ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2019
Hospital-acquired influenza in an Australian tertiary Centre 2017: a surveillance based study.
Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Meta-Analysis on Evaluation of Nosocomial Infections Amongst Patients in a Tertiary Care Hospital.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Pooled it
- Prediction of hospital-acquired influenza using machine learning algorithms: a comparative study.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Observational
- Clinical impact of healthcare-associated respiratory syncytial virus in hospitalized adults.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2023Article
- Uptake rates, knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward seasonal influenza vaccination among healthcare workers in Lebanon.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Article
- Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of community-acquired and nosocomial influenza cases and risk factors associated with complications: A four season analysis of all adult patients admitted in a tertiary hospital.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2021Observational
- Description of an influenza outbreak in a French university hospital and risk factors of nosocomial influenza.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2021Observational
- Influenza With and Without Fever: Clinical Predictors and Impact on Outcomes in Patients Requiring Hospitalization.Open forum infectious diseases · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn 2017, Australia experienced its highest levels of influenza virus activity since the 2009 pandemic. This allowed detailed comparison of the characteristics of patients with community and hospital-acquired influenza, and infection control factors that contributed to influenza spread.
methodsA surveillance based study was conducted on hospitalised patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza at the Canberra Hospital during April-October 2017. Differences between the hospital-acquired and community-acquired patient characteristics and outcomes were assessed by univariate analysis. Epidemiologic curves were developed and cluster distribution within the hospital was determined.
resultsTwo hundred and ninety-two patients were included in the study. Twenty-eight (9.6%) acquired influenza in hospital, representing a higher proportion than any of the previous 5 years (range 0.9-5.8%). These patients were more likely to have influenza A (p = 0.021), had higher rates of diabetes (p = 0.015), malignancy (p = 0.046) and chronic liver disease (p = 0.043). Patients acquiring influenza in hospital met clinical criteria for influenza like illness in 25% of cases, compared with 64.4% for community-acquired cases (p < 0.001). Hospital-acquired influenza cases occurred in two distinct clusters. Patients were moved an average of 5 times after diagnosis. Mean length of stay following diagnosis was 13 days compared to 5 days for community-acquired cases (p < 0.001). Of the patients with hospital-acquired influenza, 22 were in shared rooms during their incubation period and 9 were not isolated in single rooms following diagnosis. Treatment was initiated within the recommended 48 h period following symptom onset for 62.5% of hospital-acquired cases compared with 39.8% of community-acquired cases (p = 0.033).
conclusionsOur results show that clinical presentation differed between patients with hospital-acquired influenza compared with those who acquired influenza in the community. Cases occurred in two clusters suggesting intra-hospital transmission rather than random importation from the community, highlighting the importance of infection control measures to limit influenza spread. Patients with hospital-acquired influenza may present without classical features of an influenza-like illness and this should promote earlier diagnostic testing and isolation to limit spread. Movement of patients after diagnosis is likely to facilitate spread within the hospital.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.