To evaluate the clinical impact of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (PNA panel) in critically ill patients.

Single-center, preintervention and postintervention retrospective cohort study.

Tertiary-care academic medical center.

Adult ICU patients.

Patients with quantitative bacterial cultures obtained by bronchoalveolar lavage or tracheal aspirate either before (January–March 2021, preintervention period) or after (January–March 2022, postintervention period) implementation of the PNA panel were randomly screened until 25 patients per study month (75 in each cohort) who met the study criteria were included. Antibiotic use from the day of culture collection through day 5 was compared.

The primary outcome of median time to first antibiotic change based on microbiologic data was 50 hours before the intervention versus 21 hours after the intervention (P = .0006). Also, 56 postintervention regimens (75%) were eligible for change based on PNA panel results; actual change occurred in 30 regimens (54%). Median antibiotic days of therapy (DOTs) were 8 before the intervention versus 6 after the intervention (P = .07). For the patients with antibiotic changes made based on PNA panel results, the median time to first antibiotic change was 10 hours. For patients who were initially on inadequate therapy, time to adequate therapy was 67 hours before the intervention versus 37 hours after the intervention (P = .27).

The PNA panel was associated with decreased time to first antibiotic change and fewer antibiotic DOTs. Its impact may have been larger if a higher percentage of potential antibiotic changes had been implemented. The PNA panel is a promising tool to enhance antibiotic stewardship.

Clozapine is licensed for treatment-resistant psychosis and remains underutilised. This may berelated to the stringent haematological monitoring requirements that are mandatory in most countries. We aimed to compare guidelines internationally and develop a novel Stringency Index. We hypothesised that the most stringent countries would have increased healthcare costs and reduced prescription rates.

We conducted a literature review and survey of guidelines internationally. Guideline identification involved a literature review and consultation with clinical academics. We focused on the haematological monitoring parameters, frequency and thresholds for discontinuation and rechallenge after suspected clozapine-induced neutropenia. In addition, indicators reflecting monitoring guideline stringency were scored and visualised using a choropleth map. We developed a Stringency Index with an international panel of clozapine experts, through a modified-Delphi-survey. The Stringency Index was compared to health expenditure per-capita and clozapine prescription per 100 000 persons.

One hundred twocountries were included, from Europe (n = 35), Asia (n = 24), Africa (n = 20), South America (n = 11), North America (n = 7) and Oceania and Australia (n = 5). Guidelines differed in frequency of haematological monitoring and discontinuation thresholds. Overall, 5% of included countries had explicit guidelines for clozapine-rechallenge and 40% explicitly prohibited clozapine-rechallenge. Furthermore, 7% of included countries had modified discontinuation thresholds for benign ethnic neutropenia. None of the guidelines specified how long haematological monitoring should continue. The most stringent guidelines were in Europe, and the least stringent were in Africa and South America. There was a positive association (r = 0.43, p < 0.001) between a country's Stringency Index and healthcare expenditure per capita.

Recommendations on how haematological function should be monitored in patients treated with clozapine vary considerably between countries. It would be useful to standardise guidelines on haematological monitoring worldwide.

Clozapine is the only drug licensed for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) but the real-world clinical and cost-effectiveness of community initiation of clozapine is unclear.

The aim was to assess the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of community initiation of clozapine.

This was a naturalistic study of community patients recommended for clozapine treatment.

Of 158 patients recommended for clozapine treatment, 88 (56%) patients agreed to clozapine initiation and, of these, 58 (66%) were successfully established on clozapine. The success rate for community initiation was 65.4%; which was not significantly different from that for in-patient initiation (58.82%, χ2(1,88) = 0.47, P = 0.49). Following clozapine initiation, there was a significant reduction in median out-patient visits over 1 year (from 24.00 (interquartile range (IQR) = 14.00–41.00) to 13.00 visits (IQR = 5.00–24.00), P < 0.001), and 2 years (from 47.50 visits (IQR = 24.75–71.00) to 22.00 (IQR = 11.00–42.00), P < 0.001), and a 74.71% decrease in psychiatric hospital bed days (z = −2.50, P = 0.01). Service-use costs decreased (1 year: –£963/patient (P < 0.001); 2 years: –£1598.10/patient (P < 0.001). Subanalyses for community-only initiation also showed significant cost reductions (1 year: –£827.40/patient (P < 0.001); 2 year: –£1668.50/patient (P < 0.001) relative to costs prior to starting clozapine. Relative to before initiation, symptom severity was improved in patients taking clozapine at discharge (median Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score: initial visit: 80 (IQR = 71.00–104.00); discharge visit 50.5 (IQR = 44.75–75.00), P < 0.001) and at 2 year follow-up (Health of Nation Outcome Scales total score median initial visit: 13.00 (IQR = 9.00–15.00); 2 year follow-up: 8.00 (IQR = 3.00–13.00), P = 0.023).

These findings indicate that community initiation of clozapine is feasible and is associated with significant reductions in costs, service use and symptom severity.

The Canadian Nosocomial Infection Surveillance Program conducted point-prevalence surveys in acute-care hospitals in 2002, 2009, and 2017 to identify trends in antimicrobial use.

Eligible inpatients were identified from a 24-hour period in February of each survey year. Patients were eligible (1) if they were admitted for ≥48 hours or (2) if they had been admitted to the hospital within a month. Chart reviews were conducted. We calculated the prevalence of antimicrobial use as follows: patients receiving ≥1 antimicrobial during survey period per number of patients surveyed × 100%.

