammation), and Cxcl11 (plasma cell recruitment). Ccl1 was specifically elevated in KD versus febrile controls, suggesting a unique relationship between Ccl1 and KD/KLS pathogenesis.Conclusions. This study defines a KD/KLS inflammatory signature mirroring a dysfunctional response likely to a common etiologic agent. The KD/KLS inflammatory signature based on elevated acute-phase reactants and specific endothelial/smooth muscle chemokines was able to identify KD subjects versus febrile controls, and it may serve as a practicable diagnostic test for KD

    What is the effect of a decision aid in potentially vulnerable parents? Insights from the head CT choice randomized trial.

    Get PDF
    ObjectiveTo test the hypotheses that use of the Head CT Choice decision aid would be similarly effective in all parent/patient dyads but parents with high (vs low) numeracy experience a greater increase in knowledge while those with low (vs high) health literacy experience a greater increase in trust.MethodsThis was a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized trial conducted at seven sites. One hundred seventy-two clinicians caring for 971 children at intermediate risk for clinically important traumatic brain injuries were randomized to shared decision making facilitated by the DA (n = 493) or to usual care (n = 478). We assessed for subgroup effects based on patient and parent characteristics, including socioeconomic status (health literacy, numeracy and income). We tested for interactions using regression models with indicators for arm assignment and study site.ResultsThe decision aid did not increase knowledge more in parents with high numeracy (P for interaction [Pint ] = 0.14) or physician trust more in parents with low health literacy (Pint  = 0.34). The decision aid decreased decisional conflict more in non-white parents (decisional conflict scale, -8.14, 95% CI: -12.33 to -3.95; Pint  = 0.05) and increased physician trust more in socioeconomically disadvantaged parents (trust in physician scale, OR: 8.59, 95% CI: 2.35-14.83; Pint  = 0.04).ConclusionsUse of the Head CT Choice decision aid resulted in less decisional conflict in non-white parents and greater physician trust in socioeconomically disadvantaged parents. Decision aids may be particularly effective in potentially vulnerable parents

    Effectiveness of the head CT choice decision aid in parents of children with minor head trauma: study protocol for a multicenter randomized trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Blunt head trauma is a common cause of death and disability in children worldwide. Cranial computed tomography (CT), the reference standard for the diagnosis of traumatic brain injury (TBI), exposes children to ionizing radiation which has been linked to the development of brain tumors, leukemia, and other cancers. We describe the methods used to develop and test the effectiveness of a decision aid to facilitate shared decision-making with parents regarding whether to obtain a head CT scan or to further observe their child at home. Methods/Design: This is a protocol for a multicenter clinician-level parallel randomized trial to compare an intervention group receiving a decision aid, ‘Head CT Choice’, to a control group receiving usual care. The trial will be conducted at five diverse emergency departments (EDs) in Minnesota and California. Clinicians will be randomized to decision aid or usual care. Parents visiting the ED with children who are less than 18-years-old, have experienced blunt head trauma within 24 hours, and have one or two risk factors for clinically-important TBI (ciTBI) from the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network head injury clinical prediction rules will be eligible for enrollment. We will measure the effect of Head CT Choice on: (1) parent knowledge regarding their child’s risk of ciTBI, the available diagnostic options, and the risks of radiation exposure associated with a cranial CT scan (primary outcome); (2) parent engagement in the decision-making process; (3) the degree of conflict parents experience related to feeling uninformed; (4) patient and clinician satisfaction with the decision made; (5) the rate of ciTBI at seven days; (6) the proportion of patients in whom a cranial CT scan is obtained; and (7) seven-day healthcare utilization. To capture these outcomes, we will administer parent and clinician surveys immediately after each clinical encounter, obtain video recordings of parent-clinician discussions, administer parent healthcare utilization diaries, analyze hospital billing records, review the electronic medical record, and conduct telephone follow-up. Discussion: This multicenter trial will robustly assess the effectiveness of a decision aid on patient-centered outcomes, safety, and healthcare utilization in parents of children with minor head trauma in five diverse EDs. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT02063087. Registration date February 13, 2014

