Volume 18, Number 9—September 2012
CME ACTIVITY
Evaluation of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Approaches for Suspected Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 Infection, 2009–2010
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).
