Dagan R, Sofer S, Phillip M, Shachak E
Department of Pediatrics, Soroka University Hospital, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel.
J Pediatr. 1988 Mar;112(3):355-60. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(88)80312-3.
We prospectively examined whether febrile infants younger than 2 months of age who were defined as being at low risk for having bacterial infection could be observed as outpatients without the usual complete evaluation for sepsis and without antibiotic treatment. A total of 237 previously healthy febrile infants were seen at the Pediatric Emergency Room over 17 1/2 months. One hundred forty-eight infants (63%) fulfilled the criteria for being at low risk: no physical findings consisting of soft tissue or skeletal infections, no purulent otitis media, normal urinalysis, less than 25 white blood cells per high-power field on microsopic stool examination, peripheral leukocyte count 5000 to 15,000/mm3 with less than 1500 band cells/mm3. One infant appeared too ill to be included, and had sepsis and meningitis. None of the 148 infants at low risk had bacterial infections, versus 21 of 88 (24%) of those at high risk (P less than 0.0001); eight of 88 (9%) had bacteremia. Of the 148 infants classified as being at low risk for having bacterial infection, 62 (42%) were discharged to home, and 72 (49%) were initially observed for less than or equal to 24 hours and then discharged. Seventeen infants (11%) were hospitalized: in six, low risk became high risk; six had indications other than fever; and five because the study physicians could not be found. The 137 nontreated infants were closely observed as outpatients. The duration of fever was less than 48 hours in 42%, and less than 96 hours in 91%. All infants were observed for at least 10 days after the last examination. The fever resolved spontaneously in all infants but two, with otitis media, who were treated as outpatients. Our data suggest that management of fever in selected young infants as outpatients is feasible if meticulous follow-up is provided.
我们前瞻性地研究了2个月以下被定义为细菌感染低风险的发热婴儿是否可以作为门诊患者进行观察,而无需进行常规的败血症全面评估和抗生素治疗。在17个半月的时间里,共有237名之前健康的发热婴儿在儿科急诊室就诊。148名婴儿(63%)符合低风险标准:无软组织或骨骼感染的体征,无化脓性中耳炎,尿常规正常,显微镜下粪便检查每高倍视野白细胞少于25个,外周白细胞计数5000至15000/mm³,杆状核细胞少于1500/mm³。有一名婴儿病情过重无法纳入研究,患有败血症和脑膜炎。148名低风险婴儿中无一例发生细菌感染,而88名高风险婴儿中有21例(24%)发生细菌感染(P<0.0001);88名中有8例(9%)发生菌血症。在148名被分类为细菌感染低风险的婴儿中,62名(42%)出院回家,72名(49%)最初观察时间小于或等于24小时后出院。17名婴儿(11%)住院治疗:6名低风险变为高风险;6名有发热以外的指征;5名是因为找不到研究医生。137名未接受治疗的婴儿作为门诊患者进行密切观察。42%的婴儿发热持续时间少于48小时,91%少于96小时。所有婴儿在最后一次检查后至少观察10天。除两名患有中耳炎的婴儿作为门诊患者接受治疗外,所有婴儿的发热均自行消退。我们的数据表明,如果提供细致的随访,对部分选定的幼儿发热作为门诊患者进行管理是可行的。