Background.Recently, epidemiological and clinical data have revealed important changes with regard to clinical adenovirus infection, including alterations in antigenic presentation, geographical distribution, and virulence of the virus.Methods. In an effort to better understand the epidemiology of clinical adenovirus infection in the United States, we adopted a new molecular adenovirus typing technique to study clinical adenovirus isolates collected from 22 medical facilities over a 25-month period during [2004][2005][2006]. A hexon gene sequence typing method was used to characterize 2237 clinical adenovirus-positive specimens, comparing their sequences with those of the 51 currently recognized prototype human adenovirus strains. In a blinded comparison, this method performed well and was much faster than the classic serologic typing method.Results. Among civilians, the most prevalent adenovirus types were types 3 (prevalence, 34.6%), 2 (24.3%), 1 (17.7%), and 5 (5.3%). Among military trainees, the most prevalent types were types 4 (prevalence, 92.8%), 3 (2.6%), and 21 (2.4%).Conclusions. For both populations, we observed a statistically significant increasing trend of adenovirus type 21 detection over time. Among adenovirus isolates recovered from specimens from civilians, 50% were associated with hospitalization, 19.6% with a chronic disease condition, 11% with a bone marrow or solid organ transplantation, 7.4% with intensive care unit stay, and 4.2% with a cancer diagnosis. Multivariable risk factor modeling for adenovirus disease severity found that age !7 years (odds ratio [OR], 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-7.4), chronic disease (OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 2.6-5.1), recent transplantation (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.3-5.2), and adenovirus type 5 (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.5-4.7) or type 21 infection (OR, 7.6; 95% CI, 2.6-22.3) increased the risk of severe disease.
BackgroundCarbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) pose an urgent public health threat in the United States. An important step in planning and monitoring a national response to CRE is understanding its epidemiology and associated outcomes. We conducted a systematic literature review of studies that investigated incidence and outcomes of CRE infection in the US.MethodsWe performed searches in MEDLINE via Ovid, CDSR, DARE, CENTRAL, NHS EED, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles published from 1/1/2000 to 2/1/2016 about the incidence and outcomes of CRE at US sites.ResultsFive studies evaluated incidence, but many used differing definitions for cases. Across the entire US population, the reported incidence of CRE was 0.3–2.93 infections per 100,000 person-years. Infection rates were highest in long-term acute-care (LTAC) hospitals. There was insufficient data to assess trends in infection rates over time. Four studies evaluated outcomes. Mortality was higher in CRE patients in some but not all studies.ConclusionWhile the incidence of CRE infections in the United States remains low on a national level, the incidence is highest in LTACs. Studies assessing outcomes in CRE-infected patients are limited in number, small in size, and have reached conflicting results. Future research should measure a variety of clinical outcomes and adequately adjust for confounders to better assess the full burden of CRE.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13756-018-0346-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
IMPORTANCE An understanding of the incidence and outcomes of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in the United States can inform investments in prevention and treatment interventions. OBJECTIVE To quantify the incidence of CDI and its associated hospital length of stay (LOS) in the United States using a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE via Ovid, Cochrane Library Databases via Wiley, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Complete via EBSCO Information Services, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies published in the United States between 2000 and 2019 that evaluated CDI and its associated LOS. STUDY SELECTION Incidence data were collected only from multicenter studies that had at least 5 sites. The LOS studies were included only if they assessed postinfection LOS or used methods accounting for time to infection using a multistate model or compared propensity score-matched patients with CDI with control patients without CDI. Long-term-care facility studies were excluded. Of the 119 full-text articles, 86 studies (72.3%) met the selection criteria. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Two independent reviewers performed the data abstraction and quality assessment. Incidence data were pooled only when the denominators used the same units (eg, patient-days). These data were pooled by summing the number of hospital-onset CDI incident cases and the denominators across studies. Random-effects models were used to obtain pooled mean differences. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 value. Data analysis was performed in February 2019. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Incidence of CDI and CDI-associated hospital LOS in the United States. RESULTS When the 13 studies that evaluated incidence data in patient-days due to hospital-onset CDI were pooled, the CDI incidence rate was 8.3 cases per 10 000 patient-days. Among propensity score-matched studies (16 of 20 studies), the CDI-associated mean difference in LOS (in days) between patients with and without CDI varied from 3.0 days (95% CI, 1.44-4.63 days) to 21.6 days (95% CI, 19.29-23.90 days). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Pooled estimates from currently available literature suggest that CDI is associated with a large burden on the health care system. However, these estimates should be interpreted with caution because higher-quality studies should be completed to guide future evaluations of CDI prevention and treatment interventions.
Background: Information about the health and economic impact of infections caused by vancomycin-
The threat of an influenza pandemic is looming, with new cases of sporadic avian influenza infections in man frequently reported. Exposure to diseased poultry is a leading risk factor for these infections. In this study, we used logistic regression to investigate serological evidence of previous infection with avian influenza subtypes H4, H5, H6, H7, H8, H9, H10, and H11 among 95 adults occupationally exposed to turkeys in the US Midwest and 82 unexposed controls. Our results indicate that farmers practising backyard, organic or free-ranging turkey production methods are at an increased risk of infection with avian influenza. Among these farmers, the adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for elevated microneutralization assay titres against avian H4, H5, H6, H9, and H10 influenza strains ranged between 3.9 (95% CI 1.2-12.8) and 15.3 (95% CI 2.0-115.2) when compared to non-exposed controls. The measured ORs were adjusted for antibody titres against human influenza viruses and other exposure variables. These data suggest that sometime in their lives, the workers had been exposed to low pathogenicity avian influenza viruses. These findings support calls for inclusion of agricultural workers in priority groups in pandemic influenza preparedness efforts. These data further support increasing surveillance and other preparedness efforts to include not only confinement poultry facilities, but more importantly, also small scale farms.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.