User login
It’s Not Too Late for Influenza Vaccination: Q&A With CDC’s Dr. Lisa Grohskopf
Text has been edited for length.
Are there any updates to this season’s influenza vaccine or vaccine recommendations?
Yes, we have updates to both the vaccine and the vaccine recommendations this year. Typically we have some changes each year, and this year there are two main changes in the recommendations. One relates to the composition of the vaccine for this season, and the other is a new recommendation for adult solid organ transplant recipients.
We typically have changes in the vaccine composition each season. For most seasons, one or more parts of the vaccine will change, but this year is a little different in that all of the vaccines available in the US for the 2024-2025 season are going to be three-virus, or trivalent, vaccines. They are going to be formulated to protect against three viruses: an influenza A(H1N1) virus, an influenza A(H3N2) virus, and an influenza B/Victoria lineage virus.
The reason for this change is that since the 2013-2014 season through the 2023-2024 season, we had quadrivalent vaccines that were available in the US that contained four viruses. Those vaccines contained a second influenza B virus from the Yamagata lineage (B viruses come from two main lineages).
The reason for the change to trivalent vaccines this season is that influenza B/Yamagata viruses have not been detected in global surveillance since March 2020, and so their inclusion is no longer warranted. So this season, all of the vaccines available in the US are going to be trivalent.
In addition to that change, we have an update in the influenza A(H3N2) component of the vaccine compared with last season.
The second change concerning adult solid organ transplant recipients is that Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) now recommends that solid organ transplant recipients aged 18-64 years can receive as acceptable options either the high-dose inactivated vaccine or the adjuvanted inactivated vaccine without a preference over other age appropriate, inactivated, or recombinant vaccines.
Those vaccines are both formulated with features intended to make them more immunogenic — ie, promote a stronger immune response — and there are data for immunogenicity that suggest they could be more immunogenic in that population.
Who needs an influenza vaccine this season?
That recommendation is the same as it’s been for a number of years, which is that everybody aged 6 months or older is recommended to get a flu vaccine, with some rare exceptions, mainly concerning contraindications to vaccination.
Contraindications are detailed in the ACIP flu statement each year, and they’re relatively uncommon conditions overall, so most people are recommended, if they’re in that age group 6 months and up, to get an annual flu vaccine.
Are there groups for whom influenza vaccination is especially important?
Yes. While influenza vaccination is recommended for everybody in that age group 6 months and up — and in truth, we can never really predict who’s going to get severely ill — some people are more likely to be at risk of having serious illness or hospitalization. Those people include adults aged 65 years or older; young children; people with certain chronic health conditions such as heart disease, lung disease, and diabetes; and people from some racial and ethnic groups.
Are there any specific influenza vaccination recommendations for these groups or others?
Not for most people. In general, we have a number of different influenza vaccines each season; this year we have a total of nine brands. In general, there’s no preferential recommendation for one vaccine or type of vaccine for specific groups of people, with one exception: For people aged 65 years or older, there’s a preferential recommendation for three specific vaccines — the high-dose inactivated vaccine, Fluzone High-Dose; the recombinant vaccine, Flublok; and the adjuvanted inactivated vaccine, FLUAD.
Among those three, there’s no preference for any one of them over the other two; they’re all preferred vaccines for this age group, if available. If none of those three vaccines are available at the time that somebody aged 65 or older is there to get vaccinated, people in this age group should get any other age-appropriate influenza vaccine that is available.
When should people get vaccinated if they haven’t already?
CDC and ACIP recommend vaccination for most people, ideally by the end of October. But for those who missed the end of October, it is absolutely not too late. Providers should continue to encourage vaccination and people should get their vaccines as long as flu viruses are circulating.
The timing of the onset and the peak and the end of the flu season vary a bit from year to year. We often start to see generally activity begin to increase in the US in the fall, which is the reason for the end of October recommendation; however, flu activity doesn’t tend to peak in the US until after October. We’re talking December, January, or later, so getting vaccinated after October can still provide important protection during the peak of the season.
There does seem to be a tendency for people to think, OK, I haven’t gotten the vaccine yet, and there probably isn’t a lot of reason to do it now. But really, it’s definitely not too late, and that’s something we like to encourage people to think about, particularly as we move into December and January — it’s not too late if you missed October.
Influenza vaccination is also available in so many places. You don’t necessarily have to go to a healthcare provider’s office; there are many retail chains which offer influenza vaccines.
Is influenza spreading right now? Are activity levels increasing?
Overall influenza activity currently is low nationally, although there’s starting to be some slight increases in the pediatric age groups and, of course, we do anticipate that it will increase in the coming weeks and months.
When we get vaccinated, the protection isn’t instantaneous. The immune system needs a bit of time to react to the vaccine and to develop antibodies. That can take about 2 weeks. Even with that, now is still absolutely not too late to get a vaccine. Neither is December, for that matter. As long as the flu viruses are circulating where you are, it is still worth getting vaccinated.
What was influenza vaccination coverage like last season?
It’s a little bit early to tell for the current season, but one of the things that we do know is that since the COVID-19 pandemic, coverage has dropped compared with before the COVID-19 pandemic. Before COVID-19, influenza vaccination coverage had been slowly increasing in most groups, but it has decreased since then, and those downturns in coverage haven’t recovered to prepandemic levels. For example, during 2023-2024, about half of children and adults received a flu vaccine.
What can providers do to encourage influenza vaccination in their patients?
We know that a healthcare provider’s strong recommendation for flu vaccination is a really major factor in whether or not patients get a flu vaccine, and is more effective in increasing acceptance of vaccination than just about any other factor.
There’s a method from CDC called SHARE, which is a helpful way to help make a strong recommendation and provide information to help patients make an informed decision about whether or not they want to be vaccinated.
To implement SHARE, it’s an acronym with five parts. S is for Share the reasons why the flu vaccine is right for that patient. H is for Highlight positive experiences with flu vaccination, either personal or in practice. A is for Address patient concerns and questions about the flu vaccine, including things such as side effects, safety, and effectiveness. R is Remind patients that vaccination protects them and their loved ones from serious illness and related complications. E is Explain the potential complications and consequences of getting influenza, including serious health effects, time lost from family, work, and school, and potential financial costs.
Additional resources are accessible on CDC’s influenza resources page, including brochures, posters, and fact sheets that can help providers in encouraging and reminding people to get vaccinated.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Text has been edited for length.
Are there any updates to this season’s influenza vaccine or vaccine recommendations?
Yes, we have updates to both the vaccine and the vaccine recommendations this year. Typically we have some changes each year, and this year there are two main changes in the recommendations. One relates to the composition of the vaccine for this season, and the other is a new recommendation for adult solid organ transplant recipients.
We typically have changes in the vaccine composition each season. For most seasons, one or more parts of the vaccine will change, but this year is a little different in that all of the vaccines available in the US for the 2024-2025 season are going to be three-virus, or trivalent, vaccines. They are going to be formulated to protect against three viruses: an influenza A(H1N1) virus, an influenza A(H3N2) virus, and an influenza B/Victoria lineage virus.
The reason for this change is that since the 2013-2014 season through the 2023-2024 season, we had quadrivalent vaccines that were available in the US that contained four viruses. Those vaccines contained a second influenza B virus from the Yamagata lineage (B viruses come from two main lineages).
The reason for the change to trivalent vaccines this season is that influenza B/Yamagata viruses have not been detected in global surveillance since March 2020, and so their inclusion is no longer warranted. So this season, all of the vaccines available in the US are going to be trivalent.
In addition to that change, we have an update in the influenza A(H3N2) component of the vaccine compared with last season.
The second change concerning adult solid organ transplant recipients is that Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) now recommends that solid organ transplant recipients aged 18-64 years can receive as acceptable options either the high-dose inactivated vaccine or the adjuvanted inactivated vaccine without a preference over other age appropriate, inactivated, or recombinant vaccines.
Those vaccines are both formulated with features intended to make them more immunogenic — ie, promote a stronger immune response — and there are data for immunogenicity that suggest they could be more immunogenic in that population.
Who needs an influenza vaccine this season?
That recommendation is the same as it’s been for a number of years, which is that everybody aged 6 months or older is recommended to get a flu vaccine, with some rare exceptions, mainly concerning contraindications to vaccination.
Contraindications are detailed in the ACIP flu statement each year, and they’re relatively uncommon conditions overall, so most people are recommended, if they’re in that age group 6 months and up, to get an annual flu vaccine.
Are there groups for whom influenza vaccination is especially important?
Yes. While influenza vaccination is recommended for everybody in that age group 6 months and up — and in truth, we can never really predict who’s going to get severely ill — some people are more likely to be at risk of having serious illness or hospitalization. Those people include adults aged 65 years or older; young children; people with certain chronic health conditions such as heart disease, lung disease, and diabetes; and people from some racial and ethnic groups.
Are there any specific influenza vaccination recommendations for these groups or others?
Not for most people. In general, we have a number of different influenza vaccines each season; this year we have a total of nine brands. In general, there’s no preferential recommendation for one vaccine or type of vaccine for specific groups of people, with one exception: For people aged 65 years or older, there’s a preferential recommendation for three specific vaccines — the high-dose inactivated vaccine, Fluzone High-Dose; the recombinant vaccine, Flublok; and the adjuvanted inactivated vaccine, FLUAD.
Among those three, there’s no preference for any one of them over the other two; they’re all preferred vaccines for this age group, if available. If none of those three vaccines are available at the time that somebody aged 65 or older is there to get vaccinated, people in this age group should get any other age-appropriate influenza vaccine that is available.
When should people get vaccinated if they haven’t already?
CDC and ACIP recommend vaccination for most people, ideally by the end of October. But for those who missed the end of October, it is absolutely not too late. Providers should continue to encourage vaccination and people should get their vaccines as long as flu viruses are circulating.
The timing of the onset and the peak and the end of the flu season vary a bit from year to year. We often start to see generally activity begin to increase in the US in the fall, which is the reason for the end of October recommendation; however, flu activity doesn’t tend to peak in the US until after October. We’re talking December, January, or later, so getting vaccinated after October can still provide important protection during the peak of the season.
There does seem to be a tendency for people to think, OK, I haven’t gotten the vaccine yet, and there probably isn’t a lot of reason to do it now. But really, it’s definitely not too late, and that’s something we like to encourage people to think about, particularly as we move into December and January — it’s not too late if you missed October.
Influenza vaccination is also available in so many places. You don’t necessarily have to go to a healthcare provider’s office; there are many retail chains which offer influenza vaccines.
Is influenza spreading right now? Are activity levels increasing?
Overall influenza activity currently is low nationally, although there’s starting to be some slight increases in the pediatric age groups and, of course, we do anticipate that it will increase in the coming weeks and months.
When we get vaccinated, the protection isn’t instantaneous. The immune system needs a bit of time to react to the vaccine and to develop antibodies. That can take about 2 weeks. Even with that, now is still absolutely not too late to get a vaccine. Neither is December, for that matter. As long as the flu viruses are circulating where you are, it is still worth getting vaccinated.
What was influenza vaccination coverage like last season?
It’s a little bit early to tell for the current season, but one of the things that we do know is that since the COVID-19 pandemic, coverage has dropped compared with before the COVID-19 pandemic. Before COVID-19, influenza vaccination coverage had been slowly increasing in most groups, but it has decreased since then, and those downturns in coverage haven’t recovered to prepandemic levels. For example, during 2023-2024, about half of children and adults received a flu vaccine.
What can providers do to encourage influenza vaccination in their patients?
We know that a healthcare provider’s strong recommendation for flu vaccination is a really major factor in whether or not patients get a flu vaccine, and is more effective in increasing acceptance of vaccination than just about any other factor.
There’s a method from CDC called SHARE, which is a helpful way to help make a strong recommendation and provide information to help patients make an informed decision about whether or not they want to be vaccinated.
To implement SHARE, it’s an acronym with five parts. S is for Share the reasons why the flu vaccine is right for that patient. H is for Highlight positive experiences with flu vaccination, either personal or in practice. A is for Address patient concerns and questions about the flu vaccine, including things such as side effects, safety, and effectiveness. R is Remind patients that vaccination protects them and their loved ones from serious illness and related complications. E is Explain the potential complications and consequences of getting influenza, including serious health effects, time lost from family, work, and school, and potential financial costs.
Additional resources are accessible on CDC’s influenza resources page, including brochures, posters, and fact sheets that can help providers in encouraging and reminding people to get vaccinated.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Text has been edited for length.
Are there any updates to this season’s influenza vaccine or vaccine recommendations?
Yes, we have updates to both the vaccine and the vaccine recommendations this year. Typically we have some changes each year, and this year there are two main changes in the recommendations. One relates to the composition of the vaccine for this season, and the other is a new recommendation for adult solid organ transplant recipients.
We typically have changes in the vaccine composition each season. For most seasons, one or more parts of the vaccine will change, but this year is a little different in that all of the vaccines available in the US for the 2024-2025 season are going to be three-virus, or trivalent, vaccines. They are going to be formulated to protect against three viruses: an influenza A(H1N1) virus, an influenza A(H3N2) virus, and an influenza B/Victoria lineage virus.
The reason for this change is that since the 2013-2014 season through the 2023-2024 season, we had quadrivalent vaccines that were available in the US that contained four viruses. Those vaccines contained a second influenza B virus from the Yamagata lineage (B viruses come from two main lineages).
The reason for the change to trivalent vaccines this season is that influenza B/Yamagata viruses have not been detected in global surveillance since March 2020, and so their inclusion is no longer warranted. So this season, all of the vaccines available in the US are going to be trivalent.
