Guzman‐Cottrill, Judith A.

Abstract Importance Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) hospitalization rates are highest among children <2 years of age. RSV immunization with infant monoclonal antibody or maternal vaccine is recommended to protect all U.S. infants in their first RSV season. For certain high-risk children aged 8−19 months entering their second RSV season, the monoclonal antibody nirsevimab is recommended. Little is known regarding preexisting health conditions as risk factors for RSV-associated respiratory failure in children during their second season. Objectives To describe children admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) for RSV during their second RSV season by preexisting health conditions, and to compare demographic and clinical characteristics across groups. Design, Setting, and Participants Surveillance registry of children 8-<24 months old admitted to the PICU in 30 pediatric hospitals in the 2023-2024/2024-2025 RSV seasons. All children had an RSV-positive respiratory sample and received respiratory support with high flow nasal cannula, noninvasive ventilation, or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Exposure Preexisting health conditions potentially increasing risk of severe RSV disease. Main Outcomes and Measures Patients were classified into four mutually exclusive groups by preexisting health conditions: 1) U.S. nirsevimab eligible criteria, 2) other identified RSV risk conditions (with some evidence of increased risk for severe RSV), 3) other preexisting conditions, and 4) no preexisting conditions. Patient demographic characteristics and level of respiratory support received were compared. Results Among 574 children: 47 (8.2%) had U.S. nirsevimab eligibility criteria, 76 (13.2%) had other RSV risk conditions, 96 (16.7%) had other preexisting conditions, and 355 (61.8%) had none. A higher proportion of children with nirsevimab eligibility factors (40.4%) than those with other identified RSV risk conditions (17.1%) required IMV, which was higher than other (10.4%) or no (5.9%) preexisting health conditions (p trend <0.001). Conclusions and Relevance Approximately 20% of children admitted to the PICU with severe RSV were in the defined groups that met U.S. nirsevimab-eligibility criteria or that had an identified RSV risk condition associated with known risk for severe RSV. A considerable proportion of both groups of children required IMV for respiratory support. These findings may help inform future deliberations regarding U.S. second season nirsevimab-eligibility recommendations. Key Points Question What preexisting health conditions are present in children aged 8–<24 months admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit for severe RSV disease in their second RSV season and how do clinical outcomes differ? Findings Among 574 children, 8% were eligible for nirsevimab in the U.S. and 13% had other preexisting conditions with known risk for severe RSV. Children with preexisting conditions, particularly those eligible for nirsevimab, were more likely to require invasive mechanical ventilation than those without. Meaning These findings may inform future deliberations regarding which children in their second RSV season might benefit from RSV preventive products.

Background and objectives: In June 2022, the mRNA COVID-19 vaccination was recommended for young children. We examined clinical characteristics and factors associated with vaccination status among vaccine-eligible young children hospitalized for acute COVID-19. Methods: We enrolled inpatients 8 months to <5 years of age with acute community-acquired COVID-19 across 28 US pediatric hospitals from September 20, 2022 to May 31, 2023. We assessed demographic and clinical factors, including the highest level of respiratory support, and vaccination status defined as unvaccinated, incomplete, or complete primary series [at least 2 (Moderna) or 3 (Pfizer-BioNTech) mRNA vaccine doses ≥14 days before hospitalization]. Results: Among 597 children, 174 (29.1%) patients were admitted to the intensive care unit and 75 (12.6%) had a life-threatening illness, including 51 (8.5%) requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. Children with underlying respiratory and neurologic/neuromuscular conditions more frequently received higher respiratory support. Only 4.5% of children hospitalized for COVID-19 (n = 27) had completed their primary COVID-19 vaccination series and 7.0% (n = 42) of children initiated but did not complete their primary series. Among 528 unvaccinated children, nearly half (n = 251) were previously healthy, 3 of them required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute COVID-19 and 1 died. Conclusions: Most young children hospitalized for acute COVID-19, including most children admitted to the intensive care unit and with life-threatening illness, had not initiated COVID-19 vaccination despite being eligible. Nearly half of these children had no underlying conditions. Of the small percentage of children who initiated a COVID-19 primary series, most had not completed it before hospitalization.

Abstract Background Since its emergence in late 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to pose a risk to healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients in healthcare settings. Although all clinical interactions likely carry some risk of transmission, human actions, such as coughing, and care activities, such as aerosol-generating procedures, likely have a higher risk of transmission. The rapid emergence and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 continues to create significant challenges in healthcare facilities, particularly with shortages of the personal protective equipment (PPE) used by HCP. Evidence-based recommendations for what PPE to use in conventional, contingency, and crisis standards of care continue to be needed. Where evidence is lacking, the development of specific research questions can help direct funders and investigators. The purpose of the current study was to develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support HCP in their decisions about infection prevention when caring for patients with suspected or known coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel including frontline clinicians, infectious disease specialists, experts in infection control, and guideline methodologists, with representation from the disciplines of public health, medical microbiology, pediatrics, critical care medicine and gastroenterology. The process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and gray literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. Results The IDSA guideline panel agreed on 8 recommendations, including 2 updated recommendations and 1 new recommendation added since the first version of the guideline. Narrative summaries of other interventions undergoing evaluations are also included. Conclusions Using a combination of direct and indirect evidence, the panel was able to provide recommendations for 8 specific questions on the use of PPE by HCP providing care for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. Where evidence was lacking, attempts were made to provide potential avenues for investigation. There remain significant gaps in the understanding of the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2, and PPE recommendations may need to be modified in response to new evidence. These recommendations should serve as a minimum for PPE use in healthcare facilities and do not preclude decisions based on local risk assessments or requirements of local health jurisdictions or other regulatory bodies.

Abstract Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly transmissible virus that can infect healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients in healthcare settings. Specific care activities, in particular, aerosol-generating procedures, may have a higher risk of transmission. The rapid emergence and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 has created significant challenges in healthcare facilities, particularly with severe shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) used to protect HCP. Evidence-based recommendations for what PPE to use in conventional, contingency, and crisis standards of care are needed. Where evidence is lacking, the development of specific research questions can help direct funders and investigators. Objective Our objective was to develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support HCP in their decisions about infection prevention when caring for patients with suspected or known coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included front-line clinicians, infectious diseases specialists, experts in infection control, and guideline methodologists with representation from the disciplines of preventive care, public health, medical microbiology, pediatrics, critical care medicine, and gastroenterology. The process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then, a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and gray literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. Results The IDSA guideline panel agreed on 8 recommendations and provided narrative summaries of other interventions undergoing evaluations. Conclusions Using a combination of direct and indirect evidence, the panel was able to provide recommendations for 8 specific questions on the use of PPE for HCP who provide care for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. Where evidence was lacking, attempts were made to provide potential avenues for investigation. Significant gaps in the understanding of the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 remain, and PPE recommendations may need to be modified in response to new evidence.