Search

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has created an epidemic of distress-related mental disorders such as depression, while simultaneously necessitating a shift to virtual domains of mental health care; yet, the evidence to support the use of virtual interventions is unclear., Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of virtual interventions for depressive disorders by addressing three key questions: (1) Does virtual intervention provide better outcomes than no treatment or other control conditions (ie, waitlist, treatment as usual [TAU], or attention control)? (2) Does in-person intervention provide better outcomes than virtual intervention? (3) Does one type of virtual intervention provide better outcomes than another?, Methods: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases for trials published from January 1, 2010, to October 30, 2021. We included randomized controlled trials of adults with depressive disorders that tested a virtual intervention and used a validated depression measure. Primary outcomes were defined as remission (ie, no longer meeting the clinical cutoff for depression), response (ie, a clinically significant reduction in depressive symptoms), and depression severity at posttreatment. Two researchers independently selected studies and extracted data using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Risk of bias was evaluated based on Agency for Healthcare and Research Quality guidelines. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for binary outcomes and standardized mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes., Results: We identified 3797 references, 24 of which were eligible. Compared with waitlist, virtual intervention had higher odds of remission (OR 10.30, 95% CI 5.70-18.60; N=619 patients) and lower posttreatment symptom severity (SMD 0.81, 95% CI 0.52-1.10; N=1071). Compared with TAU and virtual attention control conditions, virtual intervention had higher odds of remission (OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.10-3.35; N=512) and lower posttreatment symptom severity (SMD 0.25, 95% CI 0.09-0.42; N=573). In-person intervention outcomes were not significantly different from virtual intervention outcomes (eg, remission OR 0.84, CI 0.51-1.37; N=789). No eligible studies directly compared one active virtual intervention to another., Conclusions: Virtual interventions were efficacious compared with control conditions, including waitlist control, TAU, and attention control. Although the number of studies was relatively small, the strength of evidence was moderate that in-person interventions did not yield significantly better outcomes than virtual interventions for depressive disorders., (©Crystal Edler Schiller, Julianna Prim, Anna E Bauer, Linda Lux, Laura Claire Lundegard, Michelle Kang, Samantha Hellberg, Katherine Thompson, Theresa Webber, Adonay Teklezghi, Noah Pettee, Katherine Gaffney, Gabrielle Hodgins, Fariha Rahman, J Nikki Steinsiek, Anita Modi, Bradley N Gaynes. Originally published in JMIR Mental Health (https://mental.jmir.org), 09.01.2023.)

Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) cause significant inpatient morbidity and mortality. They are especially challenging to diagnose promptly in the intensive care unit because a plethora of other causes can contribute to clinical decline in complex, critically ill patients. The authors describe the diagnosis, management, and prevention of these diseases based on current guidelines and recent evidence., (Copyright © 2020 The Cleveland Clinic Foundation. All Rights Reserved.)

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), mediated by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), can manifest with flu-like illness and severe pneumonia with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Immunocompromised patients merit particular attention as altered host immunity may influence both disease severity and duration of viral shedding as is described with several other ribonucleic acid respiratory viruses. Yet immunocompromised status alone, in the absence of other comorbidities, may not necessarily predict severe illness presentations and poorer clinical outcomes as indicated by recent reports of COVID-19-infected solid organ transplant recipients and people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Such patients may even be spared the robust inflammatory response that precipitates ARDS associated with COVID-19, complicating the management of iatrogenic immunosuppression in this setting. We present a case of an orthotopic liver transplant recipient with well-controlled HIV who successfully recovered from a mild, flu-like illness attributed to SARS-CoV-2., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Community-acquired pneumonia significantly contributes to patient morbidity and healthcare costs. As our understanding of this common infection grows, collaborative efforts among researchers and clinical societies provide new literature and updated guidelines informing its management. This review discusses diagnostic methods, empiric treatment, and infection prevention strategies for patients with suspected community-acquired pneumonia., (Copyright © 2020 The Cleveland Clinic Foundation. All Rights Reserved.)

