Alarming signs and symptoms in febrile children in primary care: An observational cohort study in The Netherlands

__Abstract__ Context: Febrile children in primary care have a low risk for serious infection. Although several alarming signs and symptoms are proposed to have predictive value for serious infections, most are based on research in secondary care. The frequency of alarming signs/symptoms has not been established in primary care; however, in this setting differences in occurrence may influence their predictive value for serious infections. Objective: To determine the frequency of alarming signs/symptoms in febrile children in primary care. Design: Observational cohort study. Clinical information was registered in a semi-structured way and manually recoded. Setting: General practitioners' out-of-hours service. Subjects: Face-to-face patient contacts concerning children (aged ≤16 years) with fever were eligible for inclusion. Main outcome measures: Frequency of 18 alarming signs and symptoms as reported in the literature. Results: A total of 10,476 patient contacts were included. The frequency of alarming signs/symptoms ranged from n = 1 (ABC instability; 40°C as reported by the parents; 12.9%) to 8,647 contacts (parental concern; 82.5%). Conclusion: Although the prevalence of specific alarming signs/symptoms is low in primary care, ≥50% of children have one or more alarming signs/symptoms. There is a need to determine the predictive value of alarming signs/symptoms not only for serious infections in primary care, but as well for increased risk of a complicated course of the illness

Diagnostic test strategies in children at increased risk of inflammatory bowel disease in primary care

Background: In children with symptoms suggestive of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who present in primary care, the optimal test strategy for identifying those who require specialist care is unclear. We evaluated the following three test strategies to determine which was optimal for referring children with suspected IBD to specialist care: 1) alarm symptoms alone, 2) alarm symptoms plus c-reactive protein, and 3) alarm symptoms plus fecal calprotectin. Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted, including children with chronic gastrointestinal symptoms referred to pediatric gastroenterology. Outcome was defined as IBD confirmed by endoscopy, or IBD ruled out by either endoscopy or unremarkable clinical 12 month follow-up with no indication for endoscopy. Test strategy probabilities were generated by logistic regression analyses and compared by area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) and decision curves. Results: We included 90 children, of whom 17 (19%) had IBD (n = 65 from primary care physicians, n = 25 from general pediatricians). Adding fecal calprotectin to alarm symptoms increased the AUC significantly from 0.80 (0.67-0.92) to 0.97 (0.93-1.00), but adding c-reactive protein to alarm symptoms did not increase the AUC significantly (p > 0.05). Decision curves confirmed these patterns, showing that alarm symptoms combined with fecal calprotectin produced the diagnostic test strategy with the highest net benefit at reasonable threshold probabilities. Conclusion: In primary care, when children are identified as being at high risk for IBD, adding fecal calprotectin testing to alarm symptoms was the optimal strategy for improving risk stratification

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system versus endometrial ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding

Contains fulltext : 231173.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access

Prevalence and “red flags” regarding specified causes of back pain in older adults presenting in general practice

Background. In a small proportion of patients experiencing unspecified back pain, a specified underlying pathology is present. Objective. The purposes of this study were: (1) to identify the prevalence of physician specified causes of back pain and (2) to assess associations between “red flags” and vertebral fractures, as diagnosed by the patients’ general practitioner (GP), in older adults with back pain. Methods. The Back Complaints in the Elders (BACE) study is a prospective cohort study. Patients (aged >55 years) with back pain were included when consulting their GP. A questionnaire was administered and a physical examination and heel bone densitometry were performed, and the results determined back pain and patient characteristics, including red flags. Participants received a radiograph, and reports were sent to their GP. The final diagnoses established at 1 year were collected from the GP’s patient registry. Results. Of the 669 participants included, 6% were diagnosed with a serious underlying pathology during the 1-year follow-up. Most of these participants (n=33, 5%) were diagnosed with a vertebral fracture. Multivariable regression analysis showed that age of ≥ 75 years, trauma, osteoporosis, a back pain intensity score of ≥ 7, and thoracic pain were associated with a higher chance of getting the diagnosis of a vertebral fracture. Of these variables, trauma showed the highest positive predictive value for vertebral fracture of 0.25 (95% confidence interval=0.09, 0.41) and a positive likelihood ratio of 6.2 (95% confidence interval=2.8, 13.5). A diagnostic prediction model including the 5 red flags did not increase these values. Limitations. Low prevalence of vertebral fractures could have led to findings by chance. Conclusions. In these older adults with back pain presenting in general practice, 6% were diagnosed with serious pathology, mainly a vertebral fracture (5%). Four red flags were associated with the presence of vertebral fracture