WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: Recommended management of febrile neonates (#28 days) includes blood, urine, and cerebrospinal fluid cultures with hospital admission for antibiotic therapy. No study has reported adherence to standard recommendations in the management of febrile neonates in US pediatric emergency departments. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:There is wide variation in adherence to recommended management of febrile neonates. High rates of serious infections in admitted patients but low return rates for missed infections in discharged patients suggest additional studies needed to understand variation from current recommendations. abstract BACKGROUND: Blood, urine, and cerebrospinal fluid cultures and admission for antibiotics are considered standard management of febrile neonates (0-28 days). We examined variation in adherence to these recommendations across US pediatric emergency departments (PEDs) and incidence of serious infections (SIs) in febrile neonates. METHODS:Cross-sectional study of neonates with a diagnosis of fever evaluated in 36 PEDs in the 2010 Pediatric Health Information System database. We analyzed performance of recommended management (laboratory testing, antibiotic use, admission to hospital), 48-hour return visits to PED, and diagnoses of SI. RESULTS:Of 2253 neonates meeting study criteria, 369 (16.4%) were evaluated and discharged from the PED; 1884 (83.6%) were admitted. Recommended management occurred in 1497 of 2253 (66.4%; 95% confidence interval, 64.5-68.4) febrile neonates. There was more than twofold variation across the 36 PEDs in adherence to recommended management, recommended testing, and recommended treatment of febrile neonates. There was significant variation in testing and treatment between admitted and discharged neonates (P , .001). A total of 269 in 2253 (11.9%) neonates had SI, of whom 223 (82.9%; 95% confidence interval, 77.9-86.9) received recommended management.CONCLUSIONS: There was wide variation across US PEDs in adherence to recommended management of febrile neonates. One in 6 febrile neonates was discharged from the PED; discharged patients were less likely to receive testing or antibiotic therapy than admitted patients. A majority of neonates with SI received recommended evaluation and management. High rates of SI in admitted patients but low return rates for missed infections in discharged patients suggest a need for additional studies to understand variation from the current recommendations.

Introduction of PCV13 for universal infant use was associated with significant reductions in nasopharyngeal carriage of PCV13 serotypes and resistant strains. Carriage of non-PCV13 serotypes increased modestly, particularly serotype 35B. Further investigation is warranted to determine whether nonvaccine pneumococcal serotypes carried in the nasopharynx are associated with significant replacement disease.

WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: Monovalent rotavirus vaccine was introduced for infants in the United States in 2008. Previous US evaluations have not specifically assessed the performance of this vaccine under routine use. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:Using the same methodology and covering the same time period, high effectiveness (∼90%) was demonstrated for the monovalent and the pentavalent rotavirus vaccine series against rotavirus disease resulting in emergency department/inpatient care, in children up to 2 years of age. abstract OBJECTIVE: Previous US evaluations have not assessed monovalent rotavirus vaccine (RV1, a G1P[8] human rotavirus strain) effectiveness, because of its later introduction (2008). Using case-control methodology, we measured the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of the 2-dose RV1 and 3-dose pentavalent vaccine (RV5) series against rotavirus disease resulting in hospital emergency department or inpatient care. METHODS:Children were eligible for enrollment if they presented to 1 of 5 hospitals (3 in Georgia, 2 in Connecticut) with diarrhea of #10 days' duration during January through June 2010 or 2011, and were born after RV1 introduction. Stools were collected; immunization records were obtained from providers and state electronic immunization information system (IIS). Case-subjects (children testing rotavirus antigenpositive) were compared with 2 control groups: children testing rotavirus negative and children selected from IIS. RESULTS:Overall, 165 rotavirus-case subjects and 428 rotavirus-negative controls were enrolled. Using the rotavirus-negative controls, RV1 VE was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI] 80 to 95) and RV5 VE was 92% (CI 75 to 97) among children aged $8 months. The RV1 VE against G2P[4] disease was high (94%, CI 78 to 98), as was that against G1P [8] disease (89%, CI 70 to 96). RV1 effectiveness was sustained among children aged 12 through 23 months (VE 91%; CI 75 to 96). VE point estimates using IIS controls were similar to those using rotavirusnegative controls.CONCLUSIONS: RV1 and RV5 were both highly effective against severe rotavirus disease. RV1 conferred sustained protection during the first 2 years of life and demonstrated high effectiveness against G2P[4] (heterotypic) disease. Pediatrics 2013;132:e25-e33 AUTHORS: