METHODS: Qualitative study using six focus groups and 14 semi-structured interviews with doctors responsible for dengue management at a large tertiary hospital in Malaysia.
RESULTS: Dengue was recognised as difficult to diagnose and manage. Wide awareness and use of both WHO and Ministry of Health guidelines was reported, but several limitations noted in their coverage of particular patient groups. However, the phrase 'guidelines' also referred to local algorithms for fluid management, which were less clinically evidence-based. Where Medical Officers were well trained in the appropriate use of evidence-based guidelines, barriers to use included: the potential for 'following the algorithm' to undermine junior clinicians' claims to clinical expertise; inability to recognise the pattern of clinical progress; and lack of clinical experience. Other reported barriers to improved case management were resource constraints, poor referral practices, and insufficient awareness of the need for timely help seeking.
CONCLUSIONS: Awareness of clinical practice guidelines is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for optimal dengue management. In high prevalence settings, all clinical staff would benefit from regular dengue management training which should include diagnosis, practice in monitoring disease progression and the use of clinical practice guidelines in a range of clinical contexts.
METHODS: Analyses were conducted post hoc of this 24-month, phase III, double-blind study, in which RRMS patients were randomized (1:1:1) to once daily oral fingolimod 0.5 mg, 1.25 mg or placebo. The key outcomes were the association between baseline RNFLT and baseline clinical characteristics and clinical/imaging outcomes up to 24 months. Change of RNFLT with fingolimod versus placebo within 24 months and time to retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thinning were evaluated.
RESULTS: Altogether 885 patients were included. At baseline, lower RNFLT was correlated with higher Expanded Disability Status Scale score (r = -1.085, p = 0.018), lower brain volume (r = 0.025, p = 0.006) and deep gray matter volume (r = 0.731, p
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the association between administration of IL-6 antagonists compared with usual care or placebo and 28-day all-cause mortality and other outcomes.
DATA SOURCES: Trials were identified through systematic searches of electronic databases between October 2020 and January 2021. Searches were not restricted by trial status or language. Additional trials were identified through contact with experts.
STUDY SELECTION: Eligible trials randomly assigned patients hospitalized for COVID-19 to a group in whom IL-6 antagonists were administered and to a group in whom neither IL-6 antagonists nor any other immunomodulators except corticosteroids were administered. Among 72 potentially eligible trials, 27 (37.5%) met study selection criteria.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: In this prospective meta-analysis, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Inconsistency among trial results was assessed using the I2 statistic. The primary analysis was an inverse variance-weighted fixed-effects meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) for 28-day all-cause mortality.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 28 days after randomization. There were 9 secondary outcomes including progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death and risk of secondary infection by 28 days.
RESULTS: A total of 10 930 patients (median age, 61 years [range of medians, 52-68 years]; 3560 [33%] were women) participating in 27 trials were included. By 28 days, there were 1407 deaths among 6449 patients randomized to IL-6 antagonists and 1158 deaths among 4481 patients randomized to usual care or placebo (summary OR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.79-0.95]; P = .003 based on a fixed-effects meta-analysis). This corresponds to an absolute mortality risk of 22% for IL-6 antagonists compared with an assumed mortality risk of 25% for usual care or placebo. The corresponding summary ORs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.92; P
METHOD: We performed a nested case-control study using the clinical data and samples collected from the IDAMS-consortium multi-country study. This was a prospective multi-center observational study that enrolled almost 8000 participants presenting with a dengue-like illness to outpatient facilities in 8 countries across Asia and Latin America. Predefined severity definitions of severe and intermediate dengue were used as the primary outcomes. A total of 281 cases with severe/intermediate dengue were compared to 836 uncomplicated dengue patients as controls (ratio 1:3), and also 394 patients with OFI.
RESULTS: In patients with confirmed dengue, median (interquartile range) of CRP level within the first 3 days was 30.2 mg/L (12.4-61.2 mg/L) (uncomplicated dengue, 28.6 (10.5-58.9); severe or intermediate dengue, 34.0 (17.4-71.8)). Higher CRP levels in the first 3 days of illness were associated with a higher risk of severe or intermediate outcome (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.07-1.29), especially in children. Higher CRP levels, exceeding 30 mg/L, also associated with hospitalization (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.14-1.64) and longer fever clearance time (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76-0.93), especially in adults. CRP levels in patients with dengue were higher than patients with potential viral infection but lower than patients with potential bacterial infection, resulting in a quadratic association between dengue diagnosis and CRP, with levels of approximately 30 mg/L associated with the highest risk of having dengue. CRP had a positive correlation with total white cell count and neutrophils and negative correlation with lymphocytes, but did not correlate with liver transaminases, albumin, or platelet nadir.
CONCLUSIONS: In summary, CRP measured in the first 3 days of illness could be a useful biomarker for early dengue risk prediction and may assist differentiating dengue from other febrile illnesses.