Objective• To determine the rate of hospital re-admission for sepsis after transperineal (TP) biopsy using both local data and worldwide literature, as there is growing interest in TP biopsy as an alternative to transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy for patients undergoing repeat prostate biopsy. Patients and Methods• Pooled prospective databases on TP biopsy from multiple centres in Melbourne were queried for rates of re-admission for infection.• A literature review of PubMed and Embase was also conducted using the search terms: 'prostate biopsy, fever, infection, sepsis, septicaemia and complications' . Results• In all, 245 TP biopsies were performed (111 at Alfred Health, 92 at Epworth Healthcare, 38 at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, and four at other institutions).• The rate of hospital re-admission for infection was zero.• The literature review showed that the rate of sepsis after TRUS biopsy appears to be rising with increasing rates of multi-resistant bacteria found in rectal flora, and is as high as 5%.• However, the rate of sepsis from published series of TP biopsy approached zero. Conclusions• Both local and international data suggest a negligible rate of sepsis with TP biopsy.• This compares to a concerning rise in the rate of sepsis after TRUS biopsy due to the increasing prevalence of multi-resistant bacteria in rectal flora.• Although TRUS biopsy is convenient, cheap and quick to perform, we think that TP biopsy should now be offered as an option, not only to patients undergoing repeat prostate biopsy, but to all patients in whom a prostate biopsy is indicated.

This case series confirms a high number of complications in pregnant women due to pandemic H1N1/09. Many of these women had comorbidities, although almost 50% of the women in this case series who required hospitalization did not have an additional risk factor other than being pregnant.

More research is required, by all medical disciplines, on various aspects of urinary tract infection.

BackgroundLong waiting times are associated with public community outpatient health services. This trial aimed to determine if a new model of care based on evidence-based strategies that improved patient flow in two small pilot trials could be used to reduce waiting time across a variety of services. The key principle of the Specific Timely Appointments for Triage (STAT) model is that patients are booked directly into protected assessment appointments and triage is combined with initial management as an alternative to a waiting list and triage system.MethodsA stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted between October 2015 and March 2017, involving 3116 patients at eight sites across a major Australian metropolitan health network.ResultsThe intervention reduced waiting time to first appointment by 33.8% (IRR = 0.663, 95% CI 0.516 to 0.852, P = 0.001). Median waiting time decreased from a median of 42 days (IQR 19 to 86) in the control period to a median of 24 days (IQR 13 to 48) in the intervention period. A substantial reduction in variability was also noted. The model did not impact on most secondary outcomes, including time to second appointment, likelihood of discharge by 12 weeks and number of appointments provided, but was associated with a small increase in the rate of missed appointments.ConclusionsBroad-scale implementation of a model of access and triage that combined triage with initial management and actively managed the relationship between supply and demand achieved substantial reductions in waiting time without adversely impacting on other aspects of care. The reductions in waiting time are likely to have been driven, primarily, by substantial reductions for those patients previously considered low priority.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12615001016527 registration date: 29/09/2015.

