Impact of acute otitis media clinical practice guidelines on antibiotic and analgesic prescriptions: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines focusing on judicious use of antibiotics for childhood acute otitis media (AOM) have been introduced in many countries around the world. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the effects of these guidelines on the prescription of antibiotics and analgesics for children with AOM. METHODS: Systematic searches of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library from inception to 6 June 2017 using broad search terms. Studies specifically aimed at evaluating the effects of introduction of national AOM practice guidelines on type of antibiotic and/or analgesic prescriptions were included, irrespective of design, setting or language. The Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool was used to assess risk of bias. RESULTS: Of 411 unique records retrieved, seven studies conducted in six different countries (France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, UK and USA (twice)) compared data before and after guideline introduction. All studies had an observational design, using longitudinal data of children aged under 15 years (n=200-4.6 million) from either routine care, insurance databases or electronic surveys. Risk of bias of all studies was judged serious to critical.Of the five studies reporting on antibiotic prescription rates, three showed a decline of 5%-12% up to 3 years after guideline introduction and two found no or negligible effect. In one US study, the initial 9% decline decreased to 5% after 4-6 years. The recommended first choice antibiotic was prescribed more frequently (9%-58% increase) after guideline introduction in four out of five studies reporting on this outcome. Analgesic prescription rates for AOM were reported in one US study and increased from 14% to 24% after guideline introduction. CONCLUSION: Based upon what is published, the effects of introduction of national clinical practice guidelines on antibiotic and analgesic prescribing for children with AOM seem modest at the most. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42016050976

Antibiotic Treatment for First Episode of Acute Otitis Media Is Not Associated with Future Recurrences

OBJECTIVES: Antibiotic treatment of acute otitis media (AOM) has been suggested to increase the risk of future AOM episodes by causing unfavorable shifts in microbial flora. Because current evidence on this topic is inconclusive and long-term follow-up data are scarce, we wanted to estimate the effect of antibiotic treatment for a first AOM episode occurring during infancy on AOM recurrences and AOM-related health care utilization later in life. METHODS: We obtained demographic information and risk factors from data of the Wheezing Illnesses Study Leidsche Rijn, a prospective birth cohort study in which all healthy newborns born in Leidsche Rijn (between 2001 and 2012), The Netherlands, were enrolled. These data were linked to children’s primary care electronic health records up to the age of four. Children with at least one family physician-diagnosed AOM episode before the age of two were included in analyses. The exposure of interest was the prescription of oral antibiotics (yes vs no) for a child’s first AOM episode before the age of two years. RESULTS: 848 children were included in analyses and 512 (60%) children were prescribed antibiotics for their first AOM episode. Antibiotic treatment was not associated with an increased risk of total AOM recurrences (adjusted rate ratio: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.78–1.13), recurrent AOM (≥3 episodes in 6 months or ≥4 in one year; adjusted risk ratio: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.57–1.11), or with increased AOM-related health care utilization during children’s first four years of life. CONCLUSIONS: Oral antibiotic treatment of a first AOM episode occurring during infancy does not affect the number of AOM recurrences and AOM-related health care utilization later in life. This information can be used when weighing the pros and cons of various AOM treatment options

Impact of Repeated Influenza Immunization on Respiratory Illness in Children With Preexisting Medical Conditions

PURPOSE Annual influenza immunization in medical risk groups is recommended in many countries. Recent evidence suggests that repeated inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) immunization throughout childhood may impair long-term immunity against influenza. We assessed whether prior immunization altered the effect of IIV in children with preexisting medical conditions on primary care–diagnosed respiratory illness (RI) episodes during the influenza season. METHODS Electronic records of IIV-immunized children who met the criteria for annual IIV immunization according to Dutch guidelines were extracted from a primary care database from 2004 to 2015. For each year, we collected information on IIV immunization status, primary care–attended RI episodes (including influenza-like illness, acute RI, and asthma exacerbation), and potential confounders. Generalized estimating equations were used to model the association between prior IIV and occurrence of at least one RI episode during the influenza season, with “current year immunized but without IIV history” as reference group. RESULTS A total of 4,183 children (follow-up duration: 11,493 child-years) were IIV immunized at least once. Adjusted estimates showed lower odds for RI in current year–immunized children with prior IIV compared with those without (odds ratio [OR] = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47-0.78 for “current year immunized and one IIV in previous 2 years”; OR = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.68-1.07 for “current year immunized and ≥2 IIVs in previous 3 years, including prior year”). CONCLUSION Repeated IIV immunization in children with preexisting medical conditions has no negative impact on, and may even increase, long-term protection against RI episodes diagnosed during the influenza season in primary care

Experiences and needs of persons living with a household member infected with SARS-CoV-2: A mixed method study.

