Appropriateness of intensive care treatments near the end of life during the COVID-19 pandemic

The patient and family perspective on the appropriateness of intensive care unit (ICU) treatments involves preferences, values and social constructs beyond medical criteria. The clinician’s perception of inappropriateness is more reliant on clinical judgment. Earlier consultation with families before ICU admission and patient education on the outcomes of life-sustaining therapies may help reconcile these provider–patient disagreements. However, global emergencies like COVID-19 change the usual paradigm of end-of-life care, as it is a new disease with only scarce predictive information about it. Pandemics can also bring about the burdensome predicament of doctors having to make unwanted choices of rationing access to the ICU when demand for otherwise life-saving resources exceeds supply. Evidence-based prognostic checklists may guide treatment triage but the principles of shared decision-making are unchanged. Yet, they need to be altered with respect to COVID-19, defining likely outcomes and likelihood of benefit for the patient, and clarifying their willingness to take on the risks inherent to being in an ICU for 2 weeks for those eligible. For patients who are admitted during the prodrome of COVID-19 disease, or those who deteriorate in the second week, clinicians have some lead time in hospital to have appropriate discussions about ceilings of treatments offered based on severity

Limitations of microscopy to differentiate Plasmodium species in a region co-endemic for Plasmodium falciparum, Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium knowlesi

BackgroundIn areas co-endemic for multiple Plasmodium species, correct diagnosis is crucial for appropriate treatment and surveillance. Species misidentification by microscopy has been reported in areas co-endemic for vivax and falciparum malaria, and may be more frequent in regions where Plasmodium knowlesi also commonly occurs. MethodsThis prospective study in Sabah, Malaysia, evaluated the accuracy of routine district and referral hospital-based microscopy, and microscopy performed by an experienced research microscopist, for the diagnosis of PCR-confirmed Plasmodium falciparum, P. knowlesi, and Plasmodium vivax malaria. ResultsA total of 304 patients with PCR-confirmed Plasmodium infection were enrolled, including 130 with P. knowlesi, 122 with P. falciparum, 43 with P. vivax, one with Plasmodium malariae and eight with mixed species infections. Among patients with P. knowlesi mono-infection, routine and cross-check microscopy both identified 94 (72%) patients as “P. malariae/P. knowlesi”; 17 (13%) and 28 (22%) respectively were identified as P. falciparum, and 13 (10%) and two (1.5%) as P. vivax. Among patients with PCR-confirmed P. falciparum, routine and cross-check microscopy identified 110/122 (90%) and 112/118 (95%) patients respectively as P. falciparum, and 8/122 (6.6%) and 5/118 (4.2%) as “P. malariae/P. knowlesi”. Among those with P. vivax, 23/43 (53%) and 34/40 (85%) were correctly diagnosed by routine and cross-check microscopy respectively, while 13/43 (30%) and 3/40 (7.5%) patients were diagnosed as “P. malariae/P. knowlesi”. Four of 13 patients with PCR-confirmed P. vivax and misdiagnosed by routine microscopy as “P. malariae/P. knowlesi” were subsequently re-admitted with P. vivax malaria. ConclusionsMicroscopy does not reliably distinguish between P. falciparum, P. vivax and P. knowlesi in a region where all three species frequently occur. Misdiagnosis of P. knowlesi as both P. vivax and P. falciparum, and vice versa, is common, potentially leading to inappropriate treatment, including chloroquine therapy for P. falciparum and a lack of anti-relapse therapy for P. vivax. The limitations of microscopy in P. knowlesi-endemic areas supports the use of unified blood-stage treatment strategies for all Plasmodium species, the development of accurate rapid diagnostic tests suitable for all species, and the use of PCR-confirmation for accurate surveillance

Increasing Incidence of Plasmodium knowlesi Malaria following Control of P. falciparum and P. vivax Malaria in Sabah Malaysia

BackgroundThe simian parasite Plasmodium knowlesi is a common cause of human malaria in Malaysian Borneo and threatens the prospect of malaria elimination. However, little is known about the emergence of P. knowlesi, particularly in Sabah. We reviewed Sabah Department of Health records to investigate the trend of each malaria species over time.MethodsReporting of microscopy-diagnosed malaria cases in Sabah is mandatory. We reviewed all available Department of Health malaria notification records from 1992–2011. Notifications of P. malariae and P. knowlesi were considered as a single group due to microscopic near-identity.ResultsFrom 1992–2011 total malaria notifications decreased dramatically, with P. falciparum peaking at 33,153 in 1994 and decreasing 55-fold to 605 in 2011, and P. vivax peaking at 15,857 in 1995 and decreasing 25-fold to 628 in 2011. Notifications of P. malariae/P. knowlesi also demonstrated a peak in the mid-1990s (614 in 1994) before decreasing to ≈100/year in the late 1990s/early 2000s. However, P. malariae/P. knowlesi notifications increased >10-fold between 2004 (n = 59) and 2011 (n = 703). In 1992 P. falciparum, P. vivax and P. malariae/P. knowlesi monoinfections accounted for 70%, 24% and 1% respectively of malaria notifications, compared to 30%, 31% and 35% in 2011. The increase in P. malariae/P. knowlesi notifications occurred state-wide, appearing to have begun in the southwest and progressed north-easterly.ConclusionsA significant recent increase has occurred in P. knowlesi notifications following reduced transmission of the human Plasmodium species, and this trend threatens malaria elimination. Determination of transmission dynamics and risk factors for knowlesi malaria is required to guide measures to control this rising incidence