The aim of the present study was to gain an understanding of the factors associated with unplanned hospital readmission within 28 days of acute care discharge from a major Australian health service. A retrospective study of 20575 acute care discharges from 1 August to 31 December 2015 was conducted using administrative databases. Patient, index admission and readmission characteristics were evaluated for their association with unplanned readmission in ≤28 days. The unplanned readmission rate was 7.4% (n=1528) and 11.1% of readmitted patients were returned within 1 day. The factors associated with increased risk of unplanned readmission in ≤28 days for all patients were age ≥65 years (odds ratio (OR) 1.3), emergency index admission (OR 1.6), Charlson comorbidity index >1 (OR 1.1-1.9), the presence of chronic disease (OR 1.4) or complications (OR 1.8) during the index admission, index admission length of stay (LOS) >2 days (OR 1.4-1.8), hospital admission(s) (OR 1.7-10.86) or emergency department (ED) attendance(s) (OR 1.8-5.2) in the 6 months preceding the index admission and health service site (OR 1.2-1.6). However, the factors associated with increased risk of unplanned readmission ≤28 days changed with each patient group (adult medical, adult surgical, obstetric and paediatric). There were specific patient and index admission characteristics associated with increased risk of unplanned readmission in ≤28 days; however, these characteristics varied between patient groups, highlighting the need for tailored interventions. Unplanned hospital readmissions within 28 days of hospital discharge are considered an indicator of quality and safety of health care. The factors associated with increased risk of unplanned readmission in ≤28 days varied between patient groups, so a 'one size fits all approach' to reducing unplanned readmissions may not be effective. Older adult medical patients had the highest rate of unplanned readmissions and those with Charlson comorbidity index ≥4, an index admission LOS >2 days, left against advice and hospital admission(s) or ED attendance(s) in the 6 months preceding index admission and discharge from larger sites within the health service were at highest risk of unplanned readmission. One in seven discharges resulted in an unplanned readmission in ≤28 days and one in 10 unplanned readmissions occurred within 1 day of discharge. Although some patient and hospital characteristics were associated with increased risk of unplanned readmission in ≤28 days, statistical modelling shows there are other factors affecting the risk of readmission that remain unknown and need further investigation. Future work related to preventing unplanned readmissions in ≤28 days should consider inclusion of health professional, system and social factors in risk assessments.

Administration of empiric antimicrobial therapy is standard practice in the management of neutropenic fever, but there remains considerable debate about the selection of an optimal regimen. In view of emerging evidence regarding efficacy and toxicity differences between empiric treatment regimens, and strong evidence of heterogeneity in clinical practice, the current guidelines were developed to provide Australian clinicians with comprehensive guidance for selecting an appropriate empiric strategy in the setting of neutropenic fever. Beta-lactam monotherapy is presented as the treatment of choice for all clinically stable patients while early treatment with combination antibiotic therapy is considered for patients at higher risk. Due consideration is given to the appropriate use of glycopeptides in this setting. Several clinical caveats, accounting for institution-and patient-specific risk factors, are provided to help guide the judicious use of the agents described. Detailed recommendations are also provided regarding time to first dose, timing of blood cultures, selection of a first-line antibiotic regimen, subsequent modification of antibiotic choice and cessation of therapy.

Background Polygenic scores—which quantify inherited risk by integrating information from many common sites of DNA variation—may enable a tailored approach to clinical medicine. However, alongside considerable enthusiasm, we and others have highlighted a lack of standardized approaches for score disclosure. Here, we review the landscape of polygenic score reporting and describe a generalizable approach for development of a polygenic score disclosure tool for coronary artery disease. Methods We assembled a working group of clinicians, geneticists, data visualization specialists, and software developers. The group reviewed existing polygenic score reports and then designed a two-page mock report for coronary artery disease. We then conducted a qualitative user-experience study with this report using an interview guide focused on comprehension, experience, and attitudes. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed for themes identification to inform report revision. Results Review of nine existing polygenic score reports from commercial and academic groups demonstrated significant heterogeneity, reinforcing the need for additional efforts to study and standardize score disclosure. Using a newly developed mock score report, we conducted interviews with ten adult individuals (50% females, 70% without prior genetic testing experience, age range 20–70 years) recruited via an online platform. We identified three themes from interviews: (1) visual elements, such as color and simple graphics, enable participants to interpret, relate to, and contextualize their polygenic score, (2) word-based descriptions of risk and polygenic scores presented as percentiles were the best recognized and understood, (3) participants had varying levels of interest in understanding complex genomic information and therefore would benefit from additional resources that can adapt to their individual needs in real time. In response to user feedback, colors used for communicating risk were modified to minimize unintended color associations and odds ratios were removed. All 10 participants expressed interest in receiving a polygenic score report based on their personal genomic information. Conclusions Our findings describe a generalizable approach to develop a polygenic score report understandable by potential patients. Although additional studies are needed across a wider spectrum of patient populations, these results are likely to inform ongoing efforts related to polygenic score disclosure within clinical practice.

In a pandemic, many current national stockpiles of PPE and antiviral medications are likely inadequate.