No abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of invasive bacterial infections (IBIs) and adverse events in afebrile infants with acute otitis media (AOM). METHODS: We conducted a 33-site cross-sectional study of afebrile infants ≤90 days of age with AOM seen in emergency departments from 2007 to 2017. Eligible infants were identified using emergency department diagnosis codes and confirmed by chart review. IBIs (bacteremia and meningitis) were determined by the growth of pathogenic bacteria in blood or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) culture. Adverse events were defined as substantial complications resulting from or potentially associated with AOM. We used generalized linear mixed-effects models to identify factors associated with IBI diagnostic testing, controlling for site-level clustering effect. RESULTS: Of 5270 infants screened, 1637 met study criteria. None of the 278 (0%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0%–1.4%) infants with blood cultures had bacteremia; 0 of 102 (0%; 95% CI: 0%–3.6%) with CSF cultures had bacterial meningitis; 2 of 645 (0.3%; 95% CI: 0.1%–1.1%) infants with 30-day follow-up had adverse events, including lymphadenitis (1) and culture-negative sepsis (1). Diagnostic testing for IBI varied across sites and by age; overall, 278 (17.0%) had blood cultures, and 102 (6.2%) had CSF cultures obtained. Compared with infants 0 to 28 days old, older infants were less likely to have blood cultures (P < .001) or CSF cultures (P < .001) obtained. CONCLUSION: Afebrile infants with clinician-diagnosed AOM have a low prevalence of IBIs and adverse events; therefore, outpatient management without diagnostic testing may be reasonable.

Background The assessment and treatment of pediatric patients in the out-of-hospital environment often presents unique difficulties and stress for EMS practitioners. Objective Use a mixed-methods approach to assess the current experience of EMS practitioners caring for critically ill and injured children, and the potential role of a simulation-based curriculum to improve pediatric prehospital skills. Methods Data were obtained from three sources in a single, urban EMS system: a retrospective review of local pediatric EMS encounters over one year; survey data of EMS practitioners’ comfort with pediatric skills using a 7-point Likert scale; and qualitative data from focus groups with EMS practitioners assessing their experiences with pediatric patients and their preferred training modalities. Results 2.1% of pediatric prehospital encounters were considered “critical,” the highest acuity level. A total of 136 of approximately 858 prehospital providers responded to the quantitative survey; 34.4% of all respondents either somewhat disagree (16.4%), disagree (10.2%), or strongly disagree (7.8%) with the statement: “I feel comfortable taking care of a critically ill pediatric patient.” Forty-seven providers participated in focus groups that resulted in twelve major themes under three domains. Specific themes included challenges in medication dosing, communication, and airway management. Participants expressed a desire for more repetition and reinforcement of these skills, and they were receptive to the use of high-fidelity simulation as a training modality. Conclusions Critically ill pediatric prehospital encounters are rare. Over one third of EMS practitioners expressed a low comfort level in managing critically ill children. High-fidelity simulation may be an effective means to improve the comfort and skills of prehospital providers.

The role of the emergency provider lies at the forefront of recognition and treatment of novel and re-emerging infectious diseases in children. Familiarity with disease presentations that might be considered rare, such as vaccine-preventable and non-endemic illnesses, is essential in identifying and controlling outbreaks. As we have seen thus far in the novel coronavirus pandemic, susceptibility, severity, transmission, and disease presentation can all have unique patterns in children. Emergency providers also have the potential to play a public health role by using lessons learned from the phenomena of vaccine hesitancy and refusal.

More than 500 single-room occupancy hotels (SROs), a type of low-cost congregate housing with shared bathrooms and kitchens, are available in San Francisco. SRO residents include essential workers, people with disabilities, and multigenerational immigrant families. In March 2020, with increasing concerns about the potential for rapid transmission of COVID-19 among a population with disproportionate rates of comorbidity, poor access to care, and inability to self-isolate, the San Francisco Department of Public Health formed an SRO outbreak response team to identify and contain COVID-19 clusters in this congregate residential setting. Using address-matching geocoding, the team conducted active surveillance to identify new cases and outbreaks of COVID-19 at SROs. An outbreak was defined as 3 separate households in the SRO with a positive test result for COVID-19. From March 2020 through February 2021, the SRO outbreak response team conducted on-site mass testing of all residents at 52 SROs with outbreaks identified through geocoding. The rate of positive COVID-19 tests was significantly higher at SROs with outbreaks than at SROs without outbreaks (12.7% vs 6.4%; P < .001). From March through May 2020, the rate of COVID-19 cases among SRO residents was higher than among residents of other settings (ie, non–SRO residents), before decreasing and remaining at an equal level to non–SRO residents during later periods of 2020. The annual case fatality rate for SRO residents and non–SRO residents was similar (1.8% vs 1.5%). This approach identified outbreaks in a setting at high risk of COVID-19 and facilitated rapid deployment of resources. The geocoding surveillance approach could be used for other diseases and in any setting for which a list of addresses is available.