In addition to that change, we have an update in the influenza A(H3N2) component of the vaccine compared with last season.
The second change concerning adult solid organ transplant recipients is that Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) now recommends that solid organ transplant recipients aged 18-64 years can receive as acceptable options either the high-dose inactivated vaccine or the adjuvanted inactivated vaccine without a preference over other age appropriate, inactivated, or recombinant vaccines.
Those vaccines are both formulated with features intended to make them more immunogenic — ie, promote a stronger immune response — and there are data for immunogenicity that suggest they could be more immunogenic in that population.
Who needs an influenza vaccine this season?
That recommendation is the same as it’s been for a number of years, which is that everybody aged 6 months or older is recommended to get a flu vaccine, with some rare exceptions, mainly concerning contraindications to vaccination.
Contraindications are detailed in the ACIP flu statement each year, and they’re relatively uncommon conditions overall, so most people are recommended, if they’re in that age group 6 months and up, to get an annual flu vaccine.
Are there groups for whom influenza vaccination is especially important?
Yes. While influenza vaccination is recommended for everybody in that age group 6 months and up — and in truth, we can never really predict who’s going to get severely ill — some people are more likely to be at risk of having serious illness or hospitalization. Those people include adults aged 65 years or older; young children; people with certain chronic health conditions such as heart disease, lung disease, and diabetes; and people from some racial and ethnic groups.
Are there any specific influenza vaccination recommendations for these groups or others?
Not for most people. In general, we have a number of different influenza vaccines each season; this year we have a total of nine brands. In general, there’s no preferential recommendation for one vaccine or type of vaccine for specific groups of people, with one exception: For people aged 65 years or older, there’s a preferential recommendation for three specific vaccines — the high-dose inactivated vaccine, Fluzone High-Dose; the recombinant vaccine, Flublok; and the adjuvanted inactivated vaccine, FLUAD.
Among those three, there’s no preference for any one of them over the other two; they’re all preferred vaccines for this age group, if available. If none of those three vaccines are available at the time that somebody aged 65 or older is there to get vaccinated, people in this age group should get any other age-appropriate influenza vaccine that is available.
When should people get vaccinated if they haven’t already?
CDC and ACIP recommend vaccination for most people, ideally by the end of October. But for those who missed the end of October, it is absolutely not too late. Providers should continue to encourage vaccination and people should get their vaccines as long as flu viruses are circulating.
The timing of the onset and the peak and the end of the flu season vary a bit from year to year. We often start to see generally activity begin to increase in the US in the fall, which is the reason for the end of October recommendation; however, flu activity doesn’t tend to peak in the US until after October. We’re talking December, January, or later, so getting vaccinated after October can still provide important protection during the peak of the season.
There does seem to be a tendency for people to think, OK, I haven’t gotten the vaccine yet, and there probably isn’t a lot of reason to do it now. But really, it’s definitely not too late, and that’s something we like to encourage people to think about, particularly as we move into December and January — it’s not too late if you missed October.
Influenza vaccination is also available in so many places. You don’t necessarily have to go to a healthcare provider’s office; there are many retail chains which offer influenza vaccines.
Is influenza spreading right now? Are activity levels increasing?
Overall influenza activity currently is low nationally, although there’s starting to be some slight increases in the pediatric age groups and, of course, we do anticipate that it will increase in the coming weeks and months.
When we get vaccinated, the protection isn’t instantaneous. The immune system needs a bit of time to react to the vaccine and to develop antibodies. That can take about 2 weeks. Even with that, now is still absolutely not too late to get a vaccine. Neither is December, for that matter. As long as the flu viruses are circulating where you are, it is still worth getting vaccinated.
What was influenza vaccination coverage like last season?
It’s a little bit early to tell for the current season, but one of the things that we do know is that since the COVID-19 pandemic, coverage has dropped compared with before the COVID-19 pandemic. Before COVID-19, influenza vaccination coverage had been slowly increasing in most groups, but it has decreased since then, and those downturns in coverage haven’t recovered to prepandemic levels. For example, during 2023-2024, about half of children and adults received a flu vaccine.
What can providers do to encourage influenza vaccination in their patients?
We know that a healthcare provider’s strong recommendation for flu vaccination is a really major factor in whether or not patients get a flu vaccine, and is more effective in increasing acceptance of vaccination than just about any other factor.
There’s a method from CDC called SHARE, which is a helpful way to help make a strong recommendation and provide information to help patients make an informed decision about whether or not they want to be vaccinated.
To implement SHARE, it’s an acronym with five parts. S is for Share the reasons why the flu vaccine is right for that patient. H is for Highlight positive experiences with flu vaccination, either personal or in practice. A is for Address patient concerns and questions about the flu vaccine, including things such as side effects, safety, and effectiveness. R is Remind patients that vaccination protects them and their loved ones from serious illness and related complications. E is Explain the potential complications and consequences of getting influenza, including serious health effects, time lost from family, work, and school, and potential financial costs.
Additional resources are accessible on CDC’s influenza resources page, including brochures, posters, and fact sheets that can help providers in encouraging and reminding people to get vaccinated.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
RSV Infections Take Toll on Adults
based on new data from more than 67,000 cases.
RSV remains a top cause of acute respiratory tract infections among adults in the United States, with an estimated 159,000 hospitalizations in those aged 65 years or older, wrote Suzanne N. Landi, MPH, PhD, of Pfizer in New York City, and colleagues in a study published in JAMA Network Open.
“Currently, limited estimates exist to determine the risk of hospitalization following outpatient RSV disease diagnoses in the United States,” said corresponding author Joshua T. Swan, PharmD, MPH, in an interview.
The current study was conducted to inform development of clinical trials, said Swan, senior director and category clinician in internal medicine and disease development at Pfizer, the sponsor of the study. These trials would assess the efficacy of an outpatient RSV antiviral treatment in preventing RSV-related hospitalization within 28 days among adults at a high risk for progression to severe illness, he said.
The authors reviewed data from 67,239 adults aged 18 years or older with medically attended RSV infections between October 1, 2016, and September 30, 2022. The data came from three databases: Optum (2771 patients), TriNetX (7442 patients), and Veradigm Network Electronic Health Record (VNEHR; 57,026 patients).
The primary outcome was all-cause hospitalization within 28 days of medically attended RSV.
Overall, the proportions of patients hospitalized within 28 days of infection were 6.2%, 6.0%, and 4.5% in Optum, TriNetX, and VNEHR databases, respectively.
Approximately two thirds of the patients (62%-67% across the three databases) were women, and 14.0%-54.5% were aged 65 years or older. The researchers also identified comorbidity prevalences of 20.0%-30.5% for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 14.6%-24.4% for heart failure (HF), and 14.6%-24.4% for asthma.
A majority of the patients (ranging from 74.5% to 90.6% across the three databases) fell into a high-risk subgroup, defined as age 65 years or older with asthma, COPD, and HF. In this high-risk group, the proportions of hospitalizations were 7.6%, 8.5%, and 6.5% for Optum, TriNetX, and VNEHR, respectively.
The findings were limited by several factors, including the use only of data from outpatient settings, which cannot be used to estimate the RSV burden in the general population, and the reliance only on diagnosis or procedure codes to identify comorbidities, the researchers noted.
However, “the absolute risk of hospitalization of 1 out of 20 patients observed in our study represents significant and meaningful risk for vulnerable adults, in a disease where much of the public’s attention has historically focused on risk of hospitalization for young children,” Swan said. “These results highlight the unmet medical need for outpatient interventions and preventive measures that can reduce hospitalizations.”
Don’t Underestimate RSV Impact
The current study highlights the fact that RSV is a major cause of respiratory viral illness, said David R. Manoff, MD, associate professor of clinical thoracic medicine and surgery at Temple University, Philadelphia, in an interview.
“Historically, influenza, and, more recently, COVID-19 infection have generally been thought of as more likely to cause harm and, thus, have been more emphasized in terms of both vaccination and treatment,” said Manoff, who was not involved in the study.
The current study provides new evidence that infection with RSV can be far more serious than often recognized and a major potential source of both hospitalization and morbidity, Manoff said. In fact, data published in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report in 2023 showed that the risks of needing oxygen, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, intubation, and death were actually higher in patients hospitalized with RSV infections than in those hospitalized with influenza or COVID-19. “
Understanding which population is hospitalized in the first place is vital to targeting prevention measures,” he added.
The new data are consistent with previous studies showing that most patients with RSV infection have primarily upper respiratory tract infection–type symptoms, but that a minority will develop lower respiratory tract disease, Manoff noted.
The findings add to the argument for implementation of RSV vaccination, especially in high-risk individuals, and support the need for RSV testing when patients present for care, he said.
However, more research is needed to reflect recent numbers, Manoff said. The study timeframe of 2016-2022 not only precedes commercially available RSV vaccines but also includes the period of increased isolation and masking seen during the COVID-19 pandemic years of 2020-2021. “We need to see if the same trends continue in the post-pandemic era.”
Additionally, the studies leading to approval of the RSV vaccine showed a reduction in hospitalization with RSV, and it is important to see how this reduction translates in real-world data and whether the RSV vaccines are reducing need for ICU admission, intubation, and death, Manoff said.
The study was funded by Pfizer, and Swan is a Pfizer employee. Manoff had no financial conflicts to disclose.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
based on new data from more than 67,000 cases.
RSV remains a top cause of acute respiratory tract infections among adults in the United States, with an estimated 159,000 hospitalizations in those aged 65 years or older, wrote Suzanne N. Landi, MPH, PhD, of Pfizer in New York City, and colleagues in a study published in JAMA Network Open.
“Currently, limited estimates exist to determine the risk of hospitalization following outpatient RSV disease diagnoses in the United States,” said corresponding author Joshua T. Swan, PharmD, MPH, in an interview.
The current study was conducted to inform development of clinical trials, said Swan, senior director and category clinician in internal medicine and disease development at Pfizer, the sponsor of the study. These trials would assess the efficacy of an outpatient RSV antiviral treatment in preventing RSV-related hospitalization within 28 days among adults at a high risk for progression to severe illness, he said.
The authors reviewed data from 67,239 adults aged 18 years or older with medically attended RSV infections between October 1, 2016, and September 30, 2022. The data came from three databases: Optum (2771 patients), TriNetX (7442 patients), and Veradigm Network Electronic Health Record (VNEHR; 57,026 patients).
The primary outcome was all-cause hospitalization within 28 days of medically attended RSV.
Overall, the proportions of patients hospitalized within 28 days of infection were 6.2%, 6.0%, and 4.5% in Optum, TriNetX, and VNEHR databases, respectively.
Approximately two thirds of the patients (62%-67% across the three databases) were women, and 14.0%-54.5% were aged 65 years or older. The researchers also identified comorbidity prevalences of 20.0%-30.5% for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 14.6%-24.4% for heart failure (HF), and 14.6%-24.4% for asthma.
A majority of the patients (ranging from 74.5% to 90.6% across the three databases) fell into a high-risk subgroup, defined as age 65 years or older with asthma, COPD, and HF. In this high-risk group, the proportions of hospitalizations were 7.6%, 8.5%, and 6.5% for Optum, TriNetX, and VNEHR, respectively.
The findings were limited by several factors, including the use only of data from outpatient settings, which cannot be used to estimate the RSV burden in the general population, and the reliance only on diagnosis or procedure codes to identify comorbidities, the researchers noted.
However, “the absolute risk of hospitalization of 1 out of 20 patients observed in our study represents significant and meaningful risk for vulnerable adults, in a disease where much of the public’s attention has historically focused on risk of hospitalization for young children,” Swan said. “These results highlight the unmet medical need for outpatient interventions and preventive measures that can reduce hospitalizations.”
Don’t Underestimate RSV Impact
The current study highlights the fact that RSV is a major cause of respiratory viral illness, said David R. Manoff, MD, associate professor of clinical thoracic medicine and surgery at Temple University, Philadelphia, in an interview.
“Historically, influenza, and, more recently, COVID-19 infection have generally been thought of as more likely to cause harm and, thus, have been more emphasized in terms of both vaccination and treatment,” said Manoff, who was not involved in the study.
The current study provides new evidence that infection with RSV can be far more serious than often recognized and a major potential source of both hospitalization and morbidity, Manoff said. In fact, data published in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report in 2023 showed that the risks of needing oxygen, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, intubation, and death were actually higher in patients hospitalized with RSV infections than in those hospitalized with influenza or COVID-19. “
Understanding which population is hospitalized in the first place is vital to targeting prevention measures,” he added.
The new data are consistent with previous studies showing that most patients with RSV infection have primarily upper respiratory tract infection–type symptoms, but that a minority will develop lower respiratory tract disease, Manoff noted.
The findings add to the argument for implementation of RSV vaccination, especially in high-risk individuals, and support the need for RSV testing when patients present for care, he said.
However, more research is needed to reflect recent numbers, Manoff said. The study timeframe of 2016-2022 not only precedes commercially available RSV vaccines but also includes the period of increased isolation and masking seen during the COVID-19 pandemic years of 2020-2021. “We need to see if the same trends continue in the post-pandemic era.”
Additionally, the studies leading to approval of the RSV vaccine showed a reduction in hospitalization with RSV, and it is important to see how this reduction translates in real-world data and whether the RSV vaccines are reducing need for ICU admission, intubation, and death, Manoff said.
The study was funded by Pfizer, and Swan is a Pfizer employee. Manoff had no financial conflicts to disclose.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
based on new data from more than 67,000 cases.
