Background The case-fatality rate of severe leptospirosis can exceed 50%. While prompt supportive care can improve survival, predicting those at risk of developing severe disease is challenging, particularly in settings with limited diagnostic support. Methodology/Principal findings We retrospectively identified all adults with laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis in Far North Queensland, Australia, between January 1998 and May 2016. Clinical, laboratory and radiological findings at presentation were correlated with the patients’ subsequent clinical course. Medical records were available in 402 patients; 50 (12%) had severe disease. The presence of oliguria (urine output ≤500 mL/24 hours, odds ratio (OR): 16.4, 95% confidence interval (CI): 6.9–38.8, p<0.001), abnormal auscultatory findings on respiratory examination (OR 11.2 (95% CI: 4.7–26.5, p<0.001) and hypotension (systolic blood pressure ≤100 mmHg, OR 4.3 (95% CI 1.7–10.7, p = 0.002) at presentation independently predicted severe disease. A three-point score (the SPiRO score) was devised using these three clinical variables, with one point awarded for each. A score could be calculated in 392 (98%) patients; the likelihood of severe disease rose incrementally: 8/287 (3%), 14/70 (20%), 18/26 (69%) and 9/9 (100%) for a score of 0, 1, 2 and 3 respectively (p = 0.0001). A SPiRO score <1 had a negative predictive value for severe disease of 97% (95% CI: 95–99%). Conclusions/Significance A simple, three-point clinical score can help clinicians rapidly identify patients at risk of developing severe leptospirosis, prompting early transfer to referral centres for advanced supportive care. This inexpensive, bedside assessment requires minimal training and may have significant utility in the resource-limited settings which bear the greatest burden of disease.

BackgroundSevere leptospirosis can have a case-fatality rate of over 50%, even with intensive care unit (ICU) support. Multiple strategies–including protective ventilation and early renal replacement therapy (RRT)–have been recommended to improve outcomes. However, management guidelines vary widely around the world and there is no consensus on the optimal approach.Methodology/Principal findingsAll cases of leptospirosis admitted to the ICU of Cairns Hospital in tropical Australia between 1998 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients’ demographics, presentation, management and clinical course were examined. The 55 patients’ median (interquartile range (IQR)) age was 47 (32–62) years and their median (IQR) APACHE III score was 67 (48–105). All 55 received appropriate antibiotic therapy, 45 (82%) within the first 6 hours. Acute kidney injury was present in 48/55 (87%), 18/55 (33%) required RRT, although this was usually not administered until traditional criteria for initiation were met. Moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome developed in 37/55 (67%), 32/55 (58%) had pulmonary haemorrhage, and mechanical ventilation was required in 27/55 (49%). Vasopressor support was necessary in 34/55 (62%). Corticosteroids were prescribed in 20/55 (36%). The median (IQR) fluid balance in the initial three days of ICU care was +1493 (175–3567) ml. Only 2/55 (4%) died, both were elderly men with multiple comorbidities.ConclusionIn patients with severe leptospirosis in tropical Australia, prompt ICU support that includes early antibiotics, protective ventilation strategies, conservative fluid resuscitation, traditional thresholds for RRT initiation and corticosteroid therapy is associated with a very low case-fatality rate. Prospective studies are required to establish the relative contributions of each of these interventions to optimal patient outcomes.

Objectives: To assess the quality of care for patients with diabetes in Queensland hospitals, including blood glucose control, rates of hospital-acquired harm, the incidence of insulin prescription and management errors, and appropriate foot and peri-operative care.Design, setting: Cross-sectional audit of 27 public hospitals in Queensland: four of five tertiary/quaternary referral centres, four of seven large regional or outer metropolitan hospitals, seven of 13 smaller outer metropolitan or small regional hospitals, and 12 of 88 hospitals in rural or remote locations.Participants: 850 adult inpatients with diabetes mellitus in medical, surgical, mental health, high dependency, or intensive care wards.

Background Diabetes is common in hospitalised patients and despite this inpatient diabetes care in Queensland has not had large scale benchmarking or audit. Aims To establish the prevalence of diabetes in Queensland hospitals and assess the availability of specialised diabetes staff, educational resources and policies for inpatient diabetes management, including assessing equity of access to these resources. Methods The hospital capacity, prevalence of diabetes, diabetes‐related resources and the availability of diabetes‐related guidelines were assessed in 25 hospitals medical, surgical, mental health, high‐dependency and intensive care wards across Queensland. Dedicated diabetes staffing measured in full‐time equivalents (FTE), care delivery resources, access to educational resources, standard policies and procedures for care were assessed. Results Twenty‐five hospitals included 4265 occupied beds. The median prevalence of diabetes was 22.9% (interquartile range (IQR) 17.3–28.5%) with an average 2.9 FTE per 100 patients with diabetes (IQR 0–6.3). There was difficulty in accessing a diabetes educator in 48% (n = 12), diabetes specialist in 44% (n = 11), orthopaedic surgeon in 48% (n = 12), podiatrist in 58% (n = 14) and vascular surgeon in 64% (n = 16) of hospitals. Small hospitals had more difficulty accessing all members of the diabetes team compared with large hospitals including credentialled diabetes educators 33% (n = 4) versus 62% (n = 8) (P < 0.01), diabetes specialists 17% (n = 2) versus 69% (n = 9) (P < 0.01) and vascular surgeons 33% (n = 4) versus 92% (n = 12) (P < 0.01). Diabetes‐related staff education and regular nurse training was available in 40% (n = 10) of hospitals. A multi‐disciplinary foot care team was available in 28% (n = 7) of hospitals. Conclusions Queensland has a high prevalence of diabetes in hospitalised patients and they have limited and inequitable access to inpatient diabetes‐related care.

No abstract