在 COVID-19 大流行期间使用多重呼吸系统面板检测的变化。

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Jonathan D Baghdadi, Chih Chun Tung, J Kristie Johnson, Daniel J Morgan, Anthony D Harris
{"title":"在 COVID-19 大流行期间使用多重呼吸系统面板检测的变化。","authors":"Jonathan D Baghdadi, Chih Chun Tung, J Kristie Johnson, Daniel J Morgan, Anthony D Harris","doi":"10.1017/ice.2024.163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>COVID-19 changed the epidemiology of community-acquired respiratory viruses. We explored patterns of respiratory viral testing to understand which tests are most clinically useful in the postpandemic era.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective observational study of discharge data from PINC-AI (formerly Premier), a large administrative database. Use of multiplex nucleic acid amplification respiratory panels in acute care, including small (2-5 targets), medium (6-11), and large panels (>11), were compared between the early pandemic (03/2020-10/2020), late pandemic (11/2020-4/2021), and prepandemic respiratory season (11/2019 - 02/2020) using ANOVA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A median of 160.5 facilities contributed testing data per quarter (IQR 155.5-169.5). Prepandemic, facilities averaged 103 respiratory panels monthly (sd 138), including 79 large (sd 126), 7 medium (sd 31), and 16 small panels (sd 73). Relative to prepandemic, utilization decreased during the early pandemic (62 panels monthly/facility; sd 112) but returned to the prepandemic baseline by the late pandemic (107 panels monthly/facility; sd 211). Relative to prepandemic, late pandemic testing involved more small panel use (58 monthly/facility, sd 156) and less large panel use (47 monthly/facility, sd 116). Comparisons among periods demonstrated significant differences in overall testing (<i>P</i> < 0.0001), large panel use (<i>P</i> < 0.0001), and small panel use (<i>P</i> < 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Postpandemic, clinical use of respiratory panel testing shifted from predominantly large panels to predominantly small panels. Factors driving this change may include resource availability, costs, and the clinical utility of targeting important pathogenic viruses instead of testing \"for everything.\"</p>","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Changes in use of multiplex respiratory panel testing during the COVID-19 pandemic.\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan D Baghdadi, Chih Chun Tung, J Kristie Johnson, Daniel J Morgan, Anthony D Harris\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/ice.2024.163\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>COVID-19 changed the epidemiology of community-acquired respiratory viruses. We explored patterns of respiratory viral testing to understand which tests are most clinically useful in the postpandemic era.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective observational study of discharge data from PINC-AI (formerly Premier), a large administrative database. Use of multiplex nucleic acid amplification respiratory panels in acute care, including small (2-5 targets), medium (6-11), and large panels (>11), were compared between the early pandemic (03/2020-10/2020), late pandemic (11/2020-4/2021), and prepandemic respiratory season (11/2019 - 02/2020) using ANOVA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A median of 160.5 facilities contributed testing data per quarter (IQR 155.5-169.5). Prepandemic, facilities averaged 103 respiratory panels monthly (sd 138), including 79 large (sd 126), 7 medium (sd 31), and 16 small panels (sd 73). Relative to prepandemic, utilization decreased during the early pandemic (62 panels monthly/facility; sd 112) but returned to the prepandemic baseline by the late pandemic (107 panels monthly/facility; sd 211). Relative to prepandemic, late pandemic testing involved more small panel use (58 monthly/facility, sd 156) and less large panel use (47 monthly/facility, sd 116). Comparisons among periods demonstrated significant differences in overall testing (<i>P</i> < 0.0001), large panel use (<i>P</i> < 0.0001), and small panel use (<i>P</i> < 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Postpandemic, clinical use of respiratory panel testing shifted from predominantly large panels to predominantly small panels. Factors driving this change may include resource availability, costs, and the clinical utility of targeting important pathogenic viruses instead of testing \\\"for everything.\\\"</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13663,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2024.163\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2024.163","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:COVID-19 改变了社区获得性呼吸道病毒的流行病学:COVID-19 改变了社区获得性呼吸道病毒的流行病学。我们探讨了呼吸道病毒检测的模式,以了解在流行后的时代哪些检测对临床最有用:我们对大型行政数据库 PINC-AI(原 Premier)的出院数据进行了回顾性观察研究。使用方差分析比较了大流行早期(2020 年 3 月至 2020 年 10 月)、大流行晚期(2020 年 11 月至 2021 年 4 月)和大流行前呼吸道季节(2019 年 11 月至 2020 年 2 月)在急诊护理中使用的多重核酸扩增呼吸道检测试剂盒,包括小型试剂盒(2-5 个目标)、中型试剂盒(6-11 个目标)和大型试剂盒(>11 个目标):每季度提供检测数据的机构中位数为 160.5 家(IQR 155.5-169.5)。流行前,医疗机构平均每月提供 103 个呼吸道样本(sd 138),其中包括 79 个大型样本(sd 126)、7 个中型样本(sd 31)和 16 个小型样本(sd 73)。与大流行前相比,大流行初期的使用率有所下降(每月 62 台/机构;sd 112),但到大流行后期又恢复到大流行前的基线(每月 107 台/机构;sd 211)。与大流行前相比,大流行后期的检测涉及更多的小面板使用(每月 58 个面板/机构,sd 156)和更少的大面板使用(每月 47 个面板/机构,sd 116)。不同时期之间的比较显示,总体检测(P < 0.0001)、大样本使用(P < 0.0001)和小样本使用(P < 0.0001)存在显著差异:结论:大流行后,临床使用的呼吸道全套检测方法从主要使用大样本转变为主要使用小样本。推动这一变化的因素可能包括资源可用性、成本以及针对重要致病病毒而非 "全面 "检测的临床实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Changes in use of multiplex respiratory panel testing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: COVID-19 changed the epidemiology of community-acquired respiratory viruses. We explored patterns of respiratory viral testing to understand which tests are most clinically useful in the postpandemic era.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study of discharge data from PINC-AI (formerly Premier), a large administrative database. Use of multiplex nucleic acid amplification respiratory panels in acute care, including small (2-5 targets), medium (6-11), and large panels (>11), were compared between the early pandemic (03/2020-10/2020), late pandemic (11/2020-4/2021), and prepandemic respiratory season (11/2019 - 02/2020) using ANOVA.

Results: A median of 160.5 facilities contributed testing data per quarter (IQR 155.5-169.5). Prepandemic, facilities averaged 103 respiratory panels monthly (sd 138), including 79 large (sd 126), 7 medium (sd 31), and 16 small panels (sd 73). Relative to prepandemic, utilization decreased during the early pandemic (62 panels monthly/facility; sd 112) but returned to the prepandemic baseline by the late pandemic (107 panels monthly/facility; sd 211). Relative to prepandemic, late pandemic testing involved more small panel use (58 monthly/facility, sd 156) and less large panel use (47 monthly/facility, sd 116). Comparisons among periods demonstrated significant differences in overall testing (P < 0.0001), large panel use (P < 0.0001), and small panel use (P < 0.0001).

Conclusions: Postpandemic, clinical use of respiratory panel testing shifted from predominantly large panels to predominantly small panels. Factors driving this change may include resource availability, costs, and the clinical utility of targeting important pathogenic viruses instead of testing "for everything."

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
289
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology provides original, peer-reviewed scientific articles for anyone involved with an infection control or epidemiology program in a hospital or healthcare facility. Written by infection control practitioners and epidemiologists and guided by an editorial board composed of the nation''s leaders in the field, ICHE provides a critical forum for this vital information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信