RSV remains a top cause of acute respiratory tract infections among adults in the United States, with an estimated 159,000 hospitalizations in those aged 65 years or older, wrote Suzanne N. Landi, MPH, PhD, of Pfizer in New York City, and colleagues in a study published in JAMA Network Open.
“Currently, limited estimates exist to determine the risk of hospitalization following outpatient RSV disease diagnoses in the United States,” said corresponding author Joshua T. Swan, PharmD, MPH, in an interview.
The current study was conducted to inform development of clinical trials, said Swan, senior director and category clinician in internal medicine and disease development at Pfizer, the sponsor of the study. These trials would assess the efficacy of an outpatient RSV antiviral treatment in preventing RSV-related hospitalization within 28 days among adults at a high risk for progression to severe illness, he said.
The authors reviewed data from 67,239 adults aged 18 years or older with medically attended RSV infections between October 1, 2016, and September 30, 2022. The data came from three databases: Optum (2771 patients), TriNetX (7442 patients), and Veradigm Network Electronic Health Record (VNEHR; 57,026 patients).
The primary outcome was all-cause hospitalization within 28 days of medically attended RSV.
Overall, the proportions of patients hospitalized within 28 days of infection were 6.2%, 6.0%, and 4.5% in Optum, TriNetX, and VNEHR databases, respectively.
Approximately two thirds of the patients (62%-67% across the three databases) were women, and 14.0%-54.5% were aged 65 years or older. The researchers also identified comorbidity prevalences of 20.0%-30.5% for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 14.6%-24.4% for heart failure (HF), and 14.6%-24.4% for asthma.
A majority of the patients (ranging from 74.5% to 90.6% across the three databases) fell into a high-risk subgroup, defined as age 65 years or older with asthma, COPD, and HF. In this high-risk group, the proportions of hospitalizations were 7.6%, 8.5%, and 6.5% for Optum, TriNetX, and VNEHR, respectively.
The findings were limited by several factors, including the use only of data from outpatient settings, which cannot be used to estimate the RSV burden in the general population, and the reliance only on diagnosis or procedure codes to identify comorbidities, the researchers noted.
However, “the absolute risk of hospitalization of 1 out of 20 patients observed in our study represents significant and meaningful risk for vulnerable adults, in a disease where much of the public’s attention has historically focused on risk of hospitalization for young children,” Swan said. “These results highlight the unmet medical need for outpatient interventions and preventive measures that can reduce hospitalizations.”
Don’t Underestimate RSV Impact
The current study highlights the fact that RSV is a major cause of respiratory viral illness, said David R. Manoff, MD, associate professor of clinical thoracic medicine and surgery at Temple University, Philadelphia, in an interview.
“Historically, influenza, and, more recently, COVID-19 infection have generally been thought of as more likely to cause harm and, thus, have been more emphasized in terms of both vaccination and treatment,” said Manoff, who was not involved in the study.
The current study provides new evidence that infection with RSV can be far more serious than often recognized and a major potential source of both hospitalization and morbidity, Manoff said. In fact, data published in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report in 2023 showed that the risks of needing oxygen, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, intubation, and death were actually higher in patients hospitalized with RSV infections than in those hospitalized with influenza or COVID-19. “
Understanding which population is hospitalized in the first place is vital to targeting prevention measures,” he added.
The new data are consistent with previous studies showing that most patients with RSV infection have primarily upper respiratory tract infection–type symptoms, but that a minority will develop lower respiratory tract disease, Manoff noted.
The findings add to the argument for implementation of RSV vaccination, especially in high-risk individuals, and support the need for RSV testing when patients present for care, he said.
However, more research is needed to reflect recent numbers, Manoff said. The study timeframe of 2016-2022 not only precedes commercially available RSV vaccines but also includes the period of increased isolation and masking seen during the COVID-19 pandemic years of 2020-2021. “We need to see if the same trends continue in the post-pandemic era.”
Additionally, the studies leading to approval of the RSV vaccine showed a reduction in hospitalization with RSV, and it is important to see how this reduction translates in real-world data and whether the RSV vaccines are reducing need for ICU admission, intubation, and death, Manoff said.
The study was funded by Pfizer, and Swan is a Pfizer employee. Manoff had no financial conflicts to disclose.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM JAMA NETWORK OPEN
Canadian Scientists Keep Watchful Eye on H5N1 Human Case
Now that Canada has confirmed its first human case of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) linked to H5N1, virologists and infectious disease experts are urging caution around surveillance, infection control, and the potential for spread among mammals and humans.
Public health officials at the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, confirmed that the virus strain is related to the ones circulating among poultry in British Columbia.
So far, the case appears to be isolated, and no additional infections have been detected among the teen’s family, friends, or healthcare workers. But Canadian and American scientists who have studied the genetic sequence of the virus have found mutations that could make it easier to infect humans. Even if this strain remains contained after the teen’s case resolves, the mere fact that mutations have occurred could be a cause for concern about future strains.
“HPAI is one of those diseases that scientists, public health specialists, animal health specialists, and physicians have been watching closely for 20 years due to its epidemic and pandemic potential, including impacts to agriculture, food security, and financial security,” Isaac Bogoch, MD, associate professor of medicine at the University of Toronto and infectious disease specialist with the University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, said in an interview.
“The last couple of years have been notable in that the H5N1 outbreak among wild birds and migratory birds has been larger, and the spillover to dairy cows and humans in the US is obviously concerning,” he said. “As we see more viral reassortment and more mammals are impacted, the more opportunities there are for this to go awry.”
Current H5N1 Outlook
Canadian public health officials and virologists are still unsure how the teen in British Columbia became infected, Bogoch said. The case has prompted concern due to the disease severity and need for hospitalization, while other cases across North America have remained mild.
The United States has reported 53 human cases as of November 21, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In all but one case, the infections occurred among dairy or poultry workers, primarily in California, Colorado, and Washington. In all these cases, patients have reported mild symptoms, including mild respiratory issues and conjunctivitis. None have been hospitalized.
In Canada, the teen was infected with a strain of the virus circulating in wild birds. This strain has also been found in poultry outbreaks in British Columbia and Washington during the past month. So far, the risk for infection remains low for the public, according to the Public Health Agency of Canada.
“This detection was picked up via hospital-based influenza surveillance, confirming that human influenza surveillance in British Columbia and Canada is effective at detecting avian influenza A (H5N1),” Theresa Tam, MD, Canada’s chief public health officer, said in a statement. “We must continue to remain vigilant in our efforts to prevent the spread of avian influenza between animals and to humans.”
For now, Canadian virologists are watching developments closely and urging caution among those who encounter wild or migratory birds but not recommending major changes overall.
“The fact that we have a first human case in Canada is not at all surprising, given what is happening in the US and Europe, as well as what is happening in domestic bird flocks in British Columbia,” said Brian Ward, MD, professor of medicine at McGill University, researcher with McGill’s JD MacLean Centre for Tropical Diseases, and co-director of McGill’s Vaccine Study Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
“Millions of migratory waterfowl are flying over Canada right now, many of which may be carrying or infected with the virus,” he said. “The bottom line is that increasing evidence of mammal-to-mammal spread among dairy cows, elephant seals, and mink and ermine farms is worrisome, but we don’t need to sound the sirens yet.”
Future Outbreak Measures
Looking ahead, though, the developing situation feels more threatening than benign, given the ongoing spread among dairy cattle in the United States, said Bogoch. “It’s difficult to get the genie back in the bottle. I had hoped to see the cases slow down this year, but we just haven’t seen that.”
The fact that surveillance measures such as wastewater sampling have been scaled back in some areas of Canada is cause for concern, Bogoch added.
“We have great foundations for surveillance and action; we just need to make sure they are supported adequately, that groups communicate (across too many silos), and that there are quick responses,” said Scott Weese, DVM, professor of pathobiology at the Ontario Veterinary College and director of the University of Guelph’s Centre for Public Health and Zoonoses in Ontario.
“With cattle in the US, I think it’s highlighted what can happen if the initial response is not very aggressive. There could have been a lot more proactive response to H5N1 in dairy cattle, but there are so many competing interests and unwillingness to take necessary steps that the virus continues to spread,” he said. “Hopefully we’ve learned from that. However, as is often the case, the science is sometimes the easy part. Getting people to take the required actions is the challenge.”
On a personal level, masks and social distancing work well against influenza virus, including both seasonal and avian strains, said Ward. On a broader level, healthcare providers can monitor patients and support testing, where appropriate.
“The most important thing for people to know is that there is going to be another pandemic. It might or might not be due to a variant of H5N1, but it will come at some time,” said Allison McGeer, MD, professor of laboratory medicine and pathobiology at the University of Toronto and an infectious disease specialist with the Sinai Health System, Toronto.
Healthcare providers should follow ongoing updates to public health guidance, support surveillance where possible, and work with hospital leadership and infection control officials to ensure that pandemic plans are in place, she said.
“They may not be needed in the next few months, but they will be needed,” McGeer said. “We know a lot more about influenza than we did about SARS-CoV-2, so we have more tools to mitigate the impact, but we need to have them ready and know how to use them effectively.”
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Now that Canada has confirmed its first human case of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) linked to H5N1, virologists and infectious disease experts are urging caution around surveillance, infection control, and the potential for spread among mammals and humans.
Public health officials at the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, confirmed that the virus strain is related to the ones circulating among poultry in British Columbia.
So far, the case appears to be isolated, and no additional infections have been detected among the teen’s family, friends, or healthcare workers. But Canadian and American scientists who have studied the genetic sequence of the virus have found mutations that could make it easier to infect humans. Even if this strain remains contained after the teen’s case resolves, the mere fact that mutations have occurred could be a cause for concern about future strains.
“HPAI is one of those diseases that scientists, public health specialists, animal health specialists, and physicians have been watching closely for 20 years due to its epidemic and pandemic potential, including impacts to agriculture, food security, and financial security,” Isaac Bogoch, MD, associate professor of medicine at the University of Toronto and infectious disease specialist with the University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, said in an interview.
“The last couple of years have been notable in that the H5N1 outbreak among wild birds and migratory birds has been larger, and the spillover to dairy cows and humans in the US is obviously concerning,” he said. “As we see more viral reassortment and more mammals are impacted, the more opportunities there are for this to go awry.”
Current H5N1 Outlook
Canadian public health officials and virologists are still unsure how the teen in British Columbia became infected, Bogoch said. The case has prompted concern due to the disease severity and need for hospitalization, while other cases across North America have remained mild.
The United States has reported 53 human cases as of November 21, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In all but one case, the infections occurred among dairy or poultry workers, primarily in California, Colorado, and Washington. In all these cases, patients have reported mild symptoms, including mild respiratory issues and conjunctivitis. None have been hospitalized.
In Canada, the teen was infected with a strain of the virus circulating in wild birds. This strain has also been found in poultry outbreaks in British Columbia and Washington during the past month. So far, the risk for infection remains low for the public, according to the Public Health Agency of Canada.
“This detection was picked up via hospital-based influenza surveillance, confirming that human influenza surveillance in British Columbia and Canada is effective at detecting avian influenza A (H5N1),” Theresa Tam, MD, Canada’s chief public health officer, said in a statement. “We must continue to remain vigilant in our efforts to prevent the spread of avian influenza between animals and to humans.”
For now, Canadian virologists are watching developments closely and urging caution among those who encounter wild or migratory birds but not recommending major changes overall.
“The fact that we have a first human case in Canada is not at all surprising, given what is happening in the US and Europe, as well as what is happening in domestic bird flocks in British Columbia,” said Brian Ward, MD, professor of medicine at McGill University, researcher with McGill’s JD MacLean Centre for Tropical Diseases, and co-director of McGill’s Vaccine Study Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
“Millions of migratory waterfowl are flying over Canada right now, many of which may be carrying or infected with the virus,” he said. “The bottom line is that increasing evidence of mammal-to-mammal spread among dairy cows, elephant seals, and mink and ermine farms is worrisome, but we don’t need to sound the sirens yet.”
Future Outbreak Measures
Looking ahead, though, the developing situation feels more threatening than benign, given the ongoing spread among dairy cattle in the United States, said Bogoch. “It’s difficult to get the genie back in the bottle. I had hoped to see the cases slow down this year, but we just haven’t seen that.”
The fact that surveillance measures such as wastewater sampling have been scaled back in some areas of Canada is cause for concern, Bogoch added.
“We have great foundations for surveillance and action; we just need to make sure they are supported adequately, that groups communicate (across too many silos), and that there are quick responses,” said Scott Weese, DVM, professor of pathobiology at the Ontario Veterinary College and director of the University of Guelph’s Centre for Public Health and Zoonoses in Ontario.
“With cattle in the US, I think it’s highlighted what can happen if the initial response is not very aggressive. There could have been a lot more proactive response to H5N1 in dairy cattle, but there are so many competing interests and unwillingness to take necessary steps that the virus continues to spread,” he said. “Hopefully we’ve learned from that. However, as is often the case, the science is sometimes the easy part. Getting people to take the required actions is the challenge.”
On a personal level, masks and social distancing work well against influenza virus, including both seasonal and avian strains, said Ward. On a broader level, healthcare providers can monitor patients and support testing, where appropriate.
“The most important thing for people to know is that there is going to be another pandemic. It might or might not be due to a variant of H5N1, but it will come at some time,” said Allison McGeer, MD, professor of laboratory medicine and pathobiology at the University of Toronto and an infectious disease specialist with the Sinai Health System, Toronto.
Healthcare providers should follow ongoing updates to public health guidance, support surveillance where possible, and work with hospital leadership and infection control officials to ensure that pandemic plans are in place, she said.
