Food Protein-Induced Enterocolitis Syndrome: Healthcare Utilization and Referral Patterns Among a Pediatric Cohort

BACKGROUND: Food protein–induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) is a non-IgE mediated food allergy characterized by delayed, repetitive vomiting. FPIES has gained attention over the last few years and is becoming better recognized; however, there remains a lag in diagnosis. This study aimed to further explore this lag in diagnosis, as well as referral patterns and healthcare utilization, to determine areas for earlier recognition. METHODS: Data was obtained through retrospective chart reviews of pediatric FPIES patients at two hospital systems in New York. Charts were reviewed for age of symptom onset, age of diagnosis, FPIES episodes and healthcare visits prior to diagnosis, and reason/source of referral to allergy. A cohort of patients with IgE-mediated food allergy was reviewed for comparison. RESULTS: In total, 110 patients with FPIES were identified. The median length to diagnosis was 3 months, compared to 2 months in IgE-mediated food allergy (p < 0.05). Most referrals were from the pediatrician (68%) or gastroenterology (28%), none were from the ED. The most common reason for referral was concern of IgE-mediated allergy (51%), followed by FPIES (35%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates a lag in the diagnosis of FPIES and a lack of recognition of FPIES outside of the allergy community, as only one-third of the patients were considered to have FPIES prior to an allergy evaluation. Patients with profuse, repetitive vomiting 1- 4 hours after food ingestion, especially of common FPIES trigger foods, should be considered for diagnosis of FPIES, as these encounters provide an opportunity for early recognition.

Stakeholders' Perception of the Introduction of Specialized Hospitals for Urologic Diseases: Qualitative Study

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to seek in-depth perspectives of stakeholders on the necessity and specific criteria for designating a specialized hospital for urologic diseases.Methods: Eight participants experts in urology medicine and specialized hospital system were divided into four groups. Following the semi-structured guidelines, an in-depth interview was conducted twice and a focus group discussion was conducted three times. All the interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed.Results: The majority of participants predicted that there would be demand for specialized hospitals for urologic diseases. The criteria of designating a specialized hospital, such as the number of hospital beds and quality of health care, have to be modified in consideration of the specificity of urology. The introduction of a specialized hospital would improve the healthcare delivery system, positively affecting hospitals and patients. Furthermore, government support is essential for the maintenance of specialized hospital systems as urology hospitals experience difficulties in generating profits.Conclusion: This study is expected to be used as base data for introducing and operating a specialized hospital for urologic diseases. In addition, it is expected that the methodology and results of this study would encourage follow-up studies on specialized hospitals and provide guidelines to evaluate the effectiveness of such hospitals in other medical fields.

Practical Considerations in the Administration of Aducanumab for the Neurologist

Aducanumab (Aduhelm®), developed by the biotechnology firm Biogen in Cambridge, Massachusetts, was approved using the less common accelerated approval pathway by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) reserved for treatments that fill a significant unmet need.1 Its approval on June 7, 2021 has been met with an outpouring of opinions from prescribers, insurers, advocacy groups and hospital systems regarding its risk benefit profile.2-4 Originally approved for all forms of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), the FDA updated aducanumab’s labeling on July 8th, 2021 for “treatment in patients with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia stage of disease, the population in which treatment was initiated in clinical trials.5 With six million people nationally in the United States who suffer from AD and an anticipated one third of those who may now fulfill the criteria under the revised labeling, the implications of aducanumab’s approval continue to generate national interest.6

The Impact of Community Generated PPE During the SARS-COV-2 Pandemic in Southeast Alabama and Gulfport Mississippi