In each survey, 28−47 hospitals participated. In 2002, 2,460 (36.5%; 95% CI, 35.3%−37.6%) of 6,747 surveyed patients received ≥1 antimicrobial. In 2009, 3,566 (40.1%, 95% CI, 39.0%−41.1%) of 8,902 patients received ≥1 antimicrobial. In 2017, 3,936 (39.6%, 95% CI, 38.7%−40.6%) of 9,929 patients received ≥1 antimicrobial. Among patients who received ≥1 antimicrobial, penicillin use increased 36.8% between 2002 and 2017, and third-generation cephalosporin use increased from 13.9% to 18.1% (P < .0001). Between 2002 and 2017, fluoroquinolone use decreased from 25.7% to 16.3% (P < .0001) and clindamycin use decreased from 25.7% to 16.3% (P < .0001) among patients who received ≥1 antimicrobial. Aminoglycoside use decreased from 8.8% to 2.4% (P < .0001) and metronidazole use decreased from 18.1% to 9.4% (P < .0001). Carbapenem use increased from 3.9% in 2002 to 6.1% in 2009 (P < .0001) and increased by 4.8% between 2009 and 2017 (P = .60).

The prevalence of antimicrobial use increased between 2002 and 2009 and then stabilized between 2009 and 2017. These data provide important information for antimicrobial stewardship programs.

Having attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a risk factor for concussion that impacts concussion diagnosis and recovery. The relationship between ADHD and repetitive subconcussive head impacts on neurocognitive and behavioral outcomes is less well known. This study evaluated the role of ADHD as a moderator of the association between repetitive head impacts on neurocognitive test performance and behavioral concussion symptoms over the course of an athletic season.

Study participants included 284 male athletes aged 13–18 years who participated in high school football. Parents completed the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD Symptoms and Normal Behavior (SWAN) ratings about their teen athlete before the season began. Head impacts were measured using an accelerometer worn during all practices and games. Athletes and parents completed behavioral ratings of concussion symptoms and the Attention Network Task (ANT), Digital Trail Making Task (dTMT), and Cued Task Switching Task at pre- and post-season.

Mixed model analyses indicated that neither head impacts nor ADHD symptoms were associated with post-season athlete- or parent-reported concussion symptom ratings or neurocognitive task performance. Moreover, no relationships between head impact exposure and neurocognitive or behavioral outcomes emerged when severity of pre-season ADHD symptoms was included as a moderator.

Athletes’ pre-season ADHD symptoms do not appear to influence behavioral or neurocognitive outcomes following a single season of competitive football competition. Results are interpreted in light of several study limitations (e.g., single season, assessment of constructs) that may have impacted this study’s pattern of largely null results.

We examined whether preadmission history of depression is associated with less delirium/coma-free (DCF) days, worse 1-year depression severity and cognitive impairment.

A health proxy reported history of depression. Separate models examined the effect of preadmission history of depression on: (a) intensive care unit (ICU) course, measured as DCF days; (b) depression symptom severity at 3 and 12 months, measured by the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II); and (c) cognitive performance at 3 and 12 months, measured by the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) global score.

Patients admitted to the medical/surgical ICU services were eligible.

Of 821 subjects eligible at enrollment, 261 (33%) had preadmission history of depression. After adjusting for covariates, preadmission history of depression was not associated with less DCF days (OR 0.78, 95% CI, 0.59–1.03 p = 0.077). A prior history of depression was associated with higher BDI-II scores at 3 and 12 months (3 months OR 2.15, 95% CI, 1.42–3.24 p = <0.001; 12 months OR 1.89, 95% CI, 1.24–2.87 p = 0.003). We did not observe an association between preadmission history of depression and cognitive performance at either 3 or 12 months (3 months beta coefficient −0.04, 95% CI, −2.70–2.62 p = 0.97; 12 months 1.5, 95% CI, −1.26–4.26 p = 0.28).

Patients with a depression history prior to ICU stay exhibit a greater severity of depressive symptoms in the year after hospitalization.

To conduct an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of manualised psychological treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and examine the differential efficacy of psychological treatments by treatment type and format.

Previous meta-analyses conclude that efficacious psychological treatments for OCD exist. However, determining the efficacy of psychological treatments requires multiple forms of assessment across a range of indexes, yet most previous meta-analyses in OCD are based solely on effect sizes.

We evaluated treatment efficacy across 24 RCTs (n = 1,667) by conducting clinical significance analyses (using standardised Jacobson methodology) and standardised mean difference within-group effect-size analyses. Outcomes were Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) scores, evaluated at post-treatment and follow-up (3-6 months post-treatment).

Post-treatment, there was a large significant within-group effect size for treated patients (g = 1.28) and a small significant effect size for controls (g = 0.30). At follow-up, large within-group effect sizes were found for both treated patients (g = 1.45) and controls (g = 0.90). Clinical significance analyses indicated that treated patients were significantly more likely than controls to recover following an intervention, but recovery rates were low; post-intervention, only 32% of treated patients and 3% of controls recovered; rising to 38% and 21% respectively at follow-up. Regardless of allocation, only approximately 20% of patients were asymptomatic at follow-up. Across the different analysis methods, individual cognitive therapy (CT) was the most effective intervention, followed by group CT plus exposure and response prevention. Self-help interventions were generally less effective.

Reliance on aggregated within-group effect sizes may lead to overestimation of the efficacy of psychological treatments for OCD. More research is needed to determine the most effective treatment type and format for patients with OCD.