Disparities among 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) hospital admissions: A mixed methods analysis - Illinois, April-December 2009

During late April 2009, the first cases of 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) (pH1N1) in Illinois were reported. On-going, sustained local transmission resulted in an estimated 500,000 infected persons. We conducted a mixed method analysis using both quantitative (surveillance) and qualitative (interview) data; surveillance data was used to analyze demographic distribution of hospitalized cases and follow-up interview data was used to assess health seeking behavior. Invitations to participate in a telephone interview were sent to 120 randomly selected Illinois residents that were hospitalized during April-December 2009. During April-December 2009, 2,824 pH1N1 hospitalizations occurred in Illinois hospitals; median age (interquartile range) at admission was 24 (range: 6-49) years. Hospitalization rates/100,000 persons for blacks and Hispanics, regardless of age or sex were 2-3 times greater than for whites (blacks, 36/100,000 (95% Confidence Interval ([95% CI], 33-39)); Hispanics, 35/100,000 [95%CI,32-37] (; whites, 13/100,000[95%CI, 12-14); p<0.001). Mortality rates were higher for blacks (0.9/100,000; p<0.09) and Hispanics (1/100,000; p<0.04) when compared with the mortality rates for whites (0.6/ 100,000). Of 33 interview respondents, 31 (94%) stated that they had heard of pH1N1 before being hospitalized, and 24 (73%) did not believed they were at risk for pH1N1. On average, respondents reported experiencing symptoms for 2 days (range: 1-7) before seeking medical care. When asked how to prevent pH1N1 infection in the future, the most common responses were getting vaccinated and practicing hand hygiene. Blacks and Hispanics in Illinois experienced disproportionate pH1N1 hospitalization and mortality rates. Public health education and outreach efforts in preparation for future influenza pandemics should include prevention messaging focused on perception of risk, and ensure community wide access to prevention messages and practices

A modified Delphi approach to develop a trial protocol for antibiotic de-escalation in patients with suspected sepsis

Background: Early administration of antibiotics in sepsis is associated with improved patient outcomes, but safe and generalizable approaches to de-escalate or discontinue antibiotics after suspected sepsis events are unknown. Methods: We used a modified Delphi approach to identify safety criteria for an opt-out protocol to guide de-escalation or discontinuation of antibiotic therapy after 72 hours in non-ICU patients with suspected sepsis. An expert panel with expertise in antimicrobial stewardship and hospital epidemiology rated 48 unique criteria across 3 electronic survey rating tools. Criteria were rated primarily based on their impact on patient safety and feasibility for extraction from electronic health record review. The 48 unique criteria were rated by anonymous electronic survey tools, and the results were fed back to the expert panel participants. Consensus was achieved to either retain or remove each criterion. Results: After 3 rounds, 22 unique criteria remained as part of the opt-out safety checklist. These criteria included high-risk comorbidities, signs of severe illness, lack of cultures during sepsis work-up or antibiotic use prior to blood cultures, or ongoing signs and symptoms of infection. Conclusions: The modified Delphi approach is a useful method to achieve expert-level consensus in the absence of evidence suifficient to provide validated guidance. The Delphi approach allowed for flexibility in development of an opt-out trial protocol for sepsis antibiotic de-escalation. The utility of this protocol should be evaluated in a randomized controlled trial