To conduct feasibility and cost analysis of portable MRI implementation in a remote setting where MRI access is otherwise unavailable.

Portable MRI (ultra-low field, 0.064T) was installed in Weeneebayko General Hospital, Moose Factory, Ontario. Adult patients, presenting with any indication for neuroimaging, were eligible for study inclusion. Scanning period was from November 14, 2021, to September 6, 2022. Images were sent via a secure PACS network for Neuroradiologist interpretation, available 24/7. Clinical indications, image quality, and report turnaround time were recorded. A cost analysis was conducted from a healthcare system’s perspective in 2022 Canadian dollars, comparing cost of portable MRI implementation to transporting patients to a center with fixed MRI.

Portable MRI was successfully implemented in a remote Canadian location. Twenty-five patients received a portable MRI scan. All studies were of diagnostic quality. No clinically significant pathologies were identified on any of the studies. However, based on clinical presentation and limitations of portable MRI resolution, it is estimated that 11 (44%) of patients would require transfer to a center with fixed MRI for further imaging workup. Cost savings were $854,841 based on 50 patients receiving portable MRI over 1 year. Five-year budget impact analysis showed nearly $8 million dollars saved.

Portable MRI implementation in a remote setting is feasible, with significant cost savings compared to fixed MRI. This study may serve as a model to democratize MRI access, offer timely care and improved triaging in remote areas where conventional MRI is unavailable.

Administration of epinephrine has been associated with worse neurological outcomes for survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The publication of the 2018 PARAMEDIC-2 trial, a randomized and double-blind study of epinephrine in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, provides the strongest evidence to date that epinephrine increases return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) but not neurologically intact survival. This study aims to determine if Emergency Medical Services (EMS) cardiac arrest protocols have changed since the publication of PARAMEDIC-2.

States in the US utilizing mandatory or model state-wide EMS protocols, including Washington DC, were included in this study. The nontraumatic cardiac arrest protocol as of January 1, 2018 was compared to the protocol in effect on January 1, 2021 to determine if there was a change in the administration of epinephrine. Protocols were downloaded from the relevant state EMS website. If a protocol could not be obtained, the state medical director was contacted.

A 2021 state-wide protocol was found for 32/51 (62.7%) states. Data from 2018 were available for 21/51 (41.2%) states. Of the 11 states without data from 2018, all follow Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) guidelines in the 2021 protocol. Five (15.6%) of the states with a state-wide protocol made a change in the cardiac arrest protocols. Maximum cumulative epinephrine dose was limited to 4mg in Maryland and 3mg in Vermont. Rhode Island changed epinephrine in shockable rhythms to be administered after three cycles of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and an anti-arrhythmic. Rhode Island also added an epinephrine infusion as an option. No states removed epinephrine administration from their cardiac arrest protocol. Simple statistical analysis was performed with Microsoft Excel.

Several states have adjusted cardiac arrest protocols since 2018. The most frequent change was limiting the maximum cumulative dosage of epinephrine. One state changed timing of epinephrine dosing depending on the rhythm and also provided an option of an epinephrine infusion in place of bolus dosing. While the sample size is small, these changes may reflect the future direction of prehospital cardiac arrest protocols. Significant limitations apply, including the exclusion of local and regional protocols which are more capable of quickly adjusting to new research. Additionally, this study is only focused on EMS in the United States.

To estimate prior severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among skilled nursing facility (SNF) staff in the state of Georgia and to identify risk factors for seropositivity as of fall 2020.

Baseline survey and seroprevalence of the ongoing longitudinal Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) Prevention in Nursing Homes study.

The study included 14 SNFs in the state of Georgia.

In total, 792 SNF staff employed or contracted with participating SNFs were included in this study. The analysis included 749 participants with SARS-CoV-2 serostatus results who provided age, sex, and complete survey information.

We estimated unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for potential risk factors and SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. We estimated adjusted ORs using a logistic regression model including age, sex, community case rate, SNF resident infection rate, working at other facilities, and job role.

Staff working in high-infection SNFs were twice as likely (unadjusted OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.45–3.00) to be seropositive as those in low-infection SNFs. Certified nursing assistants and nurses were 3 times more likely to be seropositive than administrative, pharmacy, or nonresident care staff: unadjusted OR, 2.93 (95% CI, 1.58–5.78) and unadjusted OR, 3.08 (95% CI, 1.66–6.07). Logistic regression yielded similar adjusted ORs.

Working at high-infection SNFs was a risk factor for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. Even after accounting for resident infections, certified nursing assistants and nurses had a 3-fold higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity than nonclinical staff. This knowledge can guide prioritized implementation of safer ways for caregivers to provide necessary care to SNF residents.

