Background The prescription rate of antibiotics is high for febrile children visiting the emergency department (ED), contributing to antimicrobial resistance. Large studies at European EDs covering diversity in antibiotic and broad-spectrum prescriptions in all febrile children are lacking. A better understanding of variability in antibiotic prescriptions in EDs and its relation with viral or

No abstract

Since its first identification in Scotland, over 1000 cases of unexplained pediatric hepatitis in children have been reported worldwide, including 278 cases in the UK 1 . Here we report investigation of 38 cases, 66 age-matched immunocompetent controls and 21 immunocompromised comparator subjects, using a combination of genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic and immunohistochemical methods. We detected high levels of adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV2) DNA in liver, blood, plasma or stool from 27/28 cases. We found low levels of Adenovirus (HAdV) and Human Herpesvirus 6B (HHV-6B), in 23/31 and 16/23 respectively of the cases tested. In contrast, AAV2 was infrequently detected at low titre in blood or liver from control children with HAdV, even when profoundly immunosuppressed.AAV2, HAdV and HHV-6 phylogeny excluded emergence of novel strains in cases. Histological analyses of explanted livers showed enrichment for T-cells and B-lineage cells.Proteomic comparison of liver tissue from cases and healthy controls, identified increased expression of HLA class 2, immunoglobulin variable regions and complement proteins.HAdV and AAV2 proteins were not detected in the livers. Instead, we identified AAV2 DNA complexes reflecting both HAdV and HHV-6B-mediated replication. We hypothesize that high levels of abnormal AAV2 replication products aided by HAdV and in severe cases HHV-6B, may have triggered immune-mediated hepatic disease in genetically and immunologically predisposed children.

ObjectivesTo develop and cross-validate a multivariable clinical prediction model to identify invasive bacterial infections (IBI) and to identify patient groups who might benefit from new biomarkers.DesignProspective observational study.Setting12 emergency departments (EDs) in 8 European countries.PatientsFebrile children aged 0–18 years.Main outcome measuresIBI, defined as bacteraemia, meningitis and bone/joint infection. We derived and cross-validated a model for IBI using variables from the Feverkidstool (clinical symptoms, C reactive protein), neurological signs, non-blanching rash and comorbidity. We assessed discrimination (area under the receiver operating curve) and diagnostic performance at different risk thresholds for IBI: sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive likelihood ratios (LRs).ResultsOf 16 268 patients, 135 (0.8%) had an IBI. The discriminative ability of the model was 0.84 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.88) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.82) in pooled cross-validations. The model performed well for the rule-out threshold of 0.1% (sensitivity 0.97 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.99), negative LR 0.1 (95% CI 0.0 to 0.2) and for the rule-in threshold of 2.0% (specificity 0.94 (95% CI 0.94 to 0.95), positive LR 8.4 (95% CI 6.9 to 10.0)). The intermediate thresholds of 0.1%–2.0% performed poorly (ranges: sensitivity 0.59–0.93, negative LR 0.14–0.57, specificity 0.52–0.88, positive LR 1.9–4.8) and comprised 9784 patients (60%).ConclusionsThe rule-out threshold of this model has potential to reduce antibiotic treatment while the rule-in threshold could be used to target treatment in febrile children at the ED. In more than half of patients at intermediate risk, sensitive biomarkers could improve identification of IBI and potentially reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions.

ObjectiveTo provide an overview of care in emergency departments (EDs) across Europe in order to interpret observational data and implement interventions regarding the management of febrile children.Design and settingAn electronic questionnaire was sent to the principal investigators of an ongoing study (PERFORM (Personalised Risk assessment in Febrile illness to Optimise Real-life Management), www.perform2020.eu) in 11 European hospitals in eight countries: Austria, Germany, Greece, Latvia, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain and the UK.Outcome measuresThe questionnaire covered indicators in three domains: local ED quality (supervision, guideline availability, paper vs electronic health records), organisation of healthcare (primary care, immunisation), and local factors influencing or reflecting resource use (availability of point-of-care tests, admission rates).ResultsReported admission rates ranged from 4% to 51%. In six settings (Athens, Graz, Ljubljana, Riga, Rotterdam, Santiago de Compostela), the supervising ED physicians were general paediatricians, in two (Liverpool, London) these were paediatric emergency physicians, in two (Nijmegen, Newcastle) supervision could take place by either a general paediatrician or a general emergency physician, and in one (München) this could be either a general paediatrician or a paediatric emergency physician. The supervising physician was present on site in all settings during office hours and in five out of eleven settings during out-of-office hours. Guidelines for fever and sepsis were available in all settings; however, the type of guideline that was used differed. Primary care was available in all settings during office hours and in eight during out-of-office hours. There were differences in routine immunisations as well as in additional immunisations that were offered; immunisation rates varied between and within countries.ConclusionDifferences in local, regional and national aspects of care exist in the management of febrile children across Europe. This variability has to be considered when trying to interpret differences in the use of diagnostic tools, antibiotics and admission rates. Any future implementation of interventions or diagnostic tests will need to be aware of this European diversity.