Alarming signs of serious infections in febrile children: Studies in primary care and hospital emergency care

__Abstract__ Children constitute a substantial part of the workload of physicians in primary care and hospital emergency care. In the Netherlands, about 70% of the 3.9 million inhabitants less than 20 years of age had one or more contacts with their general practitioner (GP) in 2011. Primary out-ofhours care is annually visited by approximately 600,000 children younger than 14 years of age and hospital emergency departments (EDs) by nearly 400,000 children in this age group. Fever is one of the most common reasons for children to consult a physician. The incidence of fever as a reason for contacting primary care is approximately 430 per 1,000 patients/year under the age of 5 years. The overall incidence rate of the diagnosis of fever (without apparent source) in primary care is 19.2 per 1,000 patients/year, with the highest rate for children less than one year (100 per 1,000 patients/year) and the lowest rate for children aged 10 to 17 years (2.7 per 1,000 patients/year). At the ED, fever is also one of the main presenting problems and accounts for about 10% to 30% of all visits by children. Most acute febrile illnesses are caused by self-limiting viral infections, which do not require antibiotic treatment, diagnostic procedures, or hospitalization. However, a minority of febrile children develop a serious infection, such as meningitis, sepsis, pneumonia or urinary tract infection, for which timely diagnosis and targeted therapy are necessary to prevent harm. In primary care, the annual incidence of serious infections is about 1%, with a peak incidence rate among the youngest children (0 to 4 years: 21.1 per 1,000 patients/year). At the hospital ED about 15% to 20% of febrile children are diagnosed with a serious infection. Serious infections are an important cause of morbidity and mortality, especially in young children. Infections accounted for about 15% to 20% of all childhood deaths by natural cause in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom

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

Biallelic ADAM22 pathogenic variants cause progressive encephalopathy and infantile-onset refractory epilepsy

Pathogenic variants in A Disintegrin And Metalloproteinase (ADAM) 22, the postsynaptic cell membrane receptor for the glycoprotein leucine-rich repeat glioma-inactivated protein 1 (LGI1), have been recently associated with recessive developmental and epileptic encephalopathy. However, so far, only two affected individuals have been described and many features of this disorder are unknown. We refine the phenotype and report 19 additional individuals harboring compound heterozygous or homozygous inactivating ADAM22 variants, of whom 18 had clinical data available. Additionally, we provide follow-up data from two previously reported cases. All affected individuals exhibited infantile-onset, treatment-resistant epilepsy. Additional clinical features included moderate to profound global developmental delay/intellectual disability (20/20), hypotonia (12/20), delayed motor development (19/20). Brain MRI findings included cerebral atrophy (13/20), supported by post-mortem histological examination in patient-derived brain tissue, cerebellar vermis atrophy (5/20), and callosal hypoplasia (4/20). Functional studies in transfected cell lines confirmed the deleteriousness of all identified variants and indicated at least three distinct pathological mechanisms: defective cell membrane expression (1), impaired LGI1-binding (2), and/or impaired interaction with the postsynaptic density protein PSD-95 (3). We reveal novel clinical and molecular hallmarks of ADAM22 deficiency and provide knowledge that might inform clinical management and early diagnostics

Biallelic ADAM22 pathogenic variants cause progressive encephalopathy and infantile-onset refractory epilepsy

Pathogenic variants in A Disintegrin And Metalloproteinase (ADAM) 22, the postsynaptic cell membrane receptor for the glycoprotein leucine-rich repeat glioma-inactivated protein 1 (LGI1), have been recently associated with recessive developmental and epileptic encephalopathy. However, so far, only two affected individuals have been described and many features of this disorder are unknown. We refine the phenotype and report 19 additional individuals harbouring compound heterozygous or homozygous inactivating ADAM22 variants, of whom 18 had clinical data available. Additionally, we provide follow-up data from two previously reported cases. All affected individuals exhibited infantile-onset, treatment-resistant epilepsy. Additional clinical features included moderate to profound global developmental delay/intellectual disability (20/20), hypotonia (12/20) and delayed motor development (19/20). Brain MRI findings included cerebral atrophy (13/20), supported by post-mortem histological examination in patient-derived brain tissue, cerebellar vermis atrophy (5/20), and callosal hypoplasia (4/20). Functional studies in transfected cell lines confirmed the deleteriousness of all identified variants and indicated at least three distinct pathological mechanisms: (i) defective cell membrane expression; (ii) impaired LGI1-binding; and/or (iii) impaired interaction with the postsynaptic density protein PSD-95. We reveal novel clinical and molecular hallmarks of ADAM22 deficiency and provide knowledge that might inform clinical management and early diagnostics. Van der Knoop et al. describe the clinical features of 21 individuals with biallelic pathogenic variants in ADAM22 and confirm the deleteriousness of the variants with functional studies. Clinical hallmarks of this rare disorder comprise progressive encephalopathy and infantile-onset refractory epilepsy.Peer reviewe