There is an association between anterior cerebral artery vessel asymmetry and anterior communicating artery aneurysm, presumably based on flow dynamics. The purpose of this study is to investigate the potential relationship between aortic arch branching patterns and incidence of intracranial aneurysm.

This study included patients scanned over 1 year at our tertiary care center who underwent high-resolution imaging (computed tomography angiography or digital subtracted angiogram) of the head and neck arteries, aortic arch, and superior mediastinum. Exclusion criteria included patients with suboptimal images. Patient age, gender, aortic arch branching pattern, and the presence, location, and number of aneurysms were documented.

Among the 1082 patients analyzed, 250 (23%) patients had a variant aortic arch branching pattern, 22 (8.8%) of whom had aneurysms. There were 104 patients with 126 aneurysms, with majority of patients with normal aortic arch branching pattern (n = 82, 79%). The most common variant was a common origin of the left common carotid artery and brachiocephalic trunk with or without direct origin of the left vertebral artery. Twenty-two patients with aneurysms had an aberrant aortic arch (21%), compared to 232 patients without an aneurysm (24%). Fischer exact test showed no statistically significant difference between the incidence of aneurysm with different aortic arch variant groups (two-tailed p-value = 0.715).

To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the association between aortic arch branching patterns and incidence of intracranial aneurysm. No significant association was found between aortic arch branching pattern and the incidence of intracranial aneurysm.

To conduct a pilot study implementing combined genomic and epidemiologic surveillance for hospital-acquired multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) to predict transmission between patients and to estimate the local burden of MDRO transmission.

Pilot prospective multicenter surveillance study.

The study was conducted in 8 university hospitals (2,800 beds total) in Melbourne, Australia (population 4.8 million), including 4 acute-care, 1 specialist cancer care, and 3 subacute-care hospitals.

All clinical and screening isolates from hospital inpatients (April 24 to June 18, 2017) were collected for 6 MDROs: vanA VRE, MRSA, ESBL Escherichia coli (ESBL-Ec) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (ESBL-Kp), and carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPa) and Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAb). Isolates were analyzed and reported as routine by hospital laboratories, underwent whole-genome sequencing at the central laboratory, and were analyzed using open-source bioinformatic tools. MDRO burden and transmission were assessed using combined genomic and epidemiologic data.

In total, 408 isolates were collected from 358 patients; 47.5% were screening isolates. ESBL-Ec was most common (52.5%), then MRSA (21.6%), vanA VRE (15.7%), and ESBL-Kp (7.6%). Most MDROs (88.3%) were isolated from patients with recent healthcare exposure.

Combining genomics and epidemiology identified that at least 27.1% of MDROs were likely acquired in a hospital; most of these transmission events would not have been detected without genomics. The highest proportion of transmission occurred with vanA VRE (88.4% of patients).

Genomic and epidemiologic data from multiple institutions can feasibly be combined prospectively, providing substantial insights into the burden and distribution of MDROs, including in-hospital transmission. This analysis enables infection control teams to target interventions more effectively.

Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) requires that all faculty and staff receive the seasonal influenza vaccine annually or receive an approved vaccine exemption, either for a medical or deeply held religious or personal belief. We sought to understand the underlying principles behind these exemption requests and their interaction with a multidisciplinary exemption review process.

All of the personal and religious exemption requests at VUMC for 3 consecutive influenza seasons from 2015 to 2018 were analyzed, categorizing these requests by 1 of 12 standardized employee categories and 1 of 18 unique reasons for vaccine exemption.

Tertiary-care academic medical center.

Healthcare personnel (HCP).

Among the 3 influenza seasons, 1.1%–2.1% of all VUMC HCP requested religious or personal exemption from vaccination. The frequency of religious and personal exemption approval increased annually from 296 of 452 (65.5%) to 196 of 248 (80.2%) to 283 of 323 (87.6%) over the 3 seasons, representing a statistically significant increase each year. Of the 5 most common reasons against vaccination, 4 were explicitly religious in nature; the most common reason was that the “body is a temple or sacred.” Nonclinical staff submitted the most religious and personal exemption requests of any job category, submitting approximately one-third of all requests every year.

These results demonstrate how detailed the personal or religious convictions behind vaccine avoidance can be among HCP and how vaccine avoidance stems from much more than simple misinformation regarding vaccination. The intersection between misinformation and personal or religious beliefs provides a unique opportunity to address HCP opinions toward vaccination in an exemption and appeals process like the one described here.