Search

Study objective To describe the current epidemiology of bacteremia in febrile infants 60 days of age and younger in the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN). Methods We conducted a planned secondary analysis of a prospective observational study of febrile infants 60 days of age and younger presenting to any of 26 PECARN emergency departments (2008 to 2013) who had blood cultures obtained. We excluded infants with significant comorbidities or critically ill appearance. The primary outcome was prevalence of bacteremia. Results Of 7,335 screened infants, 4,778 (65.1%) had blood cultures and were enrolled. Of these patients, 84 had bacteremia (1.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4% to 2.2%). The prevalence of bacteremia in infants aged 28 days or younger (47/1,515) was 3.1% (95% CI 2.3% to 4.1%); in infants aged 29 to 60 days (37/3,246), 1.1% (95% CI 0.8% to 1.6%). Prevalence differed by week of age for infants 28 days of age and younger (0 to 7 days: 4/156, 2.6%; 8 to 14 days: 19/356, 5.3%; 15 to 21 days: 15/449, 3.3%; and 22 to 28 days: 9/554, 1.6%). The most common pathogens were Escherichia coli (39.3%; 95% CI 29.5% to 50.0%) and group B streptococcus (23.8%; 95% CI 16.0% to 33.9%). Bacterial meningitis occurred in 19 of 1,515 infants 28 days of age and younger (1.3%; 95% CI 0.8% to 2.0%) and 5 of 3,246 infants aged 29 to 60 days (0.2%; 95% CI 0.1% to 0.4%). Of 84 infants with bacteremia, 36 (42.9%; 95% CI 32.8% to 53.5%) had urinary tract infections ( E coli 83%); 11 (13.1%; 95% CI 7.5% to 21.9%) had bacterial meningitis. Conclusion The prevalence of bacteremia and meningitis among febrile infants 28 days of age and younger is high and exceeds that observed in infants aged 29 to 60 days. E coli and group B streptococcus are the most common bacterial pathogens.

Study objective We derive a prediction rule to identify children at very low risk for intra-abdominal injuries undergoing acute intervention and for whom computed tomography (CT) could be obviated. Methods We prospectively enrolled children with blunt torso trauma in 20 emergency departments. We used binary recursive partitioning to create a prediction rule to identify children at very low risk of intra-abdominal injuries undergoing acute intervention (therapeutic laparotomy, angiographic embolization, blood transfusion for abdominal hemorrhage, or intravenous fluid for ≥2 nights for pancreatic/gastrointestinal injuries). We considered only historical and physical examination variables with acceptable interrater reliability. Results We enrolled 12,044 children with a median age of 11.1 years (interquartile range 5.8, 15.1 years). Of the 761 (6.3%) children with intra-abdominal injuries, 203 (26.7%) received acute interventions. The prediction rule consisted of (in descending order of importance) no evidence of abdominal wall trauma or seat belt sign, Glasgow Coma Scale score greater than 13, no abdominal tenderness, no evidence of thoracic wall trauma, no complaints of abdominal pain, no decreased breath sounds, and no vomiting. The rule had a negative predictive value of 5,028 of 5,034 (99.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 99.7% to 100%), sensitivity of 197 of 203 (97%; 95% CI 94% to 99%), specificity of 5,028 of 11,841 (42.5%; 95% CI 41.6% to 43.4%), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.07 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.15). Conclusion A prediction rule consisting of 7 patient history and physical examination findings, and without laboratory or ultrasonographic information, identifies children with blunt torso trauma who are at very low risk for intra-abdominal injury undergoing acute intervention. These findings require external validation before implementation.

We compare test characteristics of abdominal computed tomography (CT) with and without oral contrast for identifying intra-abdominal injuries.This was a planned subanalysis of a prospective, multicenter study of children (18 years) with blunt torso trauma. Children imaged in the emergency department with abdominal CT using intravenous contrast were eligible. Oral contrast use was based on the participating centers' guidelines and discretions. Clinical courses were followed to identify patients with intra-abdominal injuries. Abdominal CTs were considered positive for intra-abdominal injury if a specific intra-abdominal injury was identified and considered abnormal if any findings suggestive of intra-abdominal injury were identified on the CT.A total of 12,044 patients were enrolled, with 5,276 undergoing abdominal CT with intravenous contrast. Of the 4,987 CTs (95%) with documented use or nonuse of oral contrast, 1,010 (20%) were with and 3,977 (80%) were without oral contrast; 686 patients (14%) had intra-abdominal injuries, including 127 CTs (19%) with and 559 (81%) without oral contrast. The sensitivity in the detection of any intra-abdominal injury in the oral contrast versus no oral contrast groups was sensitivitycontrast 99.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 95.7% to 100.0%) versus sensitivityno contrast 97.7% (95% CI 96.1% to 98.8%), difference 1.5% (95% CI -0.4% to 3.5%). The specificity of the oral contrast versus no oral contrast groups was specificitycontrast 84.7% (95% CI 82.2% to 87.0%) versus specificityno contrast 80.8% (95% CI 79.4% to 82.1%), difference 4.0% (95% CI 1.3% to 6.7%).Oral contrast is still used in a substantial portion of children undergoing abdominal CT after blunt torso trauma. With the exception of a slightly better specificity, test characteristics for detecting intra-abdominal injury were similar between CT with and without oral contrast.