Mary P Fairchok1, Wei-Ju Chen2, John C Arnold3, Christina Schofield4, Patrick J Danaher5, Erin A McDonough6, Martin Ottolini7, Deepika Mor2, Michelande Ridore2, Timothy H Burgess8, Eugene V Millar2. 1. Infectious Disease Clinical Research Program, Department of Preventive Medicine and Biometrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, United States; Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Rockville, MD, United States; Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, WA, United States. Electronic address: mary.p.fairchok.ctr@mail.mil. 2. Infectious Disease Clinical Research Program, Department of Preventive Medicine and Biometrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, United States; Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Rockville, MD, United States. 3. Naval Medical Center, San Diego, CA, United States. 4. Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, WA, United States. 5. San Antonio Military Medical Center, San Antonio, TX, United States. 6. Naval Health Research Center, San Diego, CA, United States. 7. Office of Curriculum, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, United States. 8. Office of Curriculum, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, United States; Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although neuraminidase inhibitors (NI) are the mainstay of treatment for influenza infection, prescribing practice for these agents is not well described. Additionally, benefit is contested. OBJECTIVES: We examined provider prescriptions of NI during the 2009 pandemic and post-pandemic periods. We also evaluated the effectiveness of NI in reducing severity of influenza infection. STUDY DESIGN: Data on NI prescription and severity of influenza infection were compiled in healthy pediatric and adult beneficiaries enrolled in a prospective study of influenza like illness conducted at five military medical centers over five years. Subjects underwent nasal swabs to determine viral etiology of their infection. Demographic, medication and severity data were collected. Subjects with positive influenza were included. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty three subjects were influenza positive [38% [H1N1] pdm09, 38.4% H3N2, and 20.5% B); 23.9% were treated with NI. NI were initiated within 48h in 63% of treated subjects. Although NI use increased over the five years of the study, early use declined. Most measures for severity of illness were not significantly reduced with NI; adults treated within 48h had only a modest reduction in duration and severity of some of their symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: NI use in our population is increasing, but early use is not. NI use resulted in no reduction in complications of illness. Resolution of symptoms and reduction in severity of some symptoms were slightly better in adults who were treated early. These modest benefits do not support routine treatment with NI in otherwise healthy individuals with influenza.
BACKGROUND: Although neuraminidase inhibitors (NI) are the mainstay of treatment for influenza infection, prescribing practice for these agents is not well described. Additionally, benefit is contested. OBJECTIVES: We examined provider prescriptions of NI during the 2009 pandemic and post-pandemic periods. We also evaluated the effectiveness of NI in reducing severity of influenza infection. STUDY DESIGN: Data on NI prescription and severity of influenza infection were compiled in healthy pediatric and adult beneficiaries enrolled in a prospective study of influenza like illness conducted at five military medical centers over five years. Subjects underwent nasal swabs to determine viral etiology of their infection. Demographic, medication and severity data were collected. Subjects with positive influenza were included. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty three subjects were influenza positive [38% [H1N1] pdm09, 38.4% H3N2, and 20.5% B); 23.9% were treated with NI. NI were initiated within 48h in 63% of treated subjects. Although NI use increased over the five years of the study, early use declined. Most measures for severity of illness were not significantly reduced with NI; adults treated within 48h had only a modest reduction in duration and severity of some of their symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: NI use in our population is increasing, but early use is not. NI use resulted in no reduction in complications of illness. Resolution of symptoms and reduction in severity of some symptoms were slightly better in adults who were treated early. These modest benefits do not support routine treatment with NI in otherwise healthy individuals with influenza.
Authors: Barbara Donner; Silvia Bader-Weder; Roman Schwarz; Michael M Peng; James Robert Smith; Viswanathan Niranjan Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Janice K Louie; Samuel Yang; Meileen Acosta; Cynthia Yen; Michael C Samuel; Robert Schechter; Hugo Guevara; Timothy M Uyeki Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2012-07-26 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Tom Jefferson; Mark A Jones; Peter Doshi; Chris B Del Mar; Carl J Heneghan; Rokuro Hama; Matthew J Thompson Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2012-01-18
Authors: Charisma Y Atkins; Anita Patel; Thomas H Taylor; Matthew Biggerstaff; Toby L Merlin; Stephanie M Dulin; Benjamin A Erickson; Rebekah H Borse; Robert Hunkler; Martin I Meltzer Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 6.883
Authors: Noelle M Cocoros; Timothy L Lash; Alfred DeMaria; Michael Klompas Journal: Influenza Other Respir Viruses Date: 2013-08-20 Impact factor: 4.380
Authors: Stella G Muthuri; Puja R Myles; Sudhir Venkatesan; Jo Leonardi-Bee; Jonathan S Nguyen-Van-Tam Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2012-11-29 Impact factor: 5.226