BackgroundFollowing a relative absence in winter 2020, a large resurgence of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) detections occurred during the 2020/2021 summer in Western Australia. This seasonal shift was linked to SARS-CoV-2 public health measures. We examine the epidemiology and RSV testing of respiratory-coded admissions, and compare clinical phenotype of RSV-positive admissions between 2019 and 2020.MethodAt a single tertiary paediatric centre, International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition Australian Modification-coded respiratory admissions longer than 12 hours were combined with laboratory data from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020. Data were grouped into bronchiolitis, other acute lower respiratory infection (OALRI) and wheeze, to assess RSV testing practices. For RSV-positive admissions, demographics and clinical features were compared between 2019 and 2020.ResultsRSV-positive admissions peaked in early summer 2020, following an absent winter season. Testing was higher in 2020: bronchiolitis, 94.8% vs 89.2% (p=0.01); OALRI, 88.6% vs 82.6% (p=0.02); and wheeze, 62.8% vs 25.5% (p<0.001). The 2020 peak month, December, contributed almost 75% of RSV-positive admissions, 2.5 times the 2019 peak. The median age in 2020 was twice that observed in 2019 (16.4 vs 8.1 months, p<0.001). The proportion of RSV-positive OALRI admissions was greater in 2020 (32.6% vs 24.9%, p=0.01). There were no clinically meaningful differences in length of stay or disease severity.InterpretationThe 2020 RSV season was in summer, with a larger than expected peak. There was an increase in RSV-positive non-bronchiolitis admissions, consistent with infection in older RSV-naïve children. This resurgence raises concern for regions experiencing longer and more stringent SARS-CoV-2 public health measures.

CTB use in head injuries did not increase during the study period, and rates of CTB were less than reported for North America.

ImportanceNasal high-flow oxygen therapy in infants with bronchiolitis and hypoxia has been shown to reduce the requirement to escalate care. The efficacy of high-flow oxygen therapy in children aged 1 to 4 years with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure without bronchiolitis is unknown.ObjectiveTo determine the effect of early high-flow oxygen therapy vs standard oxygen therapy in children with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA multicenter, randomized clinical trial was conducted at 14 metropolitan and tertiary hospitals in Australia and New Zealand, including 1567 children aged 1 to 4 years (randomized between December 18, 2017, and March 18, 2020) requiring hospital admission for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. The last participant follow-up was completed on March 22, 2020.InterventionsEnrolled children were randomly allocated 1:1 to high-flow oxygen therapy (n = 753) or standard oxygen therapy (n = 764). The type of oxygen therapy could not be masked, but the investigators remained blinded until the outcome data were locked.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was length of hospital stay with the hypothesis that high-flow oxygen therapy reduces length of stay. There were 9 secondary outcomes, including length of oxygen therapy and admission to the intensive care unit. Children were analyzed according to their randomization group.ResultsOf the 1567 children who were randomized, 1517 (97%) were included in the primary analysis (median age, 1.9 years [IQR, 1.4-3.0 years]; 732 [46.7%] were female) and all children completed the trial. The length of hospital stay was significantly longer in the high-flow oxygen group with a median of 1.77 days (IQR, 1.03-2.80 days) vs 1.50 days (IQR, 0.85-2.44 days) in the standard oxygen group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.75-0.92]; P &amp;lt; .001). Of the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 4 showed no significant difference. The median length of oxygen therapy was 1.07 days (IQR, 0.50-2.06 days) in the high-flow oxygen group vs 0.75 days (IQR, 0.35-1.61 days) in the standard oxygen therapy group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.70-0.86]). In the high-flow oxygen group, there were 94 admissions (12.5%) to the intensive care unit compared with 53 admissions (6.9%) in the standard oxygen group (adjusted odds ratio, 1.93 [95% CI, 1.35-2.75]). There was only 1 death and it occurred in the high-flow oxygen group.Conclusions and RelevanceNasal high-flow oxygen used as the initial primary therapy in children aged 1 to 4 years with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure did not significantly reduce the length of hospital stay compared with standard oxygen therapy.Trial Registrationanzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12618000210279

A decrease in temperature and increasing wind speed are associated with increasing incidence of bronchiolitis hospital admissions in Australia and New Zealand.

IntroductionAcute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF) in children is the most frequent reason for non-elective hospital admission. During the initial phase, AHRF is a clinical syndrome defined for the purpose of this study by an oxygen requirement and caused by pneumonia, lower respiratory tract infections, asthma or bronchiolitis. Up to 20% of these children with AHRF can rapidly deteriorate requiring non-invasive or invasive ventilation. Nasal high-flow (NHF) therapy has been used by clinicians for oxygen therapy outside intensive care settings to prevent escalation of care. A recent randomised trial in infants with bronchiolitis has shown that NHF therapy reduces the need to escalate therapy. No similar data is available in the older children presenting with AHRF. In this study we aim to investigate in children aged 1 to 4 years presenting with AHRF if early NHF therapy compared with standard-oxygen therapy reduces hospital length of stay and if this is cost-effective compared with standard treatment.Methods and analysisThe study design is an open-labelled randomised multicentre trial comparing early NHF and standard-oxygen therapy and will be stratified by sites and into obstructive and non-obstructive groups. Children aged 1 to 4 years (n=1512) presenting with AHRF to one of the participating emergency departments will be randomly allocated to NHF or standard-oxygen therapy once the eligibility criteria have been met (oxygen requirement with transcutaneous saturation <92%/90% (dependant on hospital standard threshold), diagnosis of AHRF, admission to hospital and tachypnoea ≥35 breaths/min). Children in the standard-oxygen group can receive rescue NHF therapy if escalation is required. The primary outcome is hospital length of stay. Secondary outcomes will include length of oxygen therapy, proportion of intensive care admissions, healthcare resource utilisation and associated costs. Analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval has been obtained in Australia (HREC/15/QRCH/159) and New Zealand (HDEC 17/NTA/135). The trial commenced recruitment in December 2017. The study findings will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences. Authorship of all publications will be decided by mutual consensus of the research team.Trial registration numberACTRN12618000210279