Background: The early stages of the SARS-COV-2 pandemic left many hospital systems devoid of personal protective equipment. Community-driven groups manufactured Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) as a form of temporary replacement until supply could increase to frontline healthcare workers. The purpose of this study was to survey hospital systems in Alabama and Mississippi who requested and received PPE to determine recipient opinions concerning community involvement.Methods: A 15-question Qualtrics survey was distributed to hospital systems who requested and received community-generated PPE (CGPPE) from the group known as Alabama Fighting COVID. 275 responses were gathered over a period of 6 months.Results: Survey data showed that most respondents from healthcare and healthcare-associated professions responded that wearing community generated personal protective equipment provided them with the perception of added protection (55.31% of participants selected either “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”), and that it improved their outlook and desire to work during the pandemic (51.77% of participants selected either “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”).Conclusions: Most respondents reported that wearing community generated personal protective equipment not only provided them with the perception of added protection, but that it improved their outlook and desire to work during the pandemic. With these responses in mind, our study raises questions concerning whether local CGPPE distribution could improve well-ness outcomes of healthcare workers (HCWs) not only in relation to decreased viral transmission, but also in favorable psychosocial health assessments. Further implications for research concerning community involvement during future medical crises are indicated, especially with the current rise of the delta variant strain.

A challenging case of tracheal foreign body retrieval following COVID-19 swabbing

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a significant increase in the number of tracheostomised patients in hospitals requiring ventilatory support. These patients require highly specialist care, but overwhelmed hospital systems with stretched human resources potentially leave these patients cared for by undertrained healthcare professionals. We describe a rare complication where a routine COVID-19 swab done incorrectly via a tracheostomy tube, resulted in a snapped-off swab in the trachea. We outline the events and our method of removal using rigid bronchoscopy through the tracheostomy stoma as endo-tracheal bronchoscopy was impossible due to significant sub-glottic stenosis. This case highlights the paramount importance of the unique care needed to safely manage tracheostomies during this ongoing pandemic.

Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers in Southern California: Not Just “Anti” vs. “Pro” Vaccine

In this study, we evaluated the status of and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination of healthcare workers in two major hospital systems (academic and private) in Southern California. Responses were collected via an anonymous and voluntary survey from a total of 2491 participants, including nurses, physicians, other allied health professionals, and administrators. Among the 2491 participants that had been offered the vaccine at the time of the study, 2103 (84%) were vaccinated. The bulk of the participants were middle-aged college-educated White (73%), non-Hispanic women (77%), and nursing was the most represented medical occupation (35%). Political affiliation, education level, and income were shown to be significant factors associated with vaccination status. Our data suggest that the current allocation of healthcare workers into dichotomous groups such as “anti-vaccine vs. pro-vaccine” may be inadequate in accurately tailoring vaccine uptake interventions. We found that healthcare workers that have yet to receive the COVID-19 vaccine likely belong to one of four categories: the misinformed, the undecided, the uninformed, or the unconcerned. This diversity in vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers highlights the importance of targeted intervention to increase vaccine confidence. Regardless of governmental vaccine mandates, addressing the root causes contributing to vaccine hesitancy continues to be of utmost importance.

Impacts of an EMS Hospital Liaison Program on Ambulance Offload Times: A Preliminary Analysis

Introduction: Ambulance patients who are unable to be quickly transferred to an emergency department (ED) bed represent a key contributing factor to ambulance offload delay (AOD). Emergency department crowding and associated AOD are exacerbated by multiple factors, including infectious disease outbreaks such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Initiatives to address AOD present an opportunity to streamline ambulance offload procedures while improving patient outcomes. Study Objective: The goal of this study was to evaluate the initial outcomes and impact of a novel Emergency Medical Service (EMS)-based Hospital Liaison Program (HLP) on ambulance offload times (AOTs). Methods: Ambulance offload times associated with EMS patients transported to a community hospital six months before and after HLP implementation were retrospectively analyzed using proportional significance tests, t-tests, and multiple regression analysis. Results: A proportional increase in incidents in the zero to <30 minutes time category after program implementation (+2.96%; P <.01) and a commensurate decrease in the proportion of incidents in the 30 to <60 minutes category (−2.65%; P <.01) were seen. The fully adjusted regression model showed AOT was 16.31% lower (P <.001) after HLP program implementation, holding all other variables constant. Conclusion: The HLP is an innovative initiative that constitutes a novel pathway for EMS and hospital systems to synergistically enhance ambulance offload procedures. The greatest effect was demonstrated in patients exhibiting potentially life-threatening symptoms, with a reduction of approximately three minutes. While small, this outcome was a statistically significant decrease from the pre-intervention period. Ultimately, the HLP represents an additional strategy to complement existing approaches to mitigate AOD.