BackgroundPneumococcal pneumonia causes significant morbidity and mortality among adults. Given limitations of diagnostic tests for non-bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia, most studies report the incidence of bacteremic or invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), and thus, grossly underestimate the pneumococcal pneumonia burden. We aimed to develop a conceptual and quantitative strategy to estimate the non-bacteremic disease burden among adults with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) using systematic study methods and the availability of a urine antigen assay.Methods and FindingsWe performed a systematic literature review of studies providing information on the relative yield of various diagnostic assays (BinaxNOW® S. pneumoniae urine antigen test (UAT) with blood and/or sputum culture) in diagnosing pneumococcal pneumonia. We estimated the proportion of pneumococcal pneumonia that is bacteremic, the proportion of CAP attributable to pneumococcus, and the additional contribution of the Binax UAT beyond conventional diagnostic techniques, using random effects meta-analytic methods and bootstrapping. We included 35 studies in the analysis, predominantly from developed countries. The estimated proportion of pneumococcal pneumonia that is bacteremic was 24.8% (95% CI: 21.3%, 28.9%). The estimated proportion of CAP attributable to pneumococcus was 27.3% (95% CI: 23.9%, 31.1%). The Binax UAT diagnosed an additional 11.4% (95% CI: 9.6, 13.6%) of CAP beyond conventional techniques. We were limited by the fact that not all patients underwent all diagnostic tests and by the sensitivity and specificity of the diagnostic tests themselves. We address these resulting biases and provide a range of plausible values in order to estimate the burden of pneumococcal pneumonia among adults.ConclusionsEstimating the adult burden of pneumococcal disease from bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia data alone significantly underestimates the true burden of disease in adults. For every case of bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia, we estimate that there are at least 3 additional cases of non-bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia.

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Guidelines, managing patients with food allergy (FA) in the community, intend to provide guidance to reduce the risk of accidental allergic reactions to foods in the community. This document is intended to meet the needs of early-childhood and school settings as well as providers of non-prepackaged food (e.g., restaurants, bakeries, takeaway, deli counters, and fast-food outlets) and targets the audience of individuals with FA, their families, patient organizations, the general public, policymakers, and allergists. Food allergy is the most common trigger of anaphylaxis in the community. Providing children and caregivers with comprehensive information on food allergen avoidance and prompt recognition and management of allergic reactions are of the utmost importance. Provision of adrenaline auto-injector devices and education on how and when to use these are essential components of a comprehensive management plan. Managing patients at risk of anaphylaxis raises many challenges, which are specific to the community. This includes the need to interact with third parties providing food (e.g., school teachers and restaurant staff) to avoid accidental exposure and to help individuals with FA to make safe and appropriate food choices. Education of individuals at risk and their families, their peers, school nurses and teachers as well as restaurant and other food retail staff can reduce the risk of severe/fatal reactions. Increased awareness among policymakers may improve decision-making on legislation at local and national level.

Noroviruses, recognized as the leading global cause of viral gastroenteritis and a major contributor to food-borne illness, present a growing challenge in health care and long-term care facilities. The virus spreads easily and by multiple routes. A visitor to a ward might initiate an outbreak by person-to-person contact, vomiting staff members or patients can disseminate the virus by airborne means, and contaminated surfaces, such as doorknobs and computer keyboards, can sustain an epidemic. In addition, although self-limited in healthy hosts, the virus can cause increased morbidity in more-vulnerable people. The GII.4 strain of the virus now dominates in multiple recent worldwide epidemics as well as in health care and long-term care facilities. Much like the influenza virus, norovirus appears to evolve by antigenic drift and evading the immune system, causing waves of global epidemics. Previous attempts at controlling outbreaks, both in the community and in closed facilities, provide guidance about the vigilance and action required by the health care community to diminish the clinical impact of norovirus infection.

Background: Anaphylaxis, a rare and potentially life-threatening hypersensitivity reaction, can occur after vaccination. Objective: We sought to describe reports of anaphylaxis after vaccination made to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) during 1990-2016. Methods: We identified domestic reports of anaphylaxis within VAERS using a combination of Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activity queries and Preferred Terms. We performed a descriptive analysis, including history of hypersensitivity (anaphylaxis, respiratory allergies, and drug allergies) and vaccines given. We reviewed all serious reports and all nonserious reports with available medical records to determine if they met the Brighton Collaboration case definition for anaphylaxis or received a physician's diagnosis. Results: During the analytic period, VAERS received 467,960 total reports; 828 met the Brighton Collaboration case definition or received a physician's diagnosis of anaphylaxis: 654 (79%) were classified as serious, and 669 (81%) had medical records available. Of 478 reports in children aged less than 19 years, 65% were male; childhood vaccines were most commonly reported. Of 350 reports in persons aged 19 years or greater, 80% were female, and influenza vaccines were most frequently reported. Overall, 41% of reports described persons with no history of hypersensitivity. We identified 8 deaths, 4 among persons with no history of hypersensitivity. Conclusion: Anaphylaxis after vaccination is rare in the United States and can occur among persons with no history of hypersensitivity. Most persons recover fully with treatment, but