Diagnostic properties of C-reactive protein for detecting pneumonia in children

SummaryBackgroundThe diagnostic value of C-reactive protein (CRP) level for pneumonia in children is unknown. As a first step in the assessment of the value of CRP, a diagnostic study was performed in children at an emergency department (ED).MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, data were retrospectively collected from children presenting with suspected pneumonia at the ED of Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein in The Netherlands between January 2007 and January 2012. Diagnostic outcome was pneumonia yes/no according to independent radiologist. (Un)adjusted association between CRP level and pneumonia and diagnostic value of CRP were calculated.ResultsOf 687 presenting children, 286 underwent both CRP measurement and chest radiography. 148 had pneumonia (52%). The proportion of pneumonia increased with CRP level. Negative predictive values declined, but positive predictive values increased with higher CRP thresholds. Univariable odds ratio for the association between CRP level and pneumonia was 1.2 (95% CI 1.11–1.21) per 10 mg/L increase. After adjustment for baseline characteristics CRP level remained associated with pneumonia.ConclusionsCRP level has independent diagnostic value for pneumonia in children presenting at the ED with suspected pneumonia, but low levels do not exclude pneumonia in this setting. These results prompt evaluation of CRP in primary care children with LRTI

The impact of penicillin allergy labels on antibiotic and health care use in primary care : a retrospective cohort study

Background: Suspected penicillin allergy (Pen-A) is often not verified by diagnostic testing. In third line penicillin allergy labels were associated with prescription of broad spectrum antibiotics, hospital stay duration and readmission. Objective: Assess the impact of Pen-A labels on antibiotic and health care use in primary care. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in primary care in the Utrecht area, the Netherlands. All patients registered with a penicillin allergy on 31 December 2013 were selected from the General Practitioner Network database. Each patient with a Pen-A label was matched for age, gender, follow-up period with three patients without Pen-A label. Risk (OR) of receiving a reserve and second choice antibiotic, number and type of antibiotics prescribed during follow-up and number of GP contacts were compared between the two cohorts. Results: Of 196,440 patients, 1254 patients (0.6%) with a Pen-A label were identified and matched with 3756 patients without Pen-A label. Pen-A labels resulted in higher risk of receiving ≥1 antibiotic prescription per year (OR 2.56, 95% CI 2.05-3.20), ≥1 s choice antibiotic prescription per year (OR 2.21 95% CI 1.11-4.40), and ≥4 GP contacts per year (OR 1.71 95% CI 1.46-2.00). The chance of receiving tetracyclins (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.29-3.89), macrolides/lincosamides/streptogamins (OR 8.69, 95% CI 4.26-17.73) and quinolones (OR 2.59, 95% CI 1.22-5.48) was higher in Pen-A patients. Conclusions: In primary health care Pen-A labels are associated with increased antibiotic use, including second choice antibiotics, and more health care use

The impact of penicillin allergy labels on antibiotic and health care use in primary care : a retrospective cohort study

Background: Suspected penicillin allergy (Pen-A) is often not verified by diagnostic testing. In third line penicillin allergy labels were associated with prescription of broad spectrum antibiotics, hospital stay duration and readmission. Objective: Assess the impact of Pen-A labels on antibiotic and health care use in primary care. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in primary care in the Utrecht area, the Netherlands. All patients registered with a penicillin allergy on 31 December 2013 were selected from the General Practitioner Network database. Each patient with a Pen-A label was matched for age, gender, follow-up period with three patients without Pen-A label. Risk (OR) of receiving a reserve and second choice antibiotic, number and type of antibiotics prescribed during follow-up and number of GP contacts were compared between the two cohorts. Results: Of 196,440 patients, 1254 patients (0.6%) with a Pen-A label were identified and matched with 3756 patients without Pen-A label. Pen-A labels resulted in higher risk of receiving ≥1 antibiotic prescription per year (OR 2.56, 95% CI 2.05-3.20), ≥1 s choice antibiotic prescription per year (OR 2.21 95% CI 1.11-4.40), and ≥4 GP contacts per year (OR 1.71 95% CI 1.46-2.00). The chance of receiving tetracyclins (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.29-3.89), macrolides/lincosamides/streptogamins (OR 8.69, 95% CI 4.26-17.73) and quinolones (OR 2.59, 95% CI 1.22-5.48) was higher in Pen-A patients. Conclusions: In primary health care Pen-A labels are associated with increased antibiotic use, including second choice antibiotics, and more health care use

Impetigo incidence and treatment : a retrospective study of Dutch routine primary care data

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of recently published data on impetigo presentation incidence and treatment practices in the routine Western European primary care setting. OBJECTIVES: To investigate impetigo incidence, treatments and recurrence in primary care in the Netherlands. METHODS: A retrospective, observational study. Electronic records of patients treated for impetigo in 2015 at 29 general practices in Utrecht and surrounds were reviewed. An episode of impetigo was defined as one or more patient-doctor contacts within 8 weeks of the index consultation. Within an episode, patient demographics and prescribing patterns were analysed including number of treatments, and the category and sequence of individual medicines. RESULTS: A total of 1761 impetigo episodes were managed, with an incidence rate of 13.6 per 1000 person years. Impetigo peaked in summer. Most patients, the majority children, experienced a single episode (93%), and 25% had eczema as comorbidity. Topical antibiotics (primarily fusidic acid) were the most prescribed initial treatments (85%), followed by oral antibiotics (14%). Topical antibiotics were progressively used less over subsequent treatments, while there was an inverse increase in oral antibiotic use. Topical fusidic acid as the most common first line treatment seemed satisfactory as only 12% of initial treatments with this drug received further therapy. Repeat treatments generally occurred within 7 days. CONCLUSION: This study of impetigo prescribing patterns in primary care highlighted that Dutch general practitioners were generally adherent to national treatment guidelines. Topical treatment, and if needed systemic small-spectrum antibiotic treatment, appeared satisfactory; these findings aid in antimicrobial stewardship