“They may not be needed in the next few months, but they will be needed,” McGeer said. “We know a lot more about influenza than we did about SARS-CoV-2, so we have more tools to mitigate the impact, but we need to have them ready and know how to use them effectively.”
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Now that Canada has confirmed its first human case of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) linked to H5N1, virologists and infectious disease experts are urging caution around surveillance, infection control, and the potential for spread among mammals and humans.
Public health officials at the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, confirmed that the virus strain is related to the ones circulating among poultry in British Columbia.
So far, the case appears to be isolated, and no additional infections have been detected among the teen’s family, friends, or healthcare workers. But Canadian and American scientists who have studied the genetic sequence of the virus have found mutations that could make it easier to infect humans. Even if this strain remains contained after the teen’s case resolves, the mere fact that mutations have occurred could be a cause for concern about future strains.
“HPAI is one of those diseases that scientists, public health specialists, animal health specialists, and physicians have been watching closely for 20 years due to its epidemic and pandemic potential, including impacts to agriculture, food security, and financial security,” Isaac Bogoch, MD, associate professor of medicine at the University of Toronto and infectious disease specialist with the University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, said in an interview.
“The last couple of years have been notable in that the H5N1 outbreak among wild birds and migratory birds has been larger, and the spillover to dairy cows and humans in the US is obviously concerning,” he said. “As we see more viral reassortment and more mammals are impacted, the more opportunities there are for this to go awry.”
Current H5N1 Outlook
Canadian public health officials and virologists are still unsure how the teen in British Columbia became infected, Bogoch said. The case has prompted concern due to the disease severity and need for hospitalization, while other cases across North America have remained mild.
The United States has reported 53 human cases as of November 21, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In all but one case, the infections occurred among dairy or poultry workers, primarily in California, Colorado, and Washington. In all these cases, patients have reported mild symptoms, including mild respiratory issues and conjunctivitis. None have been hospitalized.
In Canada, the teen was infected with a strain of the virus circulating in wild birds. This strain has also been found in poultry outbreaks in British Columbia and Washington during the past month. So far, the risk for infection remains low for the public, according to the Public Health Agency of Canada.
“This detection was picked up via hospital-based influenza surveillance, confirming that human influenza surveillance in British Columbia and Canada is effective at detecting avian influenza A (H5N1),” Theresa Tam, MD, Canada’s chief public health officer, said in a statement. “We must continue to remain vigilant in our efforts to prevent the spread of avian influenza between animals and to humans.”
For now, Canadian virologists are watching developments closely and urging caution among those who encounter wild or migratory birds but not recommending major changes overall.
“The fact that we have a first human case in Canada is not at all surprising, given what is happening in the US and Europe, as well as what is happening in domestic bird flocks in British Columbia,” said Brian Ward, MD, professor of medicine at McGill University, researcher with McGill’s JD MacLean Centre for Tropical Diseases, and co-director of McGill’s Vaccine Study Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
“Millions of migratory waterfowl are flying over Canada right now, many of which may be carrying or infected with the virus,” he said. “The bottom line is that increasing evidence of mammal-to-mammal spread among dairy cows, elephant seals, and mink and ermine farms is worrisome, but we don’t need to sound the sirens yet.”
Future Outbreak Measures
Looking ahead, though, the developing situation feels more threatening than benign, given the ongoing spread among dairy cattle in the United States, said Bogoch. “It’s difficult to get the genie back in the bottle. I had hoped to see the cases slow down this year, but we just haven’t seen that.”
The fact that surveillance measures such as wastewater sampling have been scaled back in some areas of Canada is cause for concern, Bogoch added.
“We have great foundations for surveillance and action; we just need to make sure they are supported adequately, that groups communicate (across too many silos), and that there are quick responses,” said Scott Weese, DVM, professor of pathobiology at the Ontario Veterinary College and director of the University of Guelph’s Centre for Public Health and Zoonoses in Ontario.
“With cattle in the US, I think it’s highlighted what can happen if the initial response is not very aggressive. There could have been a lot more proactive response to H5N1 in dairy cattle, but there are so many competing interests and unwillingness to take necessary steps that the virus continues to spread,” he said. “Hopefully we’ve learned from that. However, as is often the case, the science is sometimes the easy part. Getting people to take the required actions is the challenge.”
On a personal level, masks and social distancing work well against influenza virus, including both seasonal and avian strains, said Ward. On a broader level, healthcare providers can monitor patients and support testing, where appropriate.
“The most important thing for people to know is that there is going to be another pandemic. It might or might not be due to a variant of H5N1, but it will come at some time,” said Allison McGeer, MD, professor of laboratory medicine and pathobiology at the University of Toronto and an infectious disease specialist with the Sinai Health System, Toronto.
Healthcare providers should follow ongoing updates to public health guidance, support surveillance where possible, and work with hospital leadership and infection control officials to ensure that pandemic plans are in place, she said.
“They may not be needed in the next few months, but they will be needed,” McGeer said. “We know a lot more about influenza than we did about SARS-CoV-2, so we have more tools to mitigate the impact, but we need to have them ready and know how to use them effectively.”
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Does Antibiotic Use During Influenza Infection Worsen Lung Immunity?
TOPLINE:
Antibiotic use during influenza infection increases lung eosinophils, impairing immunity against secondary bacterial pneumonia. This study highlights the detrimental effects of antibiotics on lung health during viral infections.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a murine model study to evaluate the impact of antibiotic use during influenza infection on lung immunity. Mice were treated with a broad-spectrum antibiotic cocktail (vancomycin, neomycin, ampicillin, and metronidazole) starting 7 days before influenza infection.
- The study included intranasal infection with influenza virus followed by a secondary challenge with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).
- Finally, in sub-study, a total of three cohorts of hospitalized patients were evaluated to correlate eosinophil levels with antibiotic use, systemic inflammation, and outcomes.
TAKEAWAY:
- Antibiotic use during influenza infection impairs lung immunity, leading to increased lung eosinophils and reduced macrophage function.
- The study found that antibiotic treatment during influenza infection caused fungal dysbiosis, driving lung eosinophilia and impairing MRSA clearance.
- The detrimental effects of antibiotics on lung immunity were specific to the two-hit model of influenza followed by MRSA infection in mice.
- In hospitalized patients, eosinophil levels positively correlated with antibiotic use, systemic inflammation, and worsened outcomes.
IN PRACTICE:
“Our study highlights the pernicious effects of antibiotic use during viral infections and defines a mechanism whereby antibiotics perturb the gut mycobiome and result in lung eosinophilia. In turn, lung eosinophils, via release of MBP-1, suppress alveolar macrophage clearance of bacteria,” the authors of the study wrote.
SOURCE:
This study was led by Marilia Sanches Santos Rizzo Zuttion, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles. It was published online in The Journal of Clinical Investigation.
LIMITATIONS:
This study’s limitations included the use of a murine model, which may not fully replicate human immune responses. Additionally, the study focused on a specific antibiotic cocktail, and results may vary with different antibiotics. The findings were also specific to the two-hit model of influenza followed by MRSA infection, limiting generalizability to other infections.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. Marilia Sanches Santos Rizzo Zuttion received research funding from Pfizer Inc. Additional disclosures are noted in the original article.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Antibiotic use during influenza infection increases lung eosinophils, impairing immunity against secondary bacterial pneumonia. This study highlights the detrimental effects of antibiotics on lung health during viral infections.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a murine model study to evaluate the impact of antibiotic use during influenza infection on lung immunity. Mice were treated with a broad-spectrum antibiotic cocktail (vancomycin, neomycin, ampicillin, and metronidazole) starting 7 days before influenza infection.
- The study included intranasal infection with influenza virus followed by a secondary challenge with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).
- Finally, in sub-study, a total of three cohorts of hospitalized patients were evaluated to correlate eosinophil levels with antibiotic use, systemic inflammation, and outcomes.
TAKEAWAY:
- Antibiotic use during influenza infection impairs lung immunity, leading to increased lung eosinophils and reduced macrophage function.
- The study found that antibiotic treatment during influenza infection caused fungal dysbiosis, driving lung eosinophilia and impairing MRSA clearance.
- The detrimental effects of antibiotics on lung immunity were specific to the two-hit model of influenza followed by MRSA infection in mice.
- In hospitalized patients, eosinophil levels positively correlated with antibiotic use, systemic inflammation, and worsened outcomes.
IN PRACTICE:
“Our study highlights the pernicious effects of antibiotic use during viral infections and defines a mechanism whereby antibiotics perturb the gut mycobiome and result in lung eosinophilia. In turn, lung eosinophils, via release of MBP-1, suppress alveolar macrophage clearance of bacteria,” the authors of the study wrote.
SOURCE:
This study was led by Marilia Sanches Santos Rizzo Zuttion, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles. It was published online in The Journal of Clinical Investigation.
LIMITATIONS:
This study’s limitations included the use of a murine model, which may not fully replicate human immune responses. Additionally, the study focused on a specific antibiotic cocktail, and results may vary with different antibiotics. The findings were also specific to the two-hit model of influenza followed by MRSA infection, limiting generalizability to other infections.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. Marilia Sanches Santos Rizzo Zuttion received research funding from Pfizer Inc. Additional disclosures are noted in the original article.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Antibiotic use during influenza infection increases lung eosinophils, impairing immunity against secondary bacterial pneumonia. This study highlights the detrimental effects of antibiotics on lung health during viral infections.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a murine model study to evaluate the impact of antibiotic use during influenza infection on lung immunity. Mice were treated with a broad-spectrum antibiotic cocktail (vancomycin, neomycin, ampicillin, and metronidazole) starting 7 days before influenza infection.
- The study included intranasal infection with influenza virus followed by a secondary challenge with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).
- Finally, in sub-study, a total of three cohorts of hospitalized patients were evaluated to correlate eosinophil levels with antibiotic use, systemic inflammation, and outcomes.
TAKEAWAY:
- Antibiotic use during influenza infection impairs lung immunity, leading to increased lung eosinophils and reduced macrophage function.
- The study found that antibiotic treatment during influenza infection caused fungal dysbiosis, driving lung eosinophilia and impairing MRSA clearance.
- The detrimental effects of antibiotics on lung immunity were specific to the two-hit model of influenza followed by MRSA infection in mice.
- In hospitalized patients, eosinophil levels positively correlated with antibiotic use, systemic inflammation, and worsened outcomes.
IN PRACTICE:
“Our study highlights the pernicious effects of antibiotic use during viral infections and defines a mechanism whereby antibiotics perturb the gut mycobiome and result in lung eosinophilia. In turn, lung eosinophils, via release of MBP-1, suppress alveolar macrophage clearance of bacteria,” the authors of the study wrote.
SOURCE:
This study was led by Marilia Sanches Santos Rizzo Zuttion, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles. It was published online in The Journal of Clinical Investigation.
LIMITATIONS:
This study’s limitations included the use of a murine model, which may not fully replicate human immune responses. Additionally, the study focused on a specific antibiotic cocktail, and results may vary with different antibiotics. The findings were also specific to the two-hit model of influenza followed by MRSA infection, limiting generalizability to other infections.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. Marilia Sanches Santos Rizzo Zuttion received research funding from Pfizer Inc. Additional disclosures are noted in the original article.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
How Extreme Rainfall Amplifies Health Risks
Climate change is intensifying the variability of precipitation caused by extreme daily and overall rainfall events. Awareness of the effects of these events is crucial for understanding the complex health consequences of climate change. Physicians have often advised their patients to move to a better climate, and when they did, the recommendation was rarely based on precise scientific knowledge. However, the benefits of changing environments were often so evident that they were indisputable.
Today, advanced models, satellite imagery, and biological approaches such as environmental epigenetics are enhancing our understanding of health risks related to climate change.
Extreme Rainfall and Health
The increase in precipitation variability is linked to climate warming, which leads to higher atmospheric humidity and extreme rainfall events. These manifestations can cause rapid weather changes, increasing interactions with harmful aerosols and raising the risk for various cardiovascular and respiratory conditions. However, a full understanding of the association between rain and health has been hindered by conflicting results and methodological issues (limited geographical locations and short observation durations) in studies.
The association between rainfall intensity and health effects is likely nonlinear. Moderate precipitation can mitigate summer heat and help reduce air pollution, an effect that may lower some environmental health risks. Conversely, intense, low-frequency, short-duration rainfall events can have particularly harmful effects on health, as such events can trigger rapid weather changes, increased proliferation of pathogens, and a rise in the risk of various pollutants, potentially exacerbating health conditions.
Rain and Mortality
Using an intensity-duration-frequency model of three rainfall indices (high intensity, low frequency, short duration), a study published in October 2024 combined these with mortality data from 34 countries or regions. Researchers estimated associations between mortality (all cause, cardiovascular, and respiratory) and rainfall events with different return periods (the average time expected before an extreme event of a certain magnitude occurs again) and crucial effect modifiers, including climatic, socioeconomic, and urban environmental conditions.
The analysis included 109,954,744 deaths from all causes; 31,164,161 cardiovascular deaths; and 11,817,278 respiratory deaths. During the study period, from 1980 to 2020, a total of 50,913 rainfall events with a 1-year return period, 8362 events with a 2-year return period, and 3301 events with a 5-year return period were identified.
