Explore the vast range of titles available.

Respiratory viruses such as influenza do not typically cause viremia; however, SARS-CoV-2 has been detected in the blood of COVID-19 patients with mild and severe symptoms. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in blood raises questions about its role in pathogenesis as well as transfusion safety concerns. Blood donor reports of symptoms or a diagnosis of COVID-19 after donation (post-donation information, PDI) preceded or coincided with increased general population COVID-19 mortality. Plasma samples from 2,250 blood donors who reported possible COVID-19-related PDI were tested for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Detection of RNAemia peaked at 9%-15% of PDI donors in late 2020 to early 2021 and fell to approximately 4% after implementation of widespread vaccination in the population. RNAemic donors were 1.2- to 1.4-fold more likely to report cough or shortness of breath and 1.8-fold more likely to report change in taste or smell compared with infected donors without detectable RNAemia. No infectious virus was detected in plasma from RNAemic donors; inoculation of permissive cell lines produced less than 0.7-7 plaque-forming units (PFU)/mL and in susceptible mice less than 100 PFU/mL in RNA-positive plasma based on limits of detection in these models. These findings suggest that blood transfusions are highly unlikely to transmit SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Electronic health record (EHR) data provide a unique opportunity to study the epidemiology of COVID-19, clinical outcomes of the infection, comparative effectiveness of therapies, and vaccine effectiveness but require a well-defined computable phenotype of COVID-19-like illness (CLI). The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of pathogen-specific and other acute respiratory illness (ARI) International Statistical Classification of Diseases-9 and -10 codes in identifying COVID-19 cases in emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) and inpatient settings. We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study using EHR, claims, and laboratory information system data of ED or UC and inpatient encounters from 4 health systems in the United States. Patients who were aged ≥18 years, had an ED or UC or inpatient encounter for an ARI, and underwent a SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021, were included. We evaluated various CLI definitions using combinations of International Statistical Classification of Diseases-10 codes as follows: COVID-19-specific codes; CLI definition used in VISION network studies; ARI signs, symptoms, and diagnosis codes only; signs and symptoms of ARI only; and random forest model definitions. We evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of each CLI definition using a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test as the reference standard. We evaluated the performance of each CLI definition for distinct hospitalization and ED or UC cohorts. Among 90,952 hospitalizations and 137,067 ED or UC visits, 5627 (6.19%) and 9866 (7.20%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, respectively. COVID-19-specific codes had high sensitivity (91.6%) and specificity (99.6%) in identifying patients with SARS-CoV-2 positivity among hospitalized patients. The VISION CLI definition maintained high sensitivity (95.8%) but lowered specificity (45.5%). By contrast, signs and symptoms of ARI had low sensitivity and positive predictive value (28.9% and 11.8%, respectively) but higher specificity and negative predictive value (85.3% and 94.7%, respectively). ARI diagnoses, signs, and symptoms alone had low predictive performance. All CLI definitions had lower sensitivity for ED or UC encounters. Random forest approaches identified distinct CLI definitions with high performance for hospital encounters and moderate performance for ED or UC encounters. COVID-19-specific codes have high sensitivity and specificity in identifying adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. Separate combinations of COVID-19-specific codes and ARI codes enhance the utility of CLI definitions in studies using EHR data in hospital and ED or UC settings.

Government funders of biomedical research are under increasing pressure to demonstrate societal benefits of their investments. A number of published studies attempted to correlate research funding levels with the societal burden for various diseases, with mixed results. We examined whether research funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is well aligned with current and projected veterans' health needs. The organizational structure of the VA makes it a particularly suitable setting for examining these questions. We used the publication patterns and dollar expenditures of VA-funded researchers to characterize the VA research portfolio by disease. We used health care utilization data from the VA for the same diseases to define veterans' health needs. We then measured the level of correlation between the two and identified disease groups that were under- or over-represented in the research portfolio relative to disease expenditures. Finally, we used historic health care utilization trends combined with demographic projections to identify diseases and conditions that are increasing in costs and/or patient volume and consequently represent potential targets for future research investments. We found a significant correlation between research volume/expenditures and health utilization. Some disease groups were slightly under- or over-represented, but these deviations were relatively small. Diseases and conditions with the increasing utilization trend at the VA included hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes, hearing loss, sleeping disorders, complications of pregnancy, and several mental disorders. Research investments at the VA are well aligned with veteran health needs. The VA can continue to meet these needs by supporting research on the diseases and conditions with a growing number of patients, costs of care, or both. Our approach can be used by other funders of disease research to characterize their portfolios and to plan research investments.

