1998
DOI: 10.1136/fn.78.2.f92
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diagnostic tests for bacterial infection from birth to 90 days---a systematic review

Abstract: Aim-To determine the clinical value of common diagnostic tests for bacterial infection in early life.Methods-A Medline search (1966-95) was undertaken to identify studies that reported the assessment of a diagnostic "test," predicting the presence or absence of bacterial infection in infants up to 90 days of age. The quality of each selected study was assessed using defined criteria. Data were extracted twice to minimise errors. Conclusions-The methodological quality of studies assessing the accuracy of diagno… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
78
0
2

Year Published

2003
2003
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 113 publications
(82 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
2
78
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…EOBI is usually defined as occurring up to 72 h after birth (2) and is associated with a high morbidity and mortality risk (1). The nonspecific clinical signs as well as the currently established biochemical and hematologic parameters have their diagnostic limitations (3,4) [reviewed in (5,6)]. …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…EOBI is usually defined as occurring up to 72 h after birth (2) and is associated with a high morbidity and mortality risk (1). The nonspecific clinical signs as well as the currently established biochemical and hematologic parameters have their diagnostic limitations (3,4) [reviewed in (5,6)]. …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conversely, low blood culture volumes, which are a major issue in premature neonates, and previous antimicrobial therapy may be responsible for false-negative results. [16][17][18] The test is not only imprecise but also time-consuming. Hence, with respect to both diagnostic and therapeutic strategy, clinicians often must make preliminary decisions based on largely nonspecific signs, especially in very low birth weight neonates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Routine laboratory evaluation including neutrophil indices and C-reactive protein as potential markers of infection in newborn infants has shown limited value in the diagnosis of EOS sepsis. 3,16 Recent interest in the contribution of proinflammatory cytokines and acute phase reactants to diagnose newborn sepsis has also been disappointing. 4,5,17 Available studies to date are inconsistent with regard to sample size, methodology and test availability, which limits the clinician's confidence in applying these tests to practice.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unfortunately, neither these clinical signs 1 nor currently available laboratory tests are reliable in the early detection of neonatal sepsis. [2][3][4][5] The blood culture has been the gold standard for the diagnosis of sepsis; however, technical pitfalls raise questions regarding blood culture reliability. 6,7 A justified concern regarding the ability to recover bacteria from the relatively small blood volumes collected for culture prompts clinicians to treat with antibiotics in spite of a negative blood culture (BC(À)).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%