The most significant finding was a global positive association between all-cause mortality and extreme rainfall events with a 5-year return period. One day of extreme rainfall with a 5-year return period was associated with a cumulative relative risk (RRc) of 1.08 (95% CI, 1.05-1.11) for daily mortality from all causes. Rainfall events with a 2-year return period were associated with increased daily respiratory mortality (RRc, 1.14), while no significant effect was observed for cardiovascular mortality during the same period. Rainfall events with a 5-year return period were associated with an increased risk for both cardiovascular mortality (RRc, 1.05) and respiratory mortality (RRc, 1.29), with the respiratory mortality being significantly higher.
Points of Concern
According to the authors, moderate to high rainfall can exert protective effects through two main mechanisms: Improving air quality (rainfall can reduce the concentration of particulate matter 2.5 cm in diameter or less in the atmosphere) and behavioral changes in people (more time spent in enclosed environments, reducing direct exposure to outdoor air pollution and nonoptimal temperatures). As rainfall intensity increases, the initial protective effects may be overshadowed by a cascade of negative impacts including:
- Critical resource disruptions: Intense rainfall can cause severe disruptions to access to healthcare, infrastructure damage including power outages, and compromised water and food quality.
- Physiological effects: Increased humidity levels facilitate the growth of airborne pathogens, potentially triggering allergic reactions and respiratory issues, particularly in vulnerable individuals. Rapid shifts in atmospheric pressure and temperature fluctuations can lead to cardiovascular and respiratory complications.
- Indirect effects: Extreme rainfall can have profound effects on mental health, inducing stress and anxiety that may exacerbate pre-existing mental health conditions and indirectly contribute to increased overall mortality from nonexternal causes.
The intensity-response curves for the health effects of heavy rainfall showed a nonlinear trend, transitioning from a protective effect at moderate levels of rainfall to a risk for severe harm when rainfall intensity became extreme. Additionally, the significant effects of extreme events were modified by various types of climate and were more pronounced in areas characterized by low variability in precipitation or sparse vegetation cover.
The study demonstrated that various local factors, such as climatic conditions, climate type, and vegetation cover, can potentially influence cardiovascular and respiratory mortality and all-cause mortality related to precipitation. The findings may help physicians convey to their patients the impact of climate change on their health.
This story was translated from Univadis Italy using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Climate change is intensifying the variability of precipitation caused by extreme daily and overall rainfall events. Awareness of the effects of these events is crucial for understanding the complex health consequences of climate change. Physicians have often advised their patients to move to a better climate, and when they did, the recommendation was rarely based on precise scientific knowledge. However, the benefits of changing environments were often so evident that they were indisputable.
Today, advanced models, satellite imagery, and biological approaches such as environmental epigenetics are enhancing our understanding of health risks related to climate change.
Extreme Rainfall and Health
The increase in precipitation variability is linked to climate warming, which leads to higher atmospheric humidity and extreme rainfall events. These manifestations can cause rapid weather changes, increasing interactions with harmful aerosols and raising the risk for various cardiovascular and respiratory conditions. However, a full understanding of the association between rain and health has been hindered by conflicting results and methodological issues (limited geographical locations and short observation durations) in studies.
The association between rainfall intensity and health effects is likely nonlinear. Moderate precipitation can mitigate summer heat and help reduce air pollution, an effect that may lower some environmental health risks. Conversely, intense, low-frequency, short-duration rainfall events can have particularly harmful effects on health, as such events can trigger rapid weather changes, increased proliferation of pathogens, and a rise in the risk of various pollutants, potentially exacerbating health conditions.
Rain and Mortality
Using an intensity-duration-frequency model of three rainfall indices (high intensity, low frequency, short duration), a study published in October 2024 combined these with mortality data from 34 countries or regions. Researchers estimated associations between mortality (all cause, cardiovascular, and respiratory) and rainfall events with different return periods (the average time expected before an extreme event of a certain magnitude occurs again) and crucial effect modifiers, including climatic, socioeconomic, and urban environmental conditions.
The analysis included 109,954,744 deaths from all causes; 31,164,161 cardiovascular deaths; and 11,817,278 respiratory deaths. During the study period, from 1980 to 2020, a total of 50,913 rainfall events with a 1-year return period, 8362 events with a 2-year return period, and 3301 events with a 5-year return period were identified.
The most significant finding was a global positive association between all-cause mortality and extreme rainfall events with a 5-year return period. One day of extreme rainfall with a 5-year return period was associated with a cumulative relative risk (RRc) of 1.08 (95% CI, 1.05-1.11) for daily mortality from all causes. Rainfall events with a 2-year return period were associated with increased daily respiratory mortality (RRc, 1.14), while no significant effect was observed for cardiovascular mortality during the same period. Rainfall events with a 5-year return period were associated with an increased risk for both cardiovascular mortality (RRc, 1.05) and respiratory mortality (RRc, 1.29), with the respiratory mortality being significantly higher.
Points of Concern
According to the authors, moderate to high rainfall can exert protective effects through two main mechanisms: Improving air quality (rainfall can reduce the concentration of particulate matter 2.5 cm in diameter or less in the atmosphere) and behavioral changes in people (more time spent in enclosed environments, reducing direct exposure to outdoor air pollution and nonoptimal temperatures). As rainfall intensity increases, the initial protective effects may be overshadowed by a cascade of negative impacts including:
- Critical resource disruptions: Intense rainfall can cause severe disruptions to access to healthcare, infrastructure damage including power outages, and compromised water and food quality.
- Physiological effects: Increased humidity levels facilitate the growth of airborne pathogens, potentially triggering allergic reactions and respiratory issues, particularly in vulnerable individuals. Rapid shifts in atmospheric pressure and temperature fluctuations can lead to cardiovascular and respiratory complications.
- Indirect effects: Extreme rainfall can have profound effects on mental health, inducing stress and anxiety that may exacerbate pre-existing mental health conditions and indirectly contribute to increased overall mortality from nonexternal causes.
The intensity-response curves for the health effects of heavy rainfall showed a nonlinear trend, transitioning from a protective effect at moderate levels of rainfall to a risk for severe harm when rainfall intensity became extreme. Additionally, the significant effects of extreme events were modified by various types of climate and were more pronounced in areas characterized by low variability in precipitation or sparse vegetation cover.
The study demonstrated that various local factors, such as climatic conditions, climate type, and vegetation cover, can potentially influence cardiovascular and respiratory mortality and all-cause mortality related to precipitation. The findings may help physicians convey to their patients the impact of climate change on their health.
This story was translated from Univadis Italy using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Climate change is intensifying the variability of precipitation caused by extreme daily and overall rainfall events. Awareness of the effects of these events is crucial for understanding the complex health consequences of climate change. Physicians have often advised their patients to move to a better climate, and when they did, the recommendation was rarely based on precise scientific knowledge. However, the benefits of changing environments were often so evident that they were indisputable.
Today, advanced models, satellite imagery, and biological approaches such as environmental epigenetics are enhancing our understanding of health risks related to climate change.
Extreme Rainfall and Health
The increase in precipitation variability is linked to climate warming, which leads to higher atmospheric humidity and extreme rainfall events. These manifestations can cause rapid weather changes, increasing interactions with harmful aerosols and raising the risk for various cardiovascular and respiratory conditions. However, a full understanding of the association between rain and health has been hindered by conflicting results and methodological issues (limited geographical locations and short observation durations) in studies.
The association between rainfall intensity and health effects is likely nonlinear. Moderate precipitation can mitigate summer heat and help reduce air pollution, an effect that may lower some environmental health risks. Conversely, intense, low-frequency, short-duration rainfall events can have particularly harmful effects on health, as such events can trigger rapid weather changes, increased proliferation of pathogens, and a rise in the risk of various pollutants, potentially exacerbating health conditions.
Rain and Mortality
Using an intensity-duration-frequency model of three rainfall indices (high intensity, low frequency, short duration), a study published in October 2024 combined these with mortality data from 34 countries or regions. Researchers estimated associations between mortality (all cause, cardiovascular, and respiratory) and rainfall events with different return periods (the average time expected before an extreme event of a certain magnitude occurs again) and crucial effect modifiers, including climatic, socioeconomic, and urban environmental conditions.
The analysis included 109,954,744 deaths from all causes; 31,164,161 cardiovascular deaths; and 11,817,278 respiratory deaths. During the study period, from 1980 to 2020, a total of 50,913 rainfall events with a 1-year return period, 8362 events with a 2-year return period, and 3301 events with a 5-year return period were identified.
The most significant finding was a global positive association between all-cause mortality and extreme rainfall events with a 5-year return period. One day of extreme rainfall with a 5-year return period was associated with a cumulative relative risk (RRc) of 1.08 (95% CI, 1.05-1.11) for daily mortality from all causes. Rainfall events with a 2-year return period were associated with increased daily respiratory mortality (RRc, 1.14), while no significant effect was observed for cardiovascular mortality during the same period. Rainfall events with a 5-year return period were associated with an increased risk for both cardiovascular mortality (RRc, 1.05) and respiratory mortality (RRc, 1.29), with the respiratory mortality being significantly higher.
Points of Concern
According to the authors, moderate to high rainfall can exert protective effects through two main mechanisms: Improving air quality (rainfall can reduce the concentration of particulate matter 2.5 cm in diameter or less in the atmosphere) and behavioral changes in people (more time spent in enclosed environments, reducing direct exposure to outdoor air pollution and nonoptimal temperatures). As rainfall intensity increases, the initial protective effects may be overshadowed by a cascade of negative impacts including:
- Critical resource disruptions: Intense rainfall can cause severe disruptions to access to healthcare, infrastructure damage including power outages, and compromised water and food quality.
- Physiological effects: Increased humidity levels facilitate the growth of airborne pathogens, potentially triggering allergic reactions and respiratory issues, particularly in vulnerable individuals. Rapid shifts in atmospheric pressure and temperature fluctuations can lead to cardiovascular and respiratory complications.
- Indirect effects: Extreme rainfall can have profound effects on mental health, inducing stress and anxiety that may exacerbate pre-existing mental health conditions and indirectly contribute to increased overall mortality from nonexternal causes.
The intensity-response curves for the health effects of heavy rainfall showed a nonlinear trend, transitioning from a protective effect at moderate levels of rainfall to a risk for severe harm when rainfall intensity became extreme. Additionally, the significant effects of extreme events were modified by various types of climate and were more pronounced in areas characterized by low variability in precipitation or sparse vegetation cover.
The study demonstrated that various local factors, such as climatic conditions, climate type, and vegetation cover, can potentially influence cardiovascular and respiratory mortality and all-cause mortality related to precipitation. The findings may help physicians convey to their patients the impact of climate change on their health.
This story was translated from Univadis Italy using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
COVID on the Floor Linked to Outbreaks on Two Hospital Wards
The viral burden of SARS-CoV-2 on floors, even in healthcare worker–only areas, was strongly associated with COVID-19 outbreaks in two acute-care hospitals, according to a new study from Ontario, Canada.
With every 10-fold increase in viral copies, the chance of an impending outbreak of COVID-19 rose 22-fold.
“These data add to the mounting evidence that built environment detection for SARS-CoV-2 may provide an additional layer of monitoring and could help inform local infection prevention and control measures,” they wrote.
The study was published online in Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology.
Preventing Future Suffering
The current study builds on the researchers’ previous work, which found the same correlation between viral load on floors and COVID outbreaks in long-term care homes.
Currently, the best-known method of environmental surveillance for COVID is wastewater detection. “Swabbing the floors would be another approach to surveillance,” senior author Caroline Nott, MD, infectious disease physician at the Ottawa Hospital, said in an interview.
“We do have environmental surveillance with wastewater, but while this may tell you what’s going on in the city, it doesn’t tell you what is going on in a particular ward of a hospital, for instance,” she added.
Nott and her colleagues believe that swabbing, which is easy and relatively inexpensive, will become another tool to examine the built environment. “Instead of having to close a whole hospital, for example, we could just close one room instead of an entire ward if swabbing showed a high concentration of COVID,” Nott said.
The current study was conducted at two hospitals in Ontario between July 2022 and March 2023. The floors of healthcare worker–only areas on four inpatient adult wards were swabbed. These areas included changing rooms, meeting rooms, staff washrooms, nursing stations, and interdisciplinary team rooms.
SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected on 537 of 760 floor swabs (71%). The overall positivity rate in the first hospital was 90% (n = 280). In the second hospital, the rate was 60% (n = 480).
Four COVID-19 outbreaks occurred in the first acute care hospital, and seven outbreaks occurred at the second hospital. Outbreaks occurred mostly among hospitalized patients (140 cases), but also in four hospital workers.
COVID-19 still requires vigilance, said Nott. “We weren’t prepared for COVID, and so as a result, many people died or have suffered long-term effects, especially vulnerable people like those being treated in hospital or in long-term care facilities. We want to develop methods to prevent similar suffering in the future, whether it’s a new COVID variant or a different pathogen altogether.”
Changing Surveillance Practice?
“This is a good study,” Steven Rogak, PhD, professor of mechanical engineering at the University of British Columbia (UBC) in Vancouver, Canada, said in an interivew. “The fundamental idea is that respiratory droplets and aerosols will deposit on the floor, and polymerase chain reaction [PCR] tests of swabs will provide a surrogate measurement of what might have been inhaled. There are solid statistics that it worked for the hospitals studied,” said Rogak, who studies aerosols at UBC’s Energy and Aerosols Laboratory. Rogak did not participate in the study.
“The authors note several limitations, including that increased healthcare worker testing may have been triggered by the higher values of PCR counts from the floor swabs. But this doesn’t seem to be a problem to me, because if the floor swabs motivate the hospital to test workers more, and that results in identifying outbreaks sooner, then great,” he said.