Effects of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccination of adults on lower respiratory tract infections and antibiotic use in primary care: secondary analysis of a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled study

Objectives: The efficacy of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) in adults to prevent community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) not requiring hospitalization is unknown. We determined the effect of PCV13 on CAP, LRTI and antibiotic use in the primary care setting. Methods: Community-dwelling immunocompetent adults over 65 years of age were randomized to PCV13 or placebo as part of the double-blind Community-Acquired Pneumonia immunization Trial in Adults (CAPiTA). CAP and LRTI episodes and antibiotic prescription data were extracted from general practitioner information systems of 40 426 individuals. Vaccine efficacy (VE) of PCV13 was determined using Poisson regression with robust standard errors, comparing CAP and non-CAP LRTI episodes, LRTI-specific and total antibiotic prescriptions. Results: In all, 20 195 participants received PCV13 and 20 231 received placebo. A total of 1564 and 1659 CAP episodes occurred in the PCV13 and placebo group, respectively; VE 5.5% (95% CI –2.6% to 13.0%). Non-CAP LRTI episodes occurred 7535 and 7817 times in the PCV13 and placebo groups, respectively; VE 3.4% (95% CI –2.0% to 8.5%). A total of 8835 and 9245 LRTI-related antibiotic courses were prescribed in the PCV13 and placebo arms, respectively; VE 4.2% (95% CI –1.0% to 9.1%). Antibiotic courses for any indication were prescribed 43 386 and 43 309 times, respectively; VE –0.4% (–4.9% to 3.9%). Conclusions: PCV13 vaccination in the elderly is unlikely to cause a relevant reduction in the incidence of CAP, LRTI, LRTI-related antibiotic use or total antibiotic use in primary care

Comparison between treatment effects in a randomised controlled trial and an observational study using propensity scores in primary care

Background  Although randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered 'gold standard' evidence, they are not always feasible or appropriate, and may represent a select population. Observational studies provide a useful alternative to enhance applicability, but results can be biased due to confounding.  Aim  To explore the utility of propensity scores for causal inference in an observational study. Design and setting Comparison of the effect of amoxicillin on key outcomes in an international RCT and observational study of lower respiratory tract infections.  Method  Propensity scores were calculated and applied as probability weights in the analyses. The adjusted results were compared with the effects reported in the RCT.  Results  Groups were well balanced in the RCT but significantly imbalanced in the observational study, with evidence of confounding by indication: patients receiving antibiotics tended to be older and more unwell at baseline consultation. In the trial duration of symptoms (hazard ratio 1.06, 95% CI = 0.96 to 1.18) and symptom severity (-0.07, 95% CI = -0.15 to 0.007) did not differ between groups. Weighting by propensity score in the observational study resulted in very similar estimates of effect: duration of symptoms (hazard ratio 1.06, 95% CI = 0.80 to 1.40) and difference for symptom severity (-0.07, 95% CI = -0.34 to 0.20).  Conclusion  The observational study, after conditioning on propensity score, echoed the trial results. Provided that detailed information is available on potential sources of confounding, effects of interventions can probably be assessed reasonably well in observational datasets, allowing them to be more directly compared with the results of RCTs

Amoxicillin for acute lower respiratory tract infection in primary care: subgroup analysis of potential high-risk groups

Background: Antibiotics are of limited overall clinical benefit for uncomplicated lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) but there is uncertainty about their effectiveness for patients with features associated with higher levels of antibiotic prescribing.Aim: To estimate the benefits and harms of antibiotics for acute LRTI among those producing coloured sputum, smokers, those with fever or prior comorbidities, and longer duration of prior illness.Design and setting: Secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial of antibiotic placebo for acute LRTI in primary care.Method: Two thousand and sixty-one adults with acute LRTI, where pneumonia was not suspected clinically, were given amoxicillin or matching placebo. The duration of symptoms, rated moderately bad or worse (primary outcome), symptom severity on days 2–4 (0–6 scale), and the development of new or worsening symptoms were analysed in pre-specified subgroups of interest. Evidence of differential treatment effectiveness was assessed in prespecified subgroups by interaction terms.Results: No subgroups were identified that were significantly more likely to benefit from antibiotics in terms of symptom duration or the development of new or worsening symptoms. Those with a history of significant comorbidities experienced a significantly greater reduction in symptom severity between days 2 and 4 (interaction term ?0.28, P = 0.003; estimated effect of antibiotics among those with a past history ?0.28 [95% confidence interval = ?0.44 to ?0.11], P = 0.001), equivalent to three people in 10 rating symptoms as a slight rather than a moderately bad problem. For subgroups not specified in advance antibiotics provided a modest reduction in symptom severity for non-smokers and for those with short prior illness duration (<7 days), and a modest reduction in symptom duration for those with short prior illness duration.Conclusion: There is no clear evidence of clinically meaningful benefit from antibiotics in the studied high-risk groups of patients presenting in general practice with uncomplicated LRTIs where prescribing is highest. Any possible benefit must be balanced against the side-effects and longer-term effects on antibiotic resistance