Prospective multicenter evaluation of adherence to the Dutch guideline for children aged 0 - 16 years with fever without a source - Febrile Illness in Children (FINCH) study
Author:
Keuning Maya Wietske1, Klarenbeek Nikki N.2, Bout Hidde J.1, Broer Amber3, Draaijer Melvin3, Hol Jeroen4, Hollander Nina5, Merelle Marieke3, Rashid Amara Nassar-Sheikh6, Nusman Charlotte4, Oostenbroek Emma3, Ridderikhof Milan L.7, Roelofs Manouck6, Rossem Ellen van5, Schoor Sophie R.D. van der8, Schouten Sarah M.4, Taselaar Pieter8, Vasse Koen8, Wermeskerken Anne-Marie van5, Zande Julia M.J. van der8, Zuurbier Roy P.2, Bijlsma Merijn W.1, Pajkrt Dasja1, Plötz Frans B.2
Affiliation:
1. University of Amsterdam, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute 2. Tergooi MC 3. Spaarne Ziekenhuis 4. Noordwest Ziekenhuisgroep 5. Flevoziekenhuis 6. Zaans Medical Center 7. Amsterdam University Medical Centers 8. Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
Evaluation of guidelines in actual practice is a crucial step in guideline improvement. Retrospective evaluation of the Dutch guideline for children with fever without an apparent source (FWS) showed 50% adherence in young infants. We prospectively evaluated adherence to the Dutch guideline and its impact on management in current practice.
Methods
Prospective observational multicenter study, including children three days to sixteen years old presented for FWS at one of seven Emergency Departments in participating secondary and tertiary care hospitals in the Netherlands. Adherence to the Dutch FWS guideline, adapted from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline, was evaluated and patterns in non-adherence and the impact of non-adherence on clinical outcomes and resource use were explored.
Results
Adherence to the guideline was 192/370 (52%). Adherence was lowest in patients categorized as high risk for severe infection (72/187, 39%), compared to the low risk group (64/73, 88%). Differences in adherence were significant between risk categories (P < 0.001) but not between age categories. In case of non-adherence, less urinalysis, less bacterial cultures (blood, urine and cerebral spinal fluid) and less empirical antibiotic treatment were performed (P < 0.050). Clinical outcomes were not significantly different between the non-adherence and the adherence group, particularly regarding missed severe infections.
Conclusions
We found a high non-adherence rate of 48%, which did not lead to unfavorable clinical outcomes. This substantiates the need for a critical reevaluation of the FWS guideline and its indications for bacterial cultures, viral testing and antibiotic treatment.
Publisher
Research Square Platform LLC
Reference22 articles.
1. Epidemiology of a pediatric emergency medicine research network: the PECARN Core Data Project;Alpern ER;Pediatric emergency care,2006 2. Clinical prediction model to aid emergency doctors managing febrile children at risk of serious bacterial infections: diagnostic study;Nijman RG;Bmj,2013 3. The cost of diagnostic uncertainty: a prospective economic analysis of febrile children attending an NHS emergency department;Leigh S;BMC medicine,2019 4. Oostenbrink RN, RG; Tuut, MK; Venmans, L. Richtlijn: Koorts in de tweede lijn bij kinderen van 0–16 jaar, Kindergeneeskunde NVK, (december 2013), 208. Available at: https://www.nvk.nl/Portals/0/richtlijnen/koorts/koortsrichtlijn.pdf 2013. 5. Practice Variation in the Evaluation and Disposition of Febrile Infants ≤ 60 Days of Age;Rogers AJ;J Emerg Med,2019
|
|