Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to page options Skip directly to site content

Volume 18, Number 9—September 2012

CME ACTIVITY - Research

Evaluation of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Approaches for Suspected Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 Infection, 2009–2010

Vini Vijayan, Jennie Jing, and Kenneth M. ZangwillComments to Author 
Author affiliations: Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor–UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, California, USA

Main Article

Table

Patients who underwent testing or treatment for influenza by category, Los Angeles, California, USA, 2009*

Test results and treatment Inpatients† Outpatients‡
Influenza diagnostic test

Patients tested for influenza

Total

177/218 (81) 664/664 (100)

Adults

79/111 (71) 398/398 (100)

Children

98/107 (92) 266/266 (100)

Positive influenza test result

Total

74/177 (42) 96/664 (14)

Adults

18/79 (23) 19/398 (5)

Children

56/98 (57) 77/266 (29)

ILI among patients with a positive test result

Total

44/74 (59) 77/96 (80)

Adults

14/18 (78) 16/19 (84)

Children

30/56 (54) 61/77 (79)
Oseltamivir prescribed

Patients with positive influenza test result

53/74 (72) 22/96 (23)

Patients with coexisting condition

145/155(94) 15/28 (54)

Patients with severe influenza disease

118/129 (91) 0/3 (0)

Median time from illness onset to treatment, d

2 (1–8) 2 (1–5)

*Values are no./total no. (%) unless otherwise indicated. ILI, influenza-like illness.
†For inpatients who received a diagnostic test for influenza, N = 218; for outpatients who received a diagnostic test, N = 664. For inpatients who received oseltamivir, N = 218. In the outpatient setting, study cohort was identified through diagnostic testing only. Use of oseltamivir was evaluated only among those for whom a diagnostic test result was positive (N = 96).

Main Article

TOP