“Another limitation is that if the hospital has better HVAC or uses air purifiers, it could remove the most infectious aerosols, but the large droplets that fall quickly to the ground would remain, and this would still result in high PCR counts from floor swabs. In this case, perhaps the floor swabs would be a poorer indication of impending outbreaks,” said Rogak.
Determining the best timing and location for floor swabbing might be challenging and specific to the particular hospital, he added. ”For example, you would not want to take swabs from floors right after they are cleaned. Overall, I think this method deserves further development, and it could become a standard technique, but the details might require refinement for widespread application.”
Adrian Popp, MD, chair of the Infectious Disease Service at Huntington Hospital–Northwell Health in New York, said that, although interesting, the study would not change his current practice.
“I’m going to start testing the environment in different rooms in the hospital, and yes, I might find different amounts of COVID, but what does that mean? If pieces of RNA from COVID are on the floor, the likelihood is that they’re not infectious,” Popp said in an interview.
“Hospital workers do get sick with COVID, and sometimes they are asymptomatic and come to work. Patients may come into the hospital for another reason and be sick with COVID. There are many ways people who work in the hospital, as well as the patients, can get COVID. To me, it means that in that hospital and community there is a lot of COVID, but I can’t tell if there is causation here. Who is giving COVID to whom? What am I supposed to do with the information?”
The study was supported by the Northern Ontario Academic Medicine Association Clinical Innovation Opportunities Fund, the Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Organization Innovation Fund, and a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Operating Grant. One author was a consultant for ProofDx, a startup company creating a point-of-care diagnostic test for COVID-19, and is an advisor for SIGNAL1, a startup company deploying machine-learning models to improve inpatient care. Nott, Rogak, and Popp reported having no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The viral burden of SARS-CoV-2 on floors, even in healthcare worker–only areas, was strongly associated with COVID-19 outbreaks in two acute-care hospitals, according to a new study from Ontario, Canada.
With every 10-fold increase in viral copies, the chance of an impending outbreak of COVID-19 rose 22-fold.
“These data add to the mounting evidence that built environment detection for SARS-CoV-2 may provide an additional layer of monitoring and could help inform local infection prevention and control measures,” they wrote.
The study was published online in Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology.
Preventing Future Suffering
The current study builds on the researchers’ previous work, which found the same correlation between viral load on floors and COVID outbreaks in long-term care homes.
Currently, the best-known method of environmental surveillance for COVID is wastewater detection. “Swabbing the floors would be another approach to surveillance,” senior author Caroline Nott, MD, infectious disease physician at the Ottawa Hospital, said in an interview.
“We do have environmental surveillance with wastewater, but while this may tell you what’s going on in the city, it doesn’t tell you what is going on in a particular ward of a hospital, for instance,” she added.
Nott and her colleagues believe that swabbing, which is easy and relatively inexpensive, will become another tool to examine the built environment. “Instead of having to close a whole hospital, for example, we could just close one room instead of an entire ward if swabbing showed a high concentration of COVID,” Nott said.
The current study was conducted at two hospitals in Ontario between July 2022 and March 2023. The floors of healthcare worker–only areas on four inpatient adult wards were swabbed. These areas included changing rooms, meeting rooms, staff washrooms, nursing stations, and interdisciplinary team rooms.
SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected on 537 of 760 floor swabs (71%). The overall positivity rate in the first hospital was 90% (n = 280). In the second hospital, the rate was 60% (n = 480).
Four COVID-19 outbreaks occurred in the first acute care hospital, and seven outbreaks occurred at the second hospital. Outbreaks occurred mostly among hospitalized patients (140 cases), but also in four hospital workers.
COVID-19 still requires vigilance, said Nott. “We weren’t prepared for COVID, and so as a result, many people died or have suffered long-term effects, especially vulnerable people like those being treated in hospital or in long-term care facilities. We want to develop methods to prevent similar suffering in the future, whether it’s a new COVID variant or a different pathogen altogether.”
Changing Surveillance Practice?
“This is a good study,” Steven Rogak, PhD, professor of mechanical engineering at the University of British Columbia (UBC) in Vancouver, Canada, said in an interivew. “The fundamental idea is that respiratory droplets and aerosols will deposit on the floor, and polymerase chain reaction [PCR] tests of swabs will provide a surrogate measurement of what might have been inhaled. There are solid statistics that it worked for the hospitals studied,” said Rogak, who studies aerosols at UBC’s Energy and Aerosols Laboratory. Rogak did not participate in the study.
“The authors note several limitations, including that increased healthcare worker testing may have been triggered by the higher values of PCR counts from the floor swabs. But this doesn’t seem to be a problem to me, because if the floor swabs motivate the hospital to test workers more, and that results in identifying outbreaks sooner, then great,” he said.
“Another limitation is that if the hospital has better HVAC or uses air purifiers, it could remove the most infectious aerosols, but the large droplets that fall quickly to the ground would remain, and this would still result in high PCR counts from floor swabs. In this case, perhaps the floor swabs would be a poorer indication of impending outbreaks,” said Rogak.
Determining the best timing and location for floor swabbing might be challenging and specific to the particular hospital, he added. ”For example, you would not want to take swabs from floors right after they are cleaned. Overall, I think this method deserves further development, and it could become a standard technique, but the details might require refinement for widespread application.”
Adrian Popp, MD, chair of the Infectious Disease Service at Huntington Hospital–Northwell Health in New York, said that, although interesting, the study would not change his current practice.
“I’m going to start testing the environment in different rooms in the hospital, and yes, I might find different amounts of COVID, but what does that mean? If pieces of RNA from COVID are on the floor, the likelihood is that they’re not infectious,” Popp said in an interview.
“Hospital workers do get sick with COVID, and sometimes they are asymptomatic and come to work. Patients may come into the hospital for another reason and be sick with COVID. There are many ways people who work in the hospital, as well as the patients, can get COVID. To me, it means that in that hospital and community there is a lot of COVID, but I can’t tell if there is causation here. Who is giving COVID to whom? What am I supposed to do with the information?”
The study was supported by the Northern Ontario Academic Medicine Association Clinical Innovation Opportunities Fund, the Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Organization Innovation Fund, and a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Operating Grant. One author was a consultant for ProofDx, a startup company creating a point-of-care diagnostic test for COVID-19, and is an advisor for SIGNAL1, a startup company deploying machine-learning models to improve inpatient care. Nott, Rogak, and Popp reported having no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The viral burden of SARS-CoV-2 on floors, even in healthcare worker–only areas, was strongly associated with COVID-19 outbreaks in two acute-care hospitals, according to a new study from Ontario, Canada.
With every 10-fold increase in viral copies, the chance of an impending outbreak of COVID-19 rose 22-fold.
“These data add to the mounting evidence that built environment detection for SARS-CoV-2 may provide an additional layer of monitoring and could help inform local infection prevention and control measures,” they wrote.
The study was published online in Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology.
Preventing Future Suffering
The current study builds on the researchers’ previous work, which found the same correlation between viral load on floors and COVID outbreaks in long-term care homes.
Currently, the best-known method of environmental surveillance for COVID is wastewater detection. “Swabbing the floors would be another approach to surveillance,” senior author Caroline Nott, MD, infectious disease physician at the Ottawa Hospital, said in an interview.
“We do have environmental surveillance with wastewater, but while this may tell you what’s going on in the city, it doesn’t tell you what is going on in a particular ward of a hospital, for instance,” she added.
Nott and her colleagues believe that swabbing, which is easy and relatively inexpensive, will become another tool to examine the built environment. “Instead of having to close a whole hospital, for example, we could just close one room instead of an entire ward if swabbing showed a high concentration of COVID,” Nott said.
The current study was conducted at two hospitals in Ontario between July 2022 and March 2023. The floors of healthcare worker–only areas on four inpatient adult wards were swabbed. These areas included changing rooms, meeting rooms, staff washrooms, nursing stations, and interdisciplinary team rooms.
SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected on 537 of 760 floor swabs (71%). The overall positivity rate in the first hospital was 90% (n = 280). In the second hospital, the rate was 60% (n = 480).
Four COVID-19 outbreaks occurred in the first acute care hospital, and seven outbreaks occurred at the second hospital. Outbreaks occurred mostly among hospitalized patients (140 cases), but also in four hospital workers.
COVID-19 still requires vigilance, said Nott. “We weren’t prepared for COVID, and so as a result, many people died or have suffered long-term effects, especially vulnerable people like those being treated in hospital or in long-term care facilities. We want to develop methods to prevent similar suffering in the future, whether it’s a new COVID variant or a different pathogen altogether.”
Changing Surveillance Practice?
“This is a good study,” Steven Rogak, PhD, professor of mechanical engineering at the University of British Columbia (UBC) in Vancouver, Canada, said in an interivew. “The fundamental idea is that respiratory droplets and aerosols will deposit on the floor, and polymerase chain reaction [PCR] tests of swabs will provide a surrogate measurement of what might have been inhaled. There are solid statistics that it worked for the hospitals studied,” said Rogak, who studies aerosols at UBC’s Energy and Aerosols Laboratory. Rogak did not participate in the study.
“The authors note several limitations, including that increased healthcare worker testing may have been triggered by the higher values of PCR counts from the floor swabs. But this doesn’t seem to be a problem to me, because if the floor swabs motivate the hospital to test workers more, and that results in identifying outbreaks sooner, then great,” he said.
“Another limitation is that if the hospital has better HVAC or uses air purifiers, it could remove the most infectious aerosols, but the large droplets that fall quickly to the ground would remain, and this would still result in high PCR counts from floor swabs. In this case, perhaps the floor swabs would be a poorer indication of impending outbreaks,” said Rogak.
Determining the best timing and location for floor swabbing might be challenging and specific to the particular hospital, he added. ”For example, you would not want to take swabs from floors right after they are cleaned. Overall, I think this method deserves further development, and it could become a standard technique, but the details might require refinement for widespread application.”
Adrian Popp, MD, chair of the Infectious Disease Service at Huntington Hospital–Northwell Health in New York, said that, although interesting, the study would not change his current practice.
“I’m going to start testing the environment in different rooms in the hospital, and yes, I might find different amounts of COVID, but what does that mean? If pieces of RNA from COVID are on the floor, the likelihood is that they’re not infectious,” Popp said in an interview.
“Hospital workers do get sick with COVID, and sometimes they are asymptomatic and come to work. Patients may come into the hospital for another reason and be sick with COVID. There are many ways people who work in the hospital, as well as the patients, can get COVID. To me, it means that in that hospital and community there is a lot of COVID, but I can’t tell if there is causation here. Who is giving COVID to whom? What am I supposed to do with the information?”
The study was supported by the Northern Ontario Academic Medicine Association Clinical Innovation Opportunities Fund, the Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Organization Innovation Fund, and a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Operating Grant. One author was a consultant for ProofDx, a startup company creating a point-of-care diagnostic test for COVID-19, and is an advisor for SIGNAL1, a startup company deploying machine-learning models to improve inpatient care. Nott, Rogak, and Popp reported having no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM INFECTION CONTROL & HOSPITAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Reduced Vaccination Rates Contribute to Rising Pertussis Numbers
New data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show significant spikes in pertussis cases compared with last year, especially in several urban areas including New York, Illinois, Florida, and Colorado.
Notably, the current pertussis case count in Illinois as of September 21, 2024, was five times higher than the total cases in 2023 (1058 vs 50). New York City alone had reported 624 cases as of September 21, compared with 38 cases in 2023.
Additional data from the CDC on vaccination coverage and exemptions of school-aged children showed an increase from 3.0% last year to 3.3% in 2024 of children who were exempted from recommended vaccination requirements. Although nearly 93% of kindergarteners in the United States received recommended vaccines (including Tdap), similar to last year, this number shows a steady decline from 94% in the 2021-2021 school year and 93% in the 2021-2022 school year, according to previous CDC reports.
What’s Happening in the Clinic
Clinical experience and the most recent CDC data point to under vaccination as a driver of the increased pertussis cases this year, David J. Cennimo, MD, associate professor of medicine and pediatrics in the division of infectious disease at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey, said in an interview.
Although the pertussis vaccination rates in infancy are still very good, clinicians are seeing a drop-off in school-aged children and adults, and the lingering anti-vaccine efforts from the COVID-19 pandemic period are undoubtedly playing a part, said Dr. Cennimo. “Unfortunately, pertussis is contagious, and the vaccine effectiveness wears off. Having decreased numbers of people protected results in more rapid spread,” he said.
Dr. Cennimo agreed that the number of cases in the United States is underreported, and even higher than the data suggest. “I’m sure of it; the initial clinical presentation may be mistaken for a viral upper respiratory tract infection (common cold),” he told this news organization.
Many older children and adults with pertussis do not manifest the classic “whooping cough” seen in infants and young children, so making a clinical diagnosis can be difficult, he said. “One classical component of the illness is a prolonged cough. I have wondered if some people now reporting a lingering cough had pertussis that was missed,” Dr. Cennimo noted.
“Clinicians should stress the value of boosters in a vaccine-preventable illness where we know immunity wanes overtime,” Dr. Cennimo said. “We have a great remedy in the Tdap vaccine, which we should all be getting very 10 years,” he said.
He also emphasized that clinicians remind pregnant women of the current recommendations to receive the Tdap vaccine for every pregnancy. “Vaccination during pregnancy is the best way to protect both the pregnant person and the newborn.
Even for the vaccine hesitant, this vaccine has a long track record of safety so should not be a significant concern,” he said.
The ultimate take-home message is not a new one, and applies to all illnesses, Dr. Cennimo told this news organization. Simply put, “Stay home if you are sick. Social distancing is not just for COVID-19,” he said.
