Search

Background: Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurologic emergency with high morbidity and mortality. Delays in SE treatment are common in clinical practice and can be associated with poorer outcomes. Our goal was to determine whether the implementation of an SE alert protocol improves time to administration of a second-line antiseizure medication (ASM) in hospitalized adults., Methods: We developed and implemented an inpatient SE alert system. A quasiexperimental cohort study was performed. We analyzed all patients aged 18-85 years who were managed at the University of Kentucky Medical Center using the SE alert protocol between March 2015 and June 2017 (n = 19). Controls were the first 20 consecutive patients treated for SE over the same time period, but who were managed with usual care (i.e., without SE alert protocol)., Results: Time to administration of a second-line ASM was shorter with the use of the SE alert system (22.21 ± 3.44 minutes) compared to usual care (58.30 ± 6.72 minutes; p < 0.0001)., Conclusion: Implementation of an SE alert system led to a marked improvement in time to administration of a second-line ASM., Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class III evidence that for adult inpatients treated for SE, implementation of an SE alert protocol reduces time to administration of second-line ASM.

Viral etiologies of respiratory tract infections (RTIs) have been less studied in adult than in pediatric populations. Furthermore, the ability of PCR/electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (PCR/ESI-MS) to detect enteroviruses and rhinoviruses in respiratory samples has not been well evaluated. We sought to use PCR/ESI-MS to comprehensively investigate the viral epidemiology of adult RTIs, including testing for rhinoviruses and enteroviruses. Nasopharyngeal or throat swabs from 267 adults with acute RTIs (212 upper RTIs and 55 lower RTIs) who visited a local clinic or the outpatient or emergency departments of a medical center in Taiwan between October 2012 and June 2013 were tested for respiratory viruses by both virus isolation and PCR/ESI-MS. Throat swabs from 15 patients with bacterial infections and 27 individuals without active infections were included as control samples. Respiratory viruses were found in 23.6%, 47.2%, and 47.9% of the 267 cases by virus isolation, PCR/ESI-MS, and both methods, respectively. When both methods were used, the influenza A virus (24.3%) and rhinoviruses (9.4%) were the most frequently identified viruses, whereas human coronaviruses, human metapneumovirus (hMPV), enteroviruses, adenoviruses, respiratory syncytial virus, and parainfluenza viruses were identified in small proportions of cases (<5% of cases for each type of virus). Coinfection was observed in 4.1% of cases. In the control group, only 1 (2.4%) sample tested positive for a respiratory virus by PCR/ESI-MS. Patients who were undergoing steroid treatment, had an active malignancy, or suffered from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were at risk for rhinovirus, hMPV, or parainfluenza infections, respectively. Overall, immunocompromised patients, patients with COPD, and patients receiving dialysis were at risk for noninfluenza respiratory virus infection. Rhinoviruses (12.7%), influenza A virus (10.9%), and parainfluenza viruses (7.3%) were the most common viruses involved in the 55 cases of lower RTIs. The factors of parainfluenza infection, old age, and immunosuppression were independently associated with lower RTIs. In conclusion, PCR/ESI-MS improved the diagnostic yield for viral RTIs. Non-influenza respiratory virus infections were associated with patients with comorbidities and with lower RTIs. Additional studies that delineate the clinical need for including non-influenza respiratory viruses in the diagnostic work-up in these populations are warranted.