A study protocol for a randomised open-label clinical trial of artesunate-mefloquine versus chloroquine in patients with non-severe Plasmodium knowlesi malaria in Sabah, Malaysia (ACT KNOW trial)

Introduction Malaria due to Plasmodium knowlesi is reported throughout South-East Asia, and is the commonest cause of it in Malaysia. P. knowlesi replicates every 24 h and can cause severe disease and death. Current 2010 WHO Malaria Treatment Guidelines have no recommendations for the optimal treatment of non-severe knowlesi malaria. Artemisinin-combination therapies (ACT) and chloroquine have each been successfully used to treat knowlesi malaria; however, the rapidity of parasite clearance has not been prospectively compared. Malaysia\u27s national policy for malaria pre-elimination involves mandatory hospital admission for confirmed malaria cases with discharge only after two negative blood films; use of a more rapidly acting antimalarial agent would have health cost benefits. P. knowlesi is commonly microscopically misreported as P. malariae, P. falciparum or P. vivax, with a high proportion of the latter two species being chloroquine-resistant in Malaysia. A unified ACT-treatment protocol would provide effective blood stage malaria treatment for all Plasmodium species.Methods and analysis ACT KNOW, the first randomised controlled trial ever performed in knowlesi malaria, is a two-arm open-label trial with enrolments over a 2-year period at three district sites in Sabah, powered to show a difference in proportion of patients negative for malaria by microscopy at 24 h between treatment arms (clinicaltrials.gov #NCT01708876). Enrolments started in December 2012, with completion expected by September 2014. A total sample size of 228 is required to give 90% power (α 0.05) to determine the primary end point using intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary end points include parasite clearance time, rates of recurrent infection/treatment failure to day 42, gametocyte carriage throughout follow-up and rates of anaemia at day 28, as determined by survival analysis.Ethics and dissemination This study has been approved by relevant institutional ethics committees in Malaysia and Australia. Results will be disseminated to inform knowlesi malaria treatment policy in this region through peer-reviewed publications and academic presentations.Trial registration number NCT01708876

Factors that are associated with the risk of acquiring Plasmodium knowlesi malaria in Sabah, Malaysia: a case-control study protocol

Introduction Plasmodium knowlesi has long been present in Malaysia, and is now an emerging cause of zoonotic human malaria. Cases have been confirmed throughout South-East Asia where the ranges of its natural macaque hosts and Anopheles leucosphyrus group vectors overlap. The majority of cases are from Eastern Malaysia, with increasing total public health notifications despite a concurrent reduction in Plasmodium falciparum and P. vivax malaria. The public health implications are concerning given P. knowlesi has the highest risk of severe and fatal disease of all Plasmodium spp in Malaysia. Current patterns of risk and disease vary based on vector type and competence, with individual exposure risks related to forest and forest-edge activities still poorly defined. Clustering of cases has not yet been systematically evaluated despite reports of peri-domestic transmission and known vector competence for human-to-human transmission.Methods and analysis A population-based case–control study will be conducted over a 2-year period at two adjacent districts in north-west Sabah, Malaysia. Confirmed malaria cases presenting to the district hospital sites meeting relevant inclusion criteria will be requested to enrol. Three community controls matched to the same village as the case will be selected randomly. Study procedures will include blood sampling and administration of household and individual questionnaires to evaluate potential exposure risks associated with acquisition of P. knowlesi malaria. Secondary outcomes will include differences in exposure variables between P. knowlesi and other Plasmodium spp, risk of severe P. knowlesi malaria, and evaluation of P. knowlesi case clustering. Primary analysis will be per protocol, with adjusted ORs for exposure risks between cases and controls calculated using conditional multiple logistic regression models.Ethics This study has been approved by the human research ethics committees of Malaysia, the Menzies School of Health Research, Australia, and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK

An Evaluation of Commonly Used Surrogate Baseline Creatinine Values to Classify AKI During Acute Infection.

INTRODUCTION: Classification of acute kidney injury (AKI) requires a premorbid baseline creatinine, often unavailable in studies in acute infection. METHODS: We evaluated commonly used surrogate and imputed baseline creatinine values against a "reference" creatinine measured during follow-up in an adult clinical trial cohort. Known AKI incidence (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes [KDIGO] criteria) was compared with AKI incidence classified by (1) back-calculation using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equation with and without a Chinese ethnicity correction coefficient; (2) back-calculation using the Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation; (3) assigning glomerular filtration rate (GFR) from age and sex-standardized reference tables; and (4) lowest measured creatinine during admission. Back-calculated distributions were performed using GFRs of 75 and 100 ml/min. RESULTS: All equations using an assumed GFR of 75 ml/min underestimated AKI incidence by more than 50%. Back-calculation with CKD-EPI and GFR of 100 ml/min most accurately predicted AKI but misclassified all AKI stages and had low levels of agreement with true AKI diagnoses. Back-calculation using MDRD and assumed GFR of 100 ml/min, age and sex-reference GFR values adjusted for good health, and lowest creatinine during admission performed similarly, best predicting AKI incidence (area under the receiver operating characteristic curves [AUC ROCs] of 0.85, 0.87, and 0.85, respectively). MDRD back-calculation using a cohort mean GFR showed low total error (22%) and an AUC ROC of 0.85. CONCLUSION: Current methods for estimating baseline creatinine are large sources of potential error in acute infection studies. Preferred alternatives include MDRD equation back-calculation with a population mean GFR, age- and sex-specific GFR values corrected for "good health," or lowest measured creatinine. Studies using surrogate baseline creatinine values should report specific methodology