Correction to: Putting genome-wide sequencing in neonates into perspective

The original version of this Article contained an error in the spelling of the author Pleuntje J. van der Sluijs, which was incorrectly given as Eline (P. J.) van der Sluijs. This has now been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article

Alarm signs and antibiotic prescription in febrile children in primary care:an observational cohort study

<p>Background</p><p>Although fever in children is often self-limiting, antibiotics are frequently prescribed for febrile illnesses. GPs may consider treating serious infections by prescribing antibiotics.</p><p>Aim</p><p>To examine whether alarm signs and/or symptoms for serious infections are related to antibiotic prescription in febrile children in primary care.</p><p>Design and setting</p><p>Observational cohort study involving five GP out-of-hours services.</p><p>Method</p><p>Clinical information was registered and manually recoded. Children (</p><p>Results</p><p>Of the 8676 included patients (median age 2.4 years), antibiotics were prescribed in 3167 contacts (36.5%). Patient characteristics and alarm signs and/or symptoms positively related to antibiotic prescription were: increasing age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.03; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 1.02 to 1.05), temperature measured by GP (OR = 1.72; 95% CI = 1.59 to 1.86), ill appearance (OR = 3.93; 95% CI = 2.85 to 5.42), being inconsolable (OR = 2.27; 95% CI = 1.58 to 3.22), shortness of breath (OR = 2.58; 95% CI = 1.88 to 3.56), duration of fever (OR = 1.31; 95% CI = 1.26 to 1.35). Negative associations were found for neurological signs (OR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.27 to 0.76), signs of urinary tract infection (OR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.49 to 0.82), and vomiting and diarrhoea (OR = 0.65; 95% CI = 0.57 to 0.74). These variables explained 19% of the antibiotic prescriptions.</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>Antibiotics are often prescribed for febrile children. These data suggest that treatment of a supposed serious bacterial infection is a consideration of GPs. However, the relatively low explained variation indicates that other considerations are also involved.</p>

Translation of clinical prediction rules for febrile children to primary care practice: an observational cohort study

Background Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) to identify children with serious infections lack validation in low-prevalence populations, which hampers their implementation in primary care practice. Aim To evaluate the diagnostic value of published CPRs for febrile children in primary care. Design and setting Observational cohort study among febrile children (<16 years) who consulted five GP cooperatives (GPCs) in the Netherlands. Method Alarm signs of serious infection and clinical management were extracted from routine clinical practice data and manually recoded with a structured electronic data-entry program. Eight CPRs were selected from literature. CPR-variables were matched with alarm signs and CPRs were applied to the GPC-population. 'Referral to emergency department (ED)' was used as a proxy outcome measure for 'serious infection'. CPR performance was assessed by calibration analyses, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the ROC-curve (ROC-area). Results A total of 9794 GPC-contacts were eligible, 54% male, median age 2.3 years (interquartile range 1.0-4.6 years) and 8.1% referred to ED. Frequencies of CPR-variables varied from 0.5% (cyanosis, drowsy) to 25% (temperature = 40 degrees C). Alarm signs frequently included in CPRs were 'ill appearance', 'inconsolable', and 'abnormal circulatory or respiratory signs'. The height of the CPR's predicted risks generally corresponded with being (or not being) referred to the ED in practice. However, calibration-slopes indicated that three CPRs underestimated the risk of serious infection in the GPC-population. Sensitivities ranged from 42% to 54%, specificities from 68% to 89%. ROC-areas ranged from 0.52 to 0.81, with best performance of CPRs for children aged Conclusion Published CPRs performed moderately well in the primary out-of-hours care population. Advice is given on how to improve translation of CPRs to primary care practice

Use of alarm features in referral of febrile children to the emergency department:an observational study

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic value of alarm features of serious infections in low prevalence settings is unclear. AIM: To explore to what extent alarm features play a role in referral to the emergency department (ED) by GPs who face a febrile child during out-of-hours care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Observational study using semi-structured, routine clinical practice data of febrile children (<16 years) presenting to GP out-of-hours care. METHOD: Logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the association between alarm features of serious infections (selected from two guidelines and one systematic review) and referral to the ED. Adherence to the guideline was explored by a 2×2 contingency table. RESULTS: In total 794 (8.1%) of 9794 eligible patients were referred to the ED. Alarm signs most strongly associated with referral were ‘age <1 month’, ‘decreased consciousness’, ‘meningeal irritation’, and ‘signs of dehydration’. Nineteen percent of 3424 children with a positive referral indication according to the guideline were referred to the ED. The majority of those not referred had only one or two alarm features present. A negative referral indication was adhered to for the majority of children. Still, in 20% of referred children, alarm features were absent. CONCLUSION: In contrast to guidance, GPs working in primary out-of-hours care seem more conservative in referring febrile children to the ED, especially if only one or two alarm features of serious infection are present. In addition, in 20% of referred children, alarm features were absent, which suggests that other factors may be important in decisions about referral of febrile children to the hospital ED

Presence of alarming signs and symptoms.

<p>*Assumption: when not mentioned in the record, it is not present.</p>†<p>Percentage of N registered.</p