Background This report describes the results of recruitment efforts and the subsequent participation of pregnant women in study activities in a 2010–2012 observational study focused on influenza illness and vaccination in California and Oregon, USA. Methods Socio-demographic and health characteristics extracted from electronic medical records were compared among pregnant women who enrolled in the study, refused to participate, or were never reached for study invitation. These characteristics plus additional self-reported information were compared between women who enrolled in two study tracks: a prospective cohort vs. women enrolled following an acute respiratory illness (ARI) medical encounter. The characteristics of women who participated in weekly ARI surveillance (cohort enrollees, year one) and a 6-month follow-up interview (all enrollees) were also examined. Results In year one, we reached 51% (6938/13,655) of the potential participants we tried to contact by telephone, and 20% (1374/6938) of the women we invited agreed to join the prospective cohort. Women with chronic medical conditions, pregnancy complications, and medical encounters for ARI (prior to pregnancy or during the study period) were more likely to be reached for recruitment and more likely to enroll in the cohort. Twenty percent of cohort enrollees never started weekly surveillance reports; among those who did, reports were completed for 55% of the surveillance weeks. Receipt of the influenza vaccine was higher among women who joined the cohort (76%) than those who refused (56%) or were never reached (54%). In contrast, vaccine uptake among medical enrollees in year one (54%; 53/98) and two (52%; 79/151) was similar to other pregnant women in those years. Study site, white race, non-Hispanic ethnicity, and not having a child aged < 13 years at home were most consistently associated with joining as a cohort or medical enrollee and completing study activities after joining. Conclusions We observed systematic differences in socio-demographic and health characteristics across different levels of participant engagement and between cohort and medical enrollees. More methodological research and innovation in conducting prospective observational studies in this population are needed, especially when extended participant engagement and ongoing surveillance are required.

Abstract Background To date, no study has examined influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations during pregnancy. Methods The Pregnancy Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (PREVENT) consisted of public health or healthcare systems with integrated laboratory, medical, and vaccination records in Australia, Canada (Alberta and Ontario), Israel, and the United States (California, Oregon, and Washington). Sites identified pregnant women aged 18 through 50 years whose pregnancies overlapped with local influenza seasons from 2010 through 2016. Administrative data were used to identify hospitalizations with acute respiratory or febrile illness (ARFI) and clinician-ordered real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) testing for influenza viruses. Overall IVE was estimated using the test-negative design and adjusting for site, season, season timing, and high-risk medical conditions. Results Among 19450 hospitalizations with an ARFI discharge diagnosis (across 25 site-specific study seasons), only 1030 (6%) of the pregnant women were tested for influenza viruses by rRT-PCR. Approximately half of these women had pneumonia or influenza discharge diagnoses (54%). Influenza A or B virus infections were detected in 598/1030 (58%) of the ARFI hospitalizations with influenza testing. Across sites and seasons, 13% of rRT-PCR-confirmed influenza-positive pregnant women were vaccinated compared with 22% of influenza-negative pregnant women; the adjusted overall IVE was 40% (95% confidence interval = 12%–59%) against influenza-associated hospitalization during pregnancy. Conclusion Between 2010 and 2016, influenza vaccines offered moderate protection against laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations during pregnancy, which may further inform the benefits of maternal influenza vaccination programs. In this retrospective study of hospitals in Australia, Canada, Israel, and the United States from 2010 to 2016, influenza vaccines were 40% effective in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations during pregnancy.