BACKGROUND: Households are important sites for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and preventive measures are recommended. This study aimed to 1) investigate the impact of living with a person infected with SARS-CoV-2; 2) understand how household members implemented infection control recommendations in their home; and 3) identify the information and support needs of household members. METHODS: For this observational mixed-methods study, households with a person with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were recruited via drive-through testing sites of Municipal Health Services, healthcare worker screening or hospital emergency visits in the University Medical Centre Utrecht, the Netherlands and via primary care physicians, hospital emergency visits or preoperative screening in the University Hospital of Antwerp, Belgium. We recorded household characteristics, including characteristics of all household members, together with their views on prevention measures. In a subset of households one adult household member was asked to participate in an interview investigating their views on preventive measures. Survey data were analysed using descriptive statistics and interview data by rapid framework analysis. A triangulation protocol was used to integrate findings. RESULTS: Thirty-four households (120 household members) were included in the quantitative survey. Twenty-two households were invited to be interviewed, of which 18 completed an interview (response 81.8%). Survey data showed that almost all households implemented some preventive measures, the use of face masks being least frequently reported. Measures taken depended on what was physically possible, the perceived severity of illness of the index patient and to what extent household members were willing to limit social interaction. Respondents did not believe in the effectiveness of wearing face masks within the house, and from the interviews this was explained by media coverage of face masks, impracticality and the stigma associated with wearing masks. Interviewees reported that quarantine had a high emotional burden and wished to have more information about the exact duration of quarantine, their own COVID-19 status, symptoms and when to seek medical help. CONCLUSION: People were willing to implement prevention measures, however actual adherence depended on perceived severity of illness and the perceived risk of becoming infected. Homes are social environments and recommendations for infection prevention should account for this context. Incorporating our findings into policy making could provide households with more relevant and actionable advice

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 within households: a remote prospective cohort study in European countries.

Household transmission studies are useful to quantify SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics. We conducted a remote prospective household study to quantify transmission, and the effects of subject characteristics, household characteristics, and implemented infection control measures on transmission. Households with a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 index case were enrolled  85% completed sample collection. 200 secondary SARS-CoV-2 infections were detected, yielding a household SAR of 45.7% (95% CI 39.7-51.7%) and per-person SAR of 32.6% (95%CI: 28.1-37.4%). 126 (63%) secondary cases were detected at enrollment. Mild (aRR = 0.57) and asymptomatic index cases (aRR = 0.29) were less likely to transmit SARS-CoV-2, compared to index cases with an acute respiratory illness (p = 0.03 for trend), and child index cases (< 12 years aRR = 0.60 and 12-18 years aRR = 0.85) compared to adults (p = 0.03 for trend). Infection control interventions in households had no significant effect on transmission. We found high SARs with the majority of transmissions occuring early after SARS-CoV-2 introduction into the household. This may explain the futile effect of implemented household measures. Age and symptom status of the index case influence secondary transmission. Remote, digitally-supported study designs with self-sampling are feasible for studying transmission under pandemic restrictions

Impact of early daycare on healthcare resource use related to upper respiratory tract infections during childhood: prospective WHISTLER cohort study

Background: Daycare attendance is an established risk factor for upper respiratory tract infections (URTI) and acute otitis media (AOM). Whether this results in higher use of healthcare resources during childhood remains unknown. We aim to assess the effect of first year daycare attendance on the timing and use of healthcare resources for URTI and AOM episodes during early childhood. Methods: In the Wheezing-Illnesses-STudy-LEidsche-Rijn birth cohort, 2,217 children were prospectively followed up to age six years. Children were categorized according to first-year daycare attendance (yes versus no) and age at entry when applicable (age 0 to 2 months, 3 to 5 months and 6 to 12 months). Information on general practitioner (GP) diagnosed URTI and AOM, GP consultations, antibiotic prescriptions and specialist referral was collected from medical records. Daycare attendance was recorded by monthly questionnaires during the first year of life. Results: First-year daycare attendees and non-attendees had similar total six-year rates of GP-diagnosed URTI and AOM episodes (59/100 child-years, 95% confidence interval 57 to 61 versus 56/100 child-years, 53 to 59). Daycare attendees had more GP-diagnosed URTI and AOM episodes before the age of one year and fewer beyond the age of four years than non-attendees (P interaction <0.001). Daycare attendees had higher total six-year rates for GP consultation (adjusted rate ratio 1.15, 1.00 to 1.31) and higher risk for specialist referrals (hazard ratio: 1.43, 1.01 to 2.03). The number of antibiotic prescriptions in the first six years of life was only significantly increased among children who entered daycare between six to twelve months of age (rate ratio 1.32, 1.04 to 1.67). This subgroup of child-care attendees also had the highest overall URTI and AOM incidence rates, GP consultation rates and risk for specialist referral. Conclusions: Children who enter daycare in the first year of life, have URTI and AOM at an earlier age, leading to higher use of healthcare resources compared to non-attendees, especially when entering daycare between six to twelve months. These findings emphasize the need for improved prevention strategies in daycare facilities to lower infection rates at the early ages