Dr. Cennimo had no financial conflicts to disclose.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
New data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show significant spikes in pertussis cases compared with last year, especially in several urban areas including New York, Illinois, Florida, and Colorado.
Notably, the current pertussis case count in Illinois as of September 21, 2024, was five times higher than the total cases in 2023 (1058 vs 50). New York City alone had reported 624 cases as of September 21, compared with 38 cases in 2023.
Additional data from the CDC on vaccination coverage and exemptions of school-aged children showed an increase from 3.0% last year to 3.3% in 2024 of children who were exempted from recommended vaccination requirements. Although nearly 93% of kindergarteners in the United States received recommended vaccines (including Tdap), similar to last year, this number shows a steady decline from 94% in the 2021-2021 school year and 93% in the 2021-2022 school year, according to previous CDC reports.
What’s Happening in the Clinic
Clinical experience and the most recent CDC data point to under vaccination as a driver of the increased pertussis cases this year, David J. Cennimo, MD, associate professor of medicine and pediatrics in the division of infectious disease at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey, said in an interview.
Although the pertussis vaccination rates in infancy are still very good, clinicians are seeing a drop-off in school-aged children and adults, and the lingering anti-vaccine efforts from the COVID-19 pandemic period are undoubtedly playing a part, said Dr. Cennimo. “Unfortunately, pertussis is contagious, and the vaccine effectiveness wears off. Having decreased numbers of people protected results in more rapid spread,” he said.
Dr. Cennimo agreed that the number of cases in the United States is underreported, and even higher than the data suggest. “I’m sure of it; the initial clinical presentation may be mistaken for a viral upper respiratory tract infection (common cold),” he told this news organization.
Many older children and adults with pertussis do not manifest the classic “whooping cough” seen in infants and young children, so making a clinical diagnosis can be difficult, he said. “One classical component of the illness is a prolonged cough. I have wondered if some people now reporting a lingering cough had pertussis that was missed,” Dr. Cennimo noted.
“Clinicians should stress the value of boosters in a vaccine-preventable illness where we know immunity wanes overtime,” Dr. Cennimo said. “We have a great remedy in the Tdap vaccine, which we should all be getting very 10 years,” he said.
He also emphasized that clinicians remind pregnant women of the current recommendations to receive the Tdap vaccine for every pregnancy. “Vaccination during pregnancy is the best way to protect both the pregnant person and the newborn.
Even for the vaccine hesitant, this vaccine has a long track record of safety so should not be a significant concern,” he said.
The ultimate take-home message is not a new one, and applies to all illnesses, Dr. Cennimo told this news organization. Simply put, “Stay home if you are sick. Social distancing is not just for COVID-19,” he said.
Dr. Cennimo had no financial conflicts to disclose.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
New data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show significant spikes in pertussis cases compared with last year, especially in several urban areas including New York, Illinois, Florida, and Colorado.
Notably, the current pertussis case count in Illinois as of September 21, 2024, was five times higher than the total cases in 2023 (1058 vs 50). New York City alone had reported 624 cases as of September 21, compared with 38 cases in 2023.
Additional data from the CDC on vaccination coverage and exemptions of school-aged children showed an increase from 3.0% last year to 3.3% in 2024 of children who were exempted from recommended vaccination requirements. Although nearly 93% of kindergarteners in the United States received recommended vaccines (including Tdap), similar to last year, this number shows a steady decline from 94% in the 2021-2021 school year and 93% in the 2021-2022 school year, according to previous CDC reports.
What’s Happening in the Clinic
Clinical experience and the most recent CDC data point to under vaccination as a driver of the increased pertussis cases this year, David J. Cennimo, MD, associate professor of medicine and pediatrics in the division of infectious disease at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey, said in an interview.
Although the pertussis vaccination rates in infancy are still very good, clinicians are seeing a drop-off in school-aged children and adults, and the lingering anti-vaccine efforts from the COVID-19 pandemic period are undoubtedly playing a part, said Dr. Cennimo. “Unfortunately, pertussis is contagious, and the vaccine effectiveness wears off. Having decreased numbers of people protected results in more rapid spread,” he said.
Dr. Cennimo agreed that the number of cases in the United States is underreported, and even higher than the data suggest. “I’m sure of it; the initial clinical presentation may be mistaken for a viral upper respiratory tract infection (common cold),” he told this news organization.
Many older children and adults with pertussis do not manifest the classic “whooping cough” seen in infants and young children, so making a clinical diagnosis can be difficult, he said. “One classical component of the illness is a prolonged cough. I have wondered if some people now reporting a lingering cough had pertussis that was missed,” Dr. Cennimo noted.
“Clinicians should stress the value of boosters in a vaccine-preventable illness where we know immunity wanes overtime,” Dr. Cennimo said. “We have a great remedy in the Tdap vaccine, which we should all be getting very 10 years,” he said.
He also emphasized that clinicians remind pregnant women of the current recommendations to receive the Tdap vaccine for every pregnancy. “Vaccination during pregnancy is the best way to protect both the pregnant person and the newborn.
Even for the vaccine hesitant, this vaccine has a long track record of safety so should not be a significant concern,” he said.
The ultimate take-home message is not a new one, and applies to all illnesses, Dr. Cennimo told this news organization. Simply put, “Stay home if you are sick. Social distancing is not just for COVID-19,” he said.
Dr. Cennimo had no financial conflicts to disclose.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Nasal Staph Aureus Carriage Linked to Surgical Infections
published in the August issue of Open Forum Infectious Diseases.
“This was a pan-European study with many hospitals, many different clinical settings, and as far as I’m aware, it hasn’t been done before. [The new study] covers a lot of European countries and a lot of surgical specialties,” said lead author Jan Kluytmans, MD. The study also captures the current state of preventive strategies in surgery, such as changes in air flow, dress, and skin preparation, he added.
The study included 5004 patients from 33 hospitals in ten European countries, of whom 67.3% were found to be SA carriers. The median age was 65 years, and 49.8% of patients were male. Open cardiac, and knee and hip prosthesis surgeries made up the largest fraction, but there were 12 types of surgery included in the study.
There were 100 SA surgical site or blood infections. The researchers found an association between surgical site or blood infection and SA carriage at any site (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 4.6; 95% CI, 2.1-10.0) and nasal SA carriage (aHR, 4.2; 95% CI, 2.0-8.6). Extranasal SA carriage was not associated with an increased infection risk.
Each 1-unit increase in nasal bacteria was associated with an increase in infection risk (aHR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.05-1.43).
A strength of the study is that it is the largest prospective study yet conducted on SA carriage in surgical patients, but the researchers were unable to do a subgroup of methicillin-resistant SA (MRSA) due to small numbers of infections.
The study confirms the value of the decolonization strategy, which the World Health Organization has endorsed with the highest level of scientific evidence that is available in preventive strategies in surgery. WHO strongly recommends decolonization for cardiothoracic and orthopedic surgery using intranasal applications of mupirocin 2% ointment with or without a combination of chlorhexidine gluconate body wash. It has a conditional recommendation for a similar procedure before other types of surgery.
However, “It is not widely practiced, and although that was not a surprise to me, I think it’s really disappointing to see that proven effective strategies are not being practiced,” said Dr. Kluytmans, professor of medical microbiology at University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, the Netherlands. “If I would come into surgery being a carrier, and not be decolonized, I would really be quite angry because it puts you at risk, which is preventable. I think that’s something we owe to our patients,” he said.
He said that some may have concerns about the potential for decolonization to contribute to antibiotic resistance, but the short-term prophylaxis — typically a few days — should not foster resistance, according to Dr. Kluytmans. “If you use it short term, just before surgery, it has been shown in many studies that resistance isn’t a big problem and it can be monitored.”
The link specifically to SA nasal carriage is a mystery, according to Dr. Kluytmans. “It puzzles me still how it gets from the nares to the wound during surgery. So that’s my million-dollar question that I would like to resolve. We would like to study it, but we haven’t quite a bright idea how to do that,” he said.
The results are compelling, according to Heather Evans, MD, who was asked for comment. “On the face of it, this looks like a no-brainer. We should be decolonizing all patients that go to the operating room, and it’s not a terribly unpleasant thing for a patient to undergo to have decolonization done. Particularly for patients who are at higher risk for having a severe complication, like someone that has an operation that’s involving an implant, for example, I think it really makes a lot of sense to do this low-cost intervention for those patients,” said Dr. Evans, professor of medicine at The Medical University of South Carolina as well as the president of the Surgical Infection Society.
She noted that many facilities test for methicillin-resistant SA, but usual not SA more broadly. “This is a very interesting and compelling study that makes us rethink that, and maybe it isn’t even worth testing to see if you have staph aureus, maybe we should just be putting Betadine in everyone’s nostrils when they come to the operating room. It just seems like it would be a pretty low-cost intervention and something that could potentially have a big impact,” said Dr. Evans.
Although she was impressed by the study, Dr. Evans noted that the researchers tested for carriage at sites unrelated to the surgical site. “It really made me wonder if it would have added even more credibility to the study if there had been a sample taken after surgical prep was done to demonstrate that there is actually no staph aureus present on the skin at the time that the wound was made,” she said.
The question ties into the recent “Trojan horse” hypothesis, which suggests that endemic carriage of bacteria is responsible for most surgical site infections, rather than the long-held belief that operating room contamination is to blame. “That would sort of fly with this study, that the patient is walking around with Staph aureus and not necessarily on their skin or at their surgical site, but it’s endemic in their body,” said Dr. Evans.
Dr. Kluytmans and Dr. Evans have no relevant financial disclosures.
published in the August issue of Open Forum Infectious Diseases.
“This was a pan-European study with many hospitals, many different clinical settings, and as far as I’m aware, it hasn’t been done before. [The new study] covers a lot of European countries and a lot of surgical specialties,” said lead author Jan Kluytmans, MD. The study also captures the current state of preventive strategies in surgery, such as changes in air flow, dress, and skin preparation, he added.
The study included 5004 patients from 33 hospitals in ten European countries, of whom 67.3% were found to be SA carriers. The median age was 65 years, and 49.8% of patients were male. Open cardiac, and knee and hip prosthesis surgeries made up the largest fraction, but there were 12 types of surgery included in the study.
There were 100 SA surgical site or blood infections. The researchers found an association between surgical site or blood infection and SA carriage at any site (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 4.6; 95% CI, 2.1-10.0) and nasal SA carriage (aHR, 4.2; 95% CI, 2.0-8.6). Extranasal SA carriage was not associated with an increased infection risk.
Each 1-unit increase in nasal bacteria was associated with an increase in infection risk (aHR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.05-1.43).
A strength of the study is that it is the largest prospective study yet conducted on SA carriage in surgical patients, but the researchers were unable to do a subgroup of methicillin-resistant SA (MRSA) due to small numbers of infections.
The study confirms the value of the decolonization strategy, which the World Health Organization has endorsed with the highest level of scientific evidence that is available in preventive strategies in surgery. WHO strongly recommends decolonization for cardiothoracic and orthopedic surgery using intranasal applications of mupirocin 2% ointment with or without a combination of chlorhexidine gluconate body wash. It has a conditional recommendation for a similar procedure before other types of surgery.
However, “It is not widely practiced, and although that was not a surprise to me, I think it’s really disappointing to see that proven effective strategies are not being practiced,” said Dr. Kluytmans, professor of medical microbiology at University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, the Netherlands. “If I would come into surgery being a carrier, and not be decolonized, I would really be quite angry because it puts you at risk, which is preventable. I think that’s something we owe to our patients,” he said.
He said that some may have concerns about the potential for decolonization to contribute to antibiotic resistance, but the short-term prophylaxis — typically a few days — should not foster resistance, according to Dr. Kluytmans. “If you use it short term, just before surgery, it has been shown in many studies that resistance isn’t a big problem and it can be monitored.”
The link specifically to SA nasal carriage is a mystery, according to Dr. Kluytmans. “It puzzles me still how it gets from the nares to the wound during surgery. So that’s my million-dollar question that I would like to resolve. We would like to study it, but we haven’t quite a bright idea how to do that,” he said.
The results are compelling, according to Heather Evans, MD, who was asked for comment. “On the face of it, this looks like a no-brainer. We should be decolonizing all patients that go to the operating room, and it’s not a terribly unpleasant thing for a patient to undergo to have decolonization done. Particularly for patients who are at higher risk for having a severe complication, like someone that has an operation that’s involving an implant, for example, I think it really makes a lot of sense to do this low-cost intervention for those patients,” said Dr. Evans, professor of medicine at The Medical University of South Carolina as well as the president of the Surgical Infection Society.
She noted that many facilities test for methicillin-resistant SA, but usual not SA more broadly. “This is a very interesting and compelling study that makes us rethink that, and maybe it isn’t even worth testing to see if you have staph aureus, maybe we should just be putting Betadine in everyone’s nostrils when they come to the operating room. It just seems like it would be a pretty low-cost intervention and something that could potentially have a big impact,” said Dr. Evans.
Although she was impressed by the study, Dr. Evans noted that the researchers tested for carriage at sites unrelated to the surgical site. “It really made me wonder if it would have added even more credibility to the study if there had been a sample taken after surgical prep was done to demonstrate that there is actually no staph aureus present on the skin at the time that the wound was made,” she said.
The question ties into the recent “Trojan horse” hypothesis, which suggests that endemic carriage of bacteria is responsible for most surgical site infections, rather than the long-held belief that operating room contamination is to blame. “That would sort of fly with this study, that the patient is walking around with Staph aureus and not necessarily on their skin or at their surgical site, but it’s endemic in their body,” said Dr. Evans.