Background: Infections are the most common cause of non-relapse mortality in adult allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo HSCT) recipients. Acute gastrointestinal graft-vs-host disease (GI GVHD) often leads to friable mucosa as well as treatment interventions which can increase risk of infection. Our primary objective was to describe the relationship between increasing grades of acute GI GVHD and incidence of bloodstream infections (BSI)., Methods: We reviewed 441 adults who underwent allo HSCT from 2011 to 2017 and were clinically diagnosed with GI GVHD, non-GI GVHD, or no GVHD based on the modified Glucksberg scale within the first 100 days of transplantation. The maximum grades of acute GI GVHD and non-GI GVHD were used in the analysis. BSI was defined based on the presence of a blood culture positive for bacteria or fungi and treatment with antibiotics. The incidence of BSI within the first 180 days of transplantation was estimated with the cumulative incidence method. Fine and Gray regression was used to assess association between clinical grade of acute GI GVHD and BSI risk, adjusting for grade of non-GI GVHD and for other significant baseline patient risk factors for BSI identified by multivariable analysis. Results are shown as hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). A similar analysis was conducted in 130 patients with histologic grade of acute GI GVHD., Results: Overall BSI incidence by day 180 was 32%; gram-negative bacilli were the predominant organisms, followed by gram-positive cocci and fungi. Patients with grade 4 acute GI GVHD had higher risk of BSI as compared to patients with no GI GVHD (HR 2.98, CI 1.65-5.37, P < .001), while those with grade 3 acute GI GVHD had similar BSI risk (HR 0.89, CI 0.36-2.21, P = .81). Grade of GI GVHD had no association with risk of non-BSI. Results were similar in patients with histologic grade acute GI GVHD. Patients who developed BSI or non-BSI had significantly higher overall mortality risk compared to those without infectious complications (HR 2.52, CI 1.92-3.31, P < .001 for BSI; HR 1.60, CI 1.20-2.13, P = .001 for non-BSI)., Conclusions: Grade 4 acute GI GVHD is associated with a higher risk of BSI, which is in turn associated with a higher risk of overall mortality in this population. Understanding the relationships between acute GI GVHD, BSI, and overall mortality can guide future treatment strategies for adult allo HSCT recipients., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Tuberculosis (TB) in the health care worker demands orchestrated efforts from health care institutions to promptly identify cases and address community risk. We describe a pediatric intensive care unit nurse with latent TB infection who developed hemoptysis and a lung infiltrate concerning for active TB. Her evaluation and contact investigation were facilitated by our institution's command center. Although TB was ultimately ruled out, this case tested our team-based care in response to a suspected high-consequence pathogen., (Copyright © 2019 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Antibiotic allergy de-labeling using penicillin allergy skin testing (PAST) can reduce the use and cost of alternative, non-β-lactam antibiotics in general inpatient populations. This strategy's role in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients is unclear., Methods: This study aimed to determine the effect of a pre-transplant PAST protocol on antibiotic use, days of therapy (DOT), and cost in an immunocompromised population at a single center from 7/1/2010-2/1/2019. Patients who received chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and those who underwent transplantation in the outpatient setting were excluded., Results: Of 1560 patients who underwent inpatient HSCT during the study period, 208 reported β-lactam allergy (136/844 [16%] pre- and 72/716 [10%] post-implementation; P < .001). PAST was performed on 7% and 54% of HSCT recipients pre- and post-implementation, respectively. Only two positive PAST were noted. There were no adverse reactions to PAST. There were no significant differences in the disease and transplant characteristics between the two groups. Days of therapy and cost of alternative antibiotics significantly decreased post-implementation (mean 788 vs 627 days, P = .01; mean $24 425 vs $17 518, P = .009)., Conclusion: Penicillin allergy skin testing adjudicates reported β-lactam allergy in HSCT recipients, lowering use, DOT, and cost of alternative antibiotics and promoting effective formulary agents to treat immunocompromised HSCT recipients., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Purpose: We explored differences in changes in medical student empathy in the third year of medical school between volunteers at JeffHOPE, a multisite medical student-run free clinic of Sidney Kimmel Medical College (SKMC), and nonvolunteers., Method: Volunteerism and leadership experience at JeffHOPE were documented for medical students in the Class of 2015 (n = 272) across their medical educations. Students completed the Jefferson Scale of Empathy at the beginning of medical school and at the end of the third year. Students who reported participation in other Jefferson-affiliated clinics (n = 44) were excluded from this study. Complete data were available for 188 SKMC students., Results: Forty-five percent of students (n = 85) volunteered at JeffHOPE at least once during their medical educations. Fifteen percent of students (n = 48) were selected for leadership positions involving weekly clinic participation. Nonvolunteers demonstrated significant decline in empathy in medical school ( P = 0.009), while those who volunteered at JeffHOPE at least once over the course of their medical educations did not show any significant decline ( P = 0.07)., Conclusions: These findings suggest that medical students may benefit from volunteering at student-run free clinics to care for underserved populations throughout medical school.