Annual vaccination against seasonal influenza is widely recognized as the primary intervention method in preventing morbidity and mortality from influenza, but coverage among adults is suboptimal in the United States. Safety and effectiveness perceptions regarding vaccines are consistently cited as factors that influence adults’ decisions to accept or reject vaccination. Therefore, we conducted this analysis in order to understand sociodemographic, attitude, and knowledge factors associated with these perceptions for influenza vaccine among adults in three different age groups. Probability-based Internet panel surveys using nationally representative samples of adults aged ≥19 years in the United States were conducted during February–March of 2017 and 2018. We asked respondents if they believed the influenza vaccine was safe and effective. We calculated prevalence ratios using chi-square and pairwise t-tests to determine associations between safety and effectiveness beliefs and sociodemographic variables for adults aged 19–49, 50–64, and ≥65 years. Survey completion rates were 58.2% (2017) and 57.2% (2018); we analyzed 4597 combined responses. Overall, most adults reported the influenza vaccine was safe (86.3%) and effective (73.0%). However, fewer younger adults reported positive perceptions compared with older age groups. Respondents who believed the vaccine was safe also reported it was effective. Generally, adults perceived the influenza vaccine as safe and effective. Considering this, any improvements to these perceptions would likely be minor and have a limited effect on coverage. Future research to understand why, despite positive perceptions, adults are still choosing to forego the vaccine may be informative.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that all health care personnel receive an annual influenza vaccination to reduce influenza-related morbidity and mortality among health care personnel and their patients and to reduce absenteeism among health care personnel (1-4). CDC conducted an opt-in Internet panel survey of 2,265 U.S. health care personnel to estimate influenza vaccination coverage among these persons during the 2017-18 influenza season. Overall, 78.4% of health care personnel reported receiving influenza vaccination during the 2017-18 season, similar to reported coverage in the previous four influenza seasons (5). As in previous seasons, coverage was highest among personnel who were required by their employer to be vaccinated (94.8%) and lowest among those working in settings where vaccination was not required, promoted, or offered on-site (47.6%). Health care personnel working in long-term care settings, the majority of whom work as assistants or aides, have lower influenza vaccination coverage than do health care personnel working in all other health care settings, which puts the elderly in long-term settings at increased risk for severe complications for influenza. Implementing workplace strategies shown to improve vaccination coverage among health care personnel, including vaccination requirements and active promotion of on-site vaccinations at no cost, can help ensure health care personnel and patients are protected against influenza (6). CDC's long-term care web-based toolkit* provides resources, strategies, and educational materials for increasing influenza vaccination among health care personnel in long-term care settings.

Vaccinating pregnant women with influenza and tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccines can reduce the risk for influenza and pertussis for themselves and their infants. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that all women who are or might be pregnant during the influenza season receive influenza vaccine, which can be administered any time during pregnancy (1). The ACIP also recommends that women receive Tdap during each pregnancy, preferably from 27 through 36 weeks' gestation (2). To assess influenza and Tdap vaccination coverage among women pregnant during the 2017-18 influenza season, CDC analyzed data from an Internet panel survey conducted during March 28-April 10, 2018. Among 1,771 survey respondents pregnant during the peak influenza vaccination period (October 2017-January 2018), 49.1% reported receiving influenza vaccine before or during their pregnancy. Among 700 respondents who had a live birth, 54.4% reported receiving Tdap during their pregnancy. Women who reported receiving a provider offer of vaccination had higher vaccination coverage than did women who received a recommendation but no offer and women who did not receive a recommendation. Reasons for nonvaccination included concern about effectiveness of the influenza vaccine and lack of knowledge regarding the need for Tdap vaccination during every pregnancy. Provider offers or referrals for vaccination in combination with patient education could reduce missed opportunities for vaccination and increase vaccination coverage among pregnant women.

Abstract Background Data are limited on influenza testing among adults with acute respiratory illness (ARI)–associated hospitalizations. We identified factors associated with influenza testing in adult ARI-associated hospitalizations across the 2016–2017 through 2019–2020 influenza seasons. Methods Using data from 4 health systems in the United States, we identified hospitalizations that had an ARI discharge diagnosis or respiratory virus test. A hospitalization with influenza testing was based on testing performed within 14 days before through 72 hours after admission. We used random forest analysis to identify patient characteristics and influenza activity indicators that were most important in terms of their relationship to influenza testing. Results Across 4 seasons, testing rates ranged from 14.8%–19.4% at 3 pooled sites and 60.1%–78.5% at a fourth site with different testing practices. Discharge diagnoses of pneumonia or infectious disease of noninfluenza etiology, presence of ARI signs/symptoms, hospital admission month, and influenza-like illness activity level were consistently among the variables with the greatest relative importance. Conclusions Select ARI diagnoses and indicators of influenza activity were the most important factors associated with influenza testing among ARI-associated hospitalizations. Improved understanding of which patients are tested may enhance influenza burden estimates and allow for more timely clinical management of influenza-associated hospitalizations. Among acute respiratory illness (ARI)–associated hospitalizations, inpatient influenza testing rates varied by site based on testing practices. Overall, select ARI categories (eg, pneumonia, signs/symptoms) and indicators of influenza activity (admission month, influenza-like illness activity) were the most important indicators of receipt of influenza testing.

Abstract Few studies have addressed respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection during pregnancy. Among 846 pregnant women hospitalized with respiratory illness and tested for RSV, 21 (2%) were RSV positive, of whom 8 (38%) were diagnosed with pneumonia. Despite study limitations, these data can help inform decisions about RSV prevention strategies.