Search

Background There is no risk and benefit assessment of COVID-19 vaccination for children younger than 5 years using a single health outcomes scale. The objective of this study is to compare the expected risk and benefits of the mRNA primary series of COVID-19 vaccines for children aged 6 months to 4 years in the United States using a single health outcome scale in the Omicron era. Methods The expected benefits and risks of the primary two-dose series of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines for children aged 6 months to 4 years were stratified by sex, the presence of underlying medical conditions, the presence of infection-induced immunity, and the type of mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273). A scoping literature review was conducted to identify the indicators in the decision tree model. The benefit–risk ratio was the outcome of interest. Results The benefit–risk ratios ranged from 200.4 in BNT162b2 for males aged 6–11 months with underlying medical conditions and without infection-induced immunity to 3.2 in mRNA-1273 for females aged 1–4 years without underlying medical conditions and with infection-induced immunity. Conclusions The expected benefit of receiving the primary series of mRNA vaccines outweighed the risk among children ages 6 months to 4 years regardless of sex, presence of underlying medical conditions, presence of infection-induced immunity, or type of mRNA vaccines. However, the continuous monitoring of the COVID-19 epidemiology as well as vaccine effectiveness and safety is important. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors respond to comments on a study which analyzed the risk and benefits of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, including quality-adjusted life years, for the omicron variant by age, sex and presence of comorbidity. They agree on the importance of long-term follow-up studies of adverse events following immunization. They clarify that the study findings do not imply the zero efficiency of mRNA vaccines and that adverse events including death were considered in the analysis of vaccine effectiveness.

Background The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the FilmArray meningitis/encephalitis panel (FAME) on length of stay (LOS) and duration of antimicrobial treatment in children and adults in a Japanese community hospital. Methods This retrospective cohort study was conducted in Japan between January 2016 and December 2022. We included hospitalized patients with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples and those aged <2 months or who had 5 or more white blood cells/μL in the CSF. To compare the days of therapy (DOT) and LOS between the pre-FAME and FAME periods, multivariate Poisson regression analyses were conducted without an offset term. Results The number of cases undergoing pathogen-specific polymerase chain reaction increased from 3.7% in the pre-FAME period to 57.5% in the FAME period (P <.001). The pathogen identification rate also increased during the FAME period, from 0.4% to 18.7% (P <.001). While the antibacterial DOT was not statistically different between the 2 periods (adjusted rate ratio [aRR], 1.06 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.00–1.13]; P =.063]), the antiviral DOT was significantly shorter in the FAME period (aRR, 0.80 [95% CI,.71–.89]; P <.001). Conclusions This study revealed a significant reduction in antiviral use during the FAME period, whereas LOS and antibacterial use did not decrease. Given the possibility of factors (eg, the COVID-19 pandemic) affecting the epidemiology of meningitis and encephalitis, the indications and impact of the FAME test should be evaluated with continuous monitoring of the epidemiology of meningitis and encephalitis and its clinical impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of the mutant omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic raised the importance of reevaluating the risk and benefit of COVID-19 vaccines. With a decision tree model, we calculated the benefit-risk ratio and the benefit-risk difference of receiving monovalent messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine (primary 2 doses, a third dose, and a fourth dose) in the 4–5 months after vaccination using quality-adjusted life years. The analysis was stratified by age, sex, and the presence of comorbidity. Evidence from peer-reviewed publications and gray literature was reviewed on September 16, 2022, to inform the study. Benefit-risk ratios for receipt of the BNT162b2 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) ranged from 6.8 for males aged 12–17 years without comorbidity for the primary doses to 221.3 for females aged ≥65 years with comorbidity for the third dose. The benefit-risk ratios for receipt of the mRNA-1273 vaccine (Moderna) ranged from 7.2 for males aged 18–29 years without comorbidity for the primary doses to 101.4 for females aged ≥65 years with comorbidity for the third dose. In all scenarios of the one-way sensitivity analysis, the benefit-risk ratios were more than 1, irrespective of age, sex, comorbidity status, and type of vaccine, for both primary and booster doses. The benefits of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in protecting against the omicron variant outweigh the risks, irrespective of age, sex, and comorbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has potentially impacted outpatient antibiotic prescribing. Investigating this impact may identify stewardship opportunities in the ongoing COVID-19 period and beyond. Methods We conducted an interrupted time series analysis on outpatient antibiotic prescriptions and antibiotic prescriptions/patient visits in Ontario, Canada, between January 2017 and December 2020 to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on population-level antibiotic prescribing by prescriber specialty, patient demographics, and conditions. Results In the evaluated COVID-19 period (March–December 2020), there was a 31.2% (95% CI, 27.0% to 35.1%) relative reduction in total antibiotic prescriptions. Total outpatient antibiotic prescriptions decreased during the COVID-19 period by 37.1% (95% CI, 32.5% to 41.3%) among family physicians, 30.7% (95% CI, 25.8% to 35.2%) among subspecialist physicians, 12.1% (95% CI, 4.4% to 19.2%) among dentists, and 25.7% (95% CI, 21.4% to 29.8%) among other prescribers. Antibiotics indicated for respiratory infections decreased by 43.7% (95% CI, 38.4% to 48.6%). Total patient visits and visits for respiratory infections decreased by 10.7% (95% CI, 5.4% to 15.6%) and 49.9% (95% CI, 43.1% to 55.9%). Total antibiotic prescriptions/1000 visits decreased by 27.5% (95% CI, 21.5% to 33.0%), while antibiotics indicated for respiratory infections/1000 visits with respiratory infections only decreased by 6.8% (95% CI, 2.7% to 10.8%). Conclusions The reduction in outpatient antibiotic prescribing during the COVID-19 pandemic was driven by less antibiotic prescribing for respiratory indications and largely explained by decreased visits for respiratory infections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Approximately 25% of outpatient antibiotic prescriptions are unnecessary among family physicians in Canada. Minimizing unnecessary antibiotics is key for community antibiotic stewardship. However, unnecessary antibiotic prescribing is much harder to measure than total antibiotic prescribing. We investigated the association between total and unnecessary antibiotic use by family physicians and evaluated inter-physician variability in unnecessary antibiotic prescribing. Methods This was a cohort study based on electronic medical records of family physicians in Ontario, Canada, between April 2011 and March 2016. We used predefined expected antibiotic prescribing rates for 23 common primary care conditions to calculate unnecessary antibiotic prescribing rates. We used multilevel Poisson regression models to evaluate the association between total antibiotic volume (number of antibiotic prescriptions per patient visit), adjusted for multiple practice- and physician-level covariates, and unnecessary antibiotic prescribing. Results There were 499 570 physician–patient encounters resulting in 152 853 antibiotic prescriptions from 341 physicians. Substantial inter-physician variability was observed. In the fully adjusted model, we observed a significant association between total antibiotic volume and unnecessary prescribing rate (adjusted rate ratio 2.11 per 10% increase in total use; 95% CI 2.05–2.17), and none of the practice- and physician-level variables were associated with unnecessary prescribing rate. Conclusions We demonstrated substantial inter-physician variability in unnecessary antibiotic prescribing in this cohort of family physicians. Total antibiotic use was strongly correlated with unnecessary antibiotic prescribing. Total antibiotic volume is a reasonable surrogate for unnecessary antibiotic use. These results can inform community antimicrobial stewardship efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Visitor restriction policies in pediatric wards during the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak are variable. Among 36 hospitals that responded to our survey, 97% allowed at least 1 visitor, with 67% restricting to 1 caregiver. Sixty-nine percent required the visitor to wear personal protective equipment and only 19% allowed non-household visitors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]