Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY.
Florida Center for Allergy and Asthma, Miami, FL.
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2022 Aug 1;38(8):358-362. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000002740. Epub 2022 May 4.
INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVE: Most pediatric emergency visits occur in general emergency departments (GED). Our study aims to assess whether medical decision making regarding the management of febrile infants differs in GEDs from pediatric EDs (PED) and deviates from pediatric expert consensus.
We conducted a retrospective chart review on patients younger than 60 days with fever admitted from 13 GEDs versus 1 PED to a children's hospital over a 3-year period. Adherence to consensus guidelines was measured by frequency of performing critical components of initial management, including blood culture, urine culture, attempted lumbar puncture, and antibiotic administration (<29 days old), or complete blood count and/or C-reactive protein, blood culture, and urine culture (29-60 days old). Additional outcomes included lumbar puncture, collecting urine specimens via catheterization, and timing of antibiotics.
A total of 176 patient charts were included. Sixty-four (36%) patients were younger than 29 days, and 112 (64%) were 29 to 60 days old. Eighty-eight (50%) patients were admitted from GEDs.In infants younger than 29 days managed in the GEDs (n = 32), 65.6% (n = 21) of patients underwent all 4 critical items compared with 96.9% (n = 31, P = 0.003) in the PED. In infants 29 to 60 days old managed in GEDs (n = 56), 64.3% (n = 36) patients underwent all 3 critical items compared with 91.1% (n = 51, P < 0.001) in the PED.
This retrospective study suggests that providers managing young infants with fever in 13 GEDs differ significantly from providers in the PED examined and literature consensus. Inconsistent testing and treatment practices may put young infants at risk for undetected bacterial infection.
简介/目的:大多数儿科急诊就诊发生在综合急诊部(GED)。我们的研究旨在评估在管理发热婴儿方面,GED 中的医疗决策是否与儿科急诊部(PED)不同,以及是否偏离儿科专家共识。
我们对在 3 年内从 13 个 GED 和 1 个儿科医院的 PED 收治的 60 天以下发热患儿进行了回顾性病历审查。通过评估初始管理中关键项目的执行频率来衡量对共识指南的遵循程度,这些关键项目包括血液培养、尿液培养、尝试腰椎穿刺和抗生素治疗(<29 天),或全血细胞计数和/或 C 反应蛋白、血液培养和尿液培养(29-60 天)。其他结局包括腰椎穿刺、通过导尿收集尿液标本和抗生素使用时间。
共纳入 176 份病历。64 名(36%)患儿年龄<29 天,112 名(64%)患儿年龄为 29-60 天。88 名(50%)患儿从 GED 入院。在 GED 治疗的<29 天发热婴儿中(n=32),4 项关键项目均完成的患儿比例为 65.6%(n=21),而 PED 中为 96.9%(n=31,P=0.003)。在 GED 治疗的 29-60 天发热婴儿中(n=56),3 项关键项目均完成的患儿比例为 64.3%(n=36),而 PED 中为 91.1%(n=51,P<0.001)。
这项回顾性研究表明,在 13 个 GED 中管理发热婴儿的医护人员与我们研究的 PED 医护人员和文献共识有很大差异。不一致的检查和治疗方法可能使婴儿面临未被发现的细菌感染风险。