Dr. Kluytmans and Dr. Evans have no relevant financial disclosures.
published in the August issue of Open Forum Infectious Diseases.
“This was a pan-European study with many hospitals, many different clinical settings, and as far as I’m aware, it hasn’t been done before. [The new study] covers a lot of European countries and a lot of surgical specialties,” said lead author Jan Kluytmans, MD. The study also captures the current state of preventive strategies in surgery, such as changes in air flow, dress, and skin preparation, he added.
The study included 5004 patients from 33 hospitals in ten European countries, of whom 67.3% were found to be SA carriers. The median age was 65 years, and 49.8% of patients were male. Open cardiac, and knee and hip prosthesis surgeries made up the largest fraction, but there were 12 types of surgery included in the study.
There were 100 SA surgical site or blood infections. The researchers found an association between surgical site or blood infection and SA carriage at any site (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 4.6; 95% CI, 2.1-10.0) and nasal SA carriage (aHR, 4.2; 95% CI, 2.0-8.6). Extranasal SA carriage was not associated with an increased infection risk.
Each 1-unit increase in nasal bacteria was associated with an increase in infection risk (aHR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.05-1.43).
A strength of the study is that it is the largest prospective study yet conducted on SA carriage in surgical patients, but the researchers were unable to do a subgroup of methicillin-resistant SA (MRSA) due to small numbers of infections.
The study confirms the value of the decolonization strategy, which the World Health Organization has endorsed with the highest level of scientific evidence that is available in preventive strategies in surgery. WHO strongly recommends decolonization for cardiothoracic and orthopedic surgery using intranasal applications of mupirocin 2% ointment with or without a combination of chlorhexidine gluconate body wash. It has a conditional recommendation for a similar procedure before other types of surgery.
However, “It is not widely practiced, and although that was not a surprise to me, I think it’s really disappointing to see that proven effective strategies are not being practiced,” said Dr. Kluytmans, professor of medical microbiology at University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, the Netherlands. “If I would come into surgery being a carrier, and not be decolonized, I would really be quite angry because it puts you at risk, which is preventable. I think that’s something we owe to our patients,” he said.
He said that some may have concerns about the potential for decolonization to contribute to antibiotic resistance, but the short-term prophylaxis — typically a few days — should not foster resistance, according to Dr. Kluytmans. “If you use it short term, just before surgery, it has been shown in many studies that resistance isn’t a big problem and it can be monitored.”
The link specifically to SA nasal carriage is a mystery, according to Dr. Kluytmans. “It puzzles me still how it gets from the nares to the wound during surgery. So that’s my million-dollar question that I would like to resolve. We would like to study it, but we haven’t quite a bright idea how to do that,” he said.
The results are compelling, according to Heather Evans, MD, who was asked for comment. “On the face of it, this looks like a no-brainer. We should be decolonizing all patients that go to the operating room, and it’s not a terribly unpleasant thing for a patient to undergo to have decolonization done. Particularly for patients who are at higher risk for having a severe complication, like someone that has an operation that’s involving an implant, for example, I think it really makes a lot of sense to do this low-cost intervention for those patients,” said Dr. Evans, professor of medicine at The Medical University of South Carolina as well as the president of the Surgical Infection Society.
She noted that many facilities test for methicillin-resistant SA, but usual not SA more broadly. “This is a very interesting and compelling study that makes us rethink that, and maybe it isn’t even worth testing to see if you have staph aureus, maybe we should just be putting Betadine in everyone’s nostrils when they come to the operating room. It just seems like it would be a pretty low-cost intervention and something that could potentially have a big impact,” said Dr. Evans.
Although she was impressed by the study, Dr. Evans noted that the researchers tested for carriage at sites unrelated to the surgical site. “It really made me wonder if it would have added even more credibility to the study if there had been a sample taken after surgical prep was done to demonstrate that there is actually no staph aureus present on the skin at the time that the wound was made,” she said.
The question ties into the recent “Trojan horse” hypothesis, which suggests that endemic carriage of bacteria is responsible for most surgical site infections, rather than the long-held belief that operating room contamination is to blame. “That would sort of fly with this study, that the patient is walking around with Staph aureus and not necessarily on their skin or at their surgical site, but it’s endemic in their body,” said Dr. Evans.
Dr. Kluytmans and Dr. Evans have no relevant financial disclosures.
Whooping Cough Rising Fast, Especially Among Teens
Whooping cough is surging in the United States, with four times as many cases reported so far this year, compared to all of 2023.
The CDC said 14,569 cases had been reported as of Sept. 14, compared to 3475 in all of 2023.
Whooping cough, also called pertussis, is a respiratory illness spread through coughing, sneezing, or breathing very close to another person. Babies are given the DTaP vaccine to protect against whooping cough, diphtheria, and tetanus. Because the vaccine effectiveness wanes faster for whooping cough than the two other illnesses, boosters are recommended every decade or so.
Why the Whooping Cough Vaccine Is Important
Whooping cough is a very contagious bacteria, so vaccination is an important step to avoid it.
But many children in their tweens aren’t getting boosters, and that age group is driving the whooping cough outbreak.
“With the increase in vaccine hesitancy that has been going on since the COVID-19 pandemic, we’re seeing outbreaks occurring in kids who are not vaccinated,” Tina Tan, MD, president-elect of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, told NBC News.
Also, people are not social distancing the way they did during the height of the COVID pandemic, when whooping cough numbers went down.
“Levels of pertussis dropped dramatically when we were all masking, and now this huge increase is getting us back to pre-pandemic levels, and probably a little above that,” Thomas Murray, MD, a Yale Medicine pediatric infectious diseases specialist, said in a news release from the school. “It’s a contagious respiratory virus that can spread fairly quickly through the population.”
FDA advisers were scheduled to meet Sept. 20 to discuss developing more effective boosters for whooping cough.
A version of this article appeared on WebMD.com.
Whooping cough is surging in the United States, with four times as many cases reported so far this year, compared to all of 2023.
The CDC said 14,569 cases had been reported as of Sept. 14, compared to 3475 in all of 2023.
Whooping cough, also called pertussis, is a respiratory illness spread through coughing, sneezing, or breathing very close to another person. Babies are given the DTaP vaccine to protect against whooping cough, diphtheria, and tetanus. Because the vaccine effectiveness wanes faster for whooping cough than the two other illnesses, boosters are recommended every decade or so.
Why the Whooping Cough Vaccine Is Important
Whooping cough is a very contagious bacteria, so vaccination is an important step to avoid it.
But many children in their tweens aren’t getting boosters, and that age group is driving the whooping cough outbreak.
“With the increase in vaccine hesitancy that has been going on since the COVID-19 pandemic, we’re seeing outbreaks occurring in kids who are not vaccinated,” Tina Tan, MD, president-elect of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, told NBC News.
Also, people are not social distancing the way they did during the height of the COVID pandemic, when whooping cough numbers went down.
“Levels of pertussis dropped dramatically when we were all masking, and now this huge increase is getting us back to pre-pandemic levels, and probably a little above that,” Thomas Murray, MD, a Yale Medicine pediatric infectious diseases specialist, said in a news release from the school. “It’s a contagious respiratory virus that can spread fairly quickly through the population.”
FDA advisers were scheduled to meet Sept. 20 to discuss developing more effective boosters for whooping cough.
A version of this article appeared on WebMD.com.
Whooping cough is surging in the United States, with four times as many cases reported so far this year, compared to all of 2023.
The CDC said 14,569 cases had been reported as of Sept. 14, compared to 3475 in all of 2023.
Whooping cough, also called pertussis, is a respiratory illness spread through coughing, sneezing, or breathing very close to another person. Babies are given the DTaP vaccine to protect against whooping cough, diphtheria, and tetanus. Because the vaccine effectiveness wanes faster for whooping cough than the two other illnesses, boosters are recommended every decade or so.
Why the Whooping Cough Vaccine Is Important
Whooping cough is a very contagious bacteria, so vaccination is an important step to avoid it.
But many children in their tweens aren’t getting boosters, and that age group is driving the whooping cough outbreak.
“With the increase in vaccine hesitancy that has been going on since the COVID-19 pandemic, we’re seeing outbreaks occurring in kids who are not vaccinated,” Tina Tan, MD, president-elect of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, told NBC News.
Also, people are not social distancing the way they did during the height of the COVID pandemic, when whooping cough numbers went down.
“Levels of pertussis dropped dramatically when we were all masking, and now this huge increase is getting us back to pre-pandemic levels, and probably a little above that,” Thomas Murray, MD, a Yale Medicine pediatric infectious diseases specialist, said in a news release from the school. “It’s a contagious respiratory virus that can spread fairly quickly through the population.”
FDA advisers were scheduled to meet Sept. 20 to discuss developing more effective boosters for whooping cough.
A version of this article appeared on WebMD.com.
Whooping Cough Likely on Pace for a 5-Year High
Like many diseases, whooping cough reached record low levels during the early days of the COVID pandemic.
More than 10,000 cases of whooping cough have been reported in the United States so far this year, and weekly reports say cases have more than tripled 2023 levels as of June, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In 2023, there were 2815 cases reported during the entire year.
“The number of reported cases this year is close to what was seen at the same time in 2019, prior to the pandemic,” the CDC reported. There were 18,617 cases of whooping cough in 2019.
There were 259 cases reported nationwide for the week ending Aug. 3, with nearly half occurring in the mid-Atlantic region. Public health officials believe the resurgence of whooping cough is likely due to declining vaccination rates, mainly due to the missed vaccines during the height of the COVID pandemic. The diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis vaccines (DTaP) have been given together since the 1940s, typically during infancy and again during early childhood. In 1941, there were more than 220,000 cases of whooping cough.
Whooping cough is caused by the bacteria Bordetella pertussis. The bacteria attach to tiny, hair-like extensions in the upper respiratory system called cilia, and toxins released by them damage the cilia and cause airways to swell. Early symptoms are similar to the common cold, but the condition eventually leads to coughing fits and a high-pitched “whoop” sound made when inhaling after a fit subsides. Coughing fits can be so severe that people can fracture a rib.
Vaccinated people may get a less severe illness, compared to unvaccinated people, the CDC says. Babies and children are particularly at risk for severe and even potentially deadly complications. About one in three babies under age 1 who get whooping cough will need to be hospitalized, and among those hospitalized babies, 1 in 100 die from complications.
A version of this article appeared on WebMD.com.
Like many diseases, whooping cough reached record low levels during the early days of the COVID pandemic.
More than 10,000 cases of whooping cough have been reported in the United States so far this year, and weekly reports say cases have more than tripled 2023 levels as of June, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In 2023, there were 2815 cases reported during the entire year.
“The number of reported cases this year is close to what was seen at the same time in 2019, prior to the pandemic,” the CDC reported. There were 18,617 cases of whooping cough in 2019.
There were 259 cases reported nationwide for the week ending Aug. 3, with nearly half occurring in the mid-Atlantic region. Public health officials believe the resurgence of whooping cough is likely due to declining vaccination rates, mainly due to the missed vaccines during the height of the COVID pandemic. The diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis vaccines (DTaP) have been given together since the 1940s, typically during infancy and again during early childhood. In 1941, there were more than 220,000 cases of whooping cough.
Whooping cough is caused by the bacteria Bordetella pertussis. The bacteria attach to tiny, hair-like extensions in the upper respiratory system called cilia, and toxins released by them damage the cilia and cause airways to swell. Early symptoms are similar to the common cold, but the condition eventually leads to coughing fits and a high-pitched “whoop” sound made when inhaling after a fit subsides. Coughing fits can be so severe that people can fracture a rib.
Vaccinated people may get a less severe illness, compared to unvaccinated people, the CDC says. Babies and children are particularly at risk for severe and even potentially deadly complications. About one in three babies under age 1 who get whooping cough will need to be hospitalized, and among those hospitalized babies, 1 in 100 die from complications.
A version of this article appeared on WebMD.com.
Like many diseases, whooping cough reached record low levels during the early days of the COVID pandemic.
More than 10,000 cases of whooping cough have been reported in the United States so far this year, and weekly reports say cases have more than tripled 2023 levels as of June, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In 2023, there were 2815 cases reported during the entire year.
“The number of reported cases this year is close to what was seen at the same time in 2019, prior to the pandemic,” the CDC reported. There were 18,617 cases of whooping cough in 2019.
There were 259 cases reported nationwide for the week ending Aug. 3, with nearly half occurring in the mid-Atlantic region. Public health officials believe the resurgence of whooping cough is likely due to declining vaccination rates, mainly due to the missed vaccines during the height of the COVID pandemic. The diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis vaccines (DTaP) have been given together since the 1940s, typically during infancy and again during early childhood. In 1941, there were more than 220,000 cases of whooping cough.
Whooping cough is caused by the bacteria Bordetella pertussis. The bacteria attach to tiny, hair-like extensions in the upper respiratory system called cilia, and toxins released by them damage the cilia and cause airways to swell. Early symptoms are similar to the common cold, but the condition eventually leads to coughing fits and a high-pitched “whoop” sound made when inhaling after a fit subsides. Coughing fits can be so severe that people can fracture a rib.
Vaccinated people may get a less severe illness, compared to unvaccinated people, the CDC says. Babies and children are particularly at risk for severe and even potentially deadly complications. About one in three babies under age 1 who get whooping cough will need to be hospitalized, and among those hospitalized babies, 1 in 100 die from complications.
A version of this article appeared on WebMD.com.