    International variation in evidence-based emergency department management of bronchiolitis: a retrospective cohort study

    Get PDF
    Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the international variation in the use of evidence-based management (EBM) in bronchiolitis. We hypothesised that management consistent with full-EBM practices is associated with the research network of care, adjusted for patient-level characteristics. Secondary objectives were to determine the association between full-EBM and (1) hospitalisation and (2) emergency department (ED) revisits resulting in hospitalisation within 21 days. Design: A secondary analysis of a retrospective cohort study. Setting: 38 paediatric EDs belonging to the Paediatric Emergency Research Network in Canada, USA, Australia/New Zealand UK/Ireland and Spain/Portugal. Patients: Otherwise healthy infants 2–11 months old diagnosed with bronchiolitis between 1 January 2013 and 31 December, 2013. Outcome measures: Primary outcome was management consistent with full-EBM, that is, no bronchodilators/corticosteroids/antibiotics, no chest radiography or laboratory testing. Secondary outcomes included hospitalisations during the index and subsequent ED visits. Results: 1137/2356 (48.3%) infants received full-EBM (ranging from 13.2% in Spain/Portugal to 72.3% in UK/Ireland). Compared with the UK/Ireland, the adjusted ORs (aOR) of full-EBM receipt were lower in Spain/Portugal (aOR 0.08, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.29), Canada (aOR 0.13 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.31) and USA (aOR 0.16 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.35). EBM was less likely in infants with dehydration (aOR 0.49 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.71)), chest retractions (aOR 0.69 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.91)) and nasal flaring (aOR 0.69 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.92)). EBM was associated with reduced odds of hospitalisation at the index visit (aOR 0.77 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.98)) but not at revisits (aOR 1.17 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.85)). Conclusions: Infants with bronchiolitis frequently do not receive full-EBM ED management, particularly those outside of the UK/Ireland. Furthermore, there is marked variation in full-EBM between paediatric emergency networks, and full-EBM delivery is associated with lower likelihood of hospitalisation. Given the global bronchiolitis burden, international ED-focused deimplementation of non-indicated interventions to enhance EBM is needed

    Laboratory-Confirmed COVID-19 Among Adults Hospitalized with COVID-19–Like Illness with Infection-Induced or mRNA Vaccine-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Immunity — Nine States, January–September 2021

    Get PDF
    What is already known about this topic? Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 vaccination can provide immunity and protection against subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness. What is added by this report? Among COVID-19–like illness hospitalizations among adults aged ≥18 years whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90–179 days earlier, the adjusted odds of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 among unvaccinated adults with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were 5.49-fold higher than the odds among fully vaccinated recipients of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine who had no previous documented infection (95% confidence interval = 2.75–10.99). What are the implications for public health practice? All eligible persons should be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible, including unvaccinated persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2

    Effectiveness of 2-Dose Vaccination with mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Against COVID-19–Associated Hospitalizations Among Immunocompromised Adults — Nine States, January–September 2021

    Get PDF
    What is already known about this topic? Studies suggest that immunocompromised persons who receive COVID-19 vaccination might not develop high neutralizing antibody titers or be as protected against severe COVID-19 outcomes as are immunocompetent persons. What is added by this report? Effectiveness of mRNA vaccination against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated hospitalization was lower (77%) among immunocompromised adults than among immunocompetent adults (90%). Vaccine effectiveness varied considerably among immunocompromised patient subgroups. What are the implications for public health practice? Immunocompromised persons benefit from COVID-19 mRNA vaccination but are less protected from severe COVID-19 outcomes than are immunocompetent persons. Immunocompromised persons receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines should receive 3 doses and a booster, consistent with CDC recommendations, practice nonpharmaceutical interventions, and, if infected, be monitored closely and considered early for proven therapies that can prevent severe outcomes
    corecore