Application of Step-by-Step and Paediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) Clinical Decision Aids in the management of young febrile infants in a UK cohort.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Etimbuk Umana, Hannah Norman-Bruce, Clare Mills, Oenone Rodgers, Hannah Mitchell, Lisa McFetridge, Gareth McKeeman, Steve Foster, Michael Barrett, Damian Roland, Mark D Lyttle, Chris Watson, Thomas Waterfield
{"title":"Application of Step-by-Step and Paediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) Clinical Decision Aids in the management of young febrile infants in a UK cohort.","authors":"Etimbuk Umana, Hannah Norman-Bruce, Clare Mills, Oenone Rodgers, Hannah Mitchell, Lisa McFetridge, Gareth McKeeman, Steve Foster, Michael Barrett, Damian Roland, Mark D Lyttle, Chris Watson, Thomas Waterfield","doi":"10.1136/emermed-2025-214876","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Young febrile infants are at high risk of invasive bacterial infections (IBIs). Clinical Decision Aids (CDA) such as the Step-by-Step and Paediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) use Procalcitonin (PCT), limiting their application in settings without PCT access. This study aimed to test the performance of these CDAs in a UK cohort.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a planned analysis of the Febrile Infant Diagnostic Assessment and Outcome Study, a large, prospective multicentre observational study conducted across over 30 sites in the UK. Febrile infants (0-90 days of age) with complete biomarker data, who also underwent PCT testing, were included. Two CDAs, PECARN and Step-by-Step, were applied to the cohort, using their recommended low-risk criteria. The diagnostic performance of the CDAs was analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1527 infants who completed biomarker testing in the main study, 442 had PCT testing and were included, 22 (5%) were diagnosed with an IBI. PECARN and Step-by-Step CDAs demonstrated sensitivities of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.85 to 1.00) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.77 to 1.00) respectively. The PECARN CDA performed with a specificity of 0.14 (95% CI: 0.11 to 0.18) identifying 14% of the participants as low-risk and did not misclassify any infants. The Step-by-Step CDA performed with a specificity of 0.15 (95% CI: 0.12 to 0.19) identifying 14% of the participants as low-risk and misclassifying one participant with IBI as low-risk.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both PECARN and Step-by-Step CDAs demonstrated high sensitivity for detecting IBI in our cohort. While specificity was relatively low, these tools could potentially identify a subset of low-risk infants suitable for less intensive management.</p>","PeriodicalId":11532,"journal":{"name":"Emergency Medicine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emergency Medicine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2025-214876","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Young febrile infants are at high risk of invasive bacterial infections (IBIs). Clinical Decision Aids (CDA) such as the Step-by-Step and Paediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) use Procalcitonin (PCT), limiting their application in settings without PCT access. This study aimed to test the performance of these CDAs in a UK cohort.

Methods: This was a planned analysis of the Febrile Infant Diagnostic Assessment and Outcome Study, a large, prospective multicentre observational study conducted across over 30 sites in the UK. Febrile infants (0-90 days of age) with complete biomarker data, who also underwent PCT testing, were included. Two CDAs, PECARN and Step-by-Step, were applied to the cohort, using their recommended low-risk criteria. The diagnostic performance of the CDAs was analysed.

Results: Of the 1527 infants who completed biomarker testing in the main study, 442 had PCT testing and were included, 22 (5%) were diagnosed with an IBI. PECARN and Step-by-Step CDAs demonstrated sensitivities of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.85 to 1.00) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.77 to 1.00) respectively. The PECARN CDA performed with a specificity of 0.14 (95% CI: 0.11 to 0.18) identifying 14% of the participants as low-risk and did not misclassify any infants. The Step-by-Step CDA performed with a specificity of 0.15 (95% CI: 0.12 to 0.19) identifying 14% of the participants as low-risk and misclassifying one participant with IBI as low-risk.

Conclusion: Both PECARN and Step-by-Step CDAs demonstrated high sensitivity for detecting IBI in our cohort. While specificity was relatively low, these tools could potentially identify a subset of low-risk infants suitable for less intensive management.

应用分步和儿科急诊护理应用研究网络(PECARN)临床决策辅助管理年轻的发热婴儿在英国队列。
背景:年幼的发热婴儿是侵袭性细菌感染(IBIs)的高危人群。临床决策辅助(CDA),如循序渐进和儿科急诊护理应用研究网络(PECARN)使用降钙素原(PCT),限制了它们在无法获得PCT的环境中的应用。本研究旨在测试这些cda在英国队列中的表现。方法:这是对发热婴儿诊断评估和结果研究的计划分析,这是一项在英国30多个地点进行的大型前瞻性多中心观察性研究。具有完整生物标志物数据的发热婴儿(0-90天)也接受了PCT检测。两个cda, PECARN和step,应用于队列,使用他们推荐的低风险标准。分析了cda的诊断性能。结果:在主要研究中完成生物标志物检测的1527名婴儿中,442名进行了PCT检测,其中22名(5%)被诊断为IBI。PECARN和逐步cda的灵敏度分别为1.00 (95% CI: 0.85至1.00)和0.96 (95% CI: 0.77至1.00)。PECARN CDA的特异性为0.14 (95% CI: 0.11至0.18),确定14%的参与者为低风险,没有对任何婴儿进行错误分类。分步CDA的特异性为0.15 (95% CI: 0.12至0.19),确定14%的参与者为低风险,并将一名IBI参与者错误分类为低风险。结论:PECARN和渐进式CDAs在我们的队列中检测IBI都具有很高的灵敏度。虽然特异性相对较低,但这些工具可以潜在地识别出适合低强度管理的低风险婴儿子集。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Emergency Medicine Journal
Emergency Medicine Journal 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
6.50%
发文量
262
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Emergency Medicine Journal is a leading international journal reporting developments and advances in emergency medicine and acute care. It has relevance to all specialties involved in the management of emergencies in the hospital and prehospital environment. Each issue contains editorials, reviews, original research, evidence based reviews, letters and more.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信