TY - JOUR
T1 - Development and validation of a prediction model for invasive bacterial infections in febrile children at European Emergency Departments
T2 - MOFICHE, a prospective observational study
AU - Hagedoorn, Nienke N.
AU - Borensztajn, Dorine
AU - Nijman, Ruud Gerard
AU - Nieboer, Daan
AU - Herberg, Jethro Adam
AU - Balode, Anda
AU - Von Both, Ulrich
AU - Carrol, Enitan
AU - Eleftheriou, Irini
AU - Emonts, Marieke
AU - Van Der Flier, Michiel
AU - De Groot, Ronald
AU - Kohlmaier, Benno
AU - Lim, Emma
AU - MacOnochie, Ian
AU - Martinón-Torres, Federico
AU - Pokorn, Marko
AU - Strle, Franc
AU - Tsolia, Maria
AU - Zavadska, Dace
AU - Zenz, Werner
AU - Levin, Michael
AU - Vermont, Clementien
AU - Moll, Henriette A.
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 668303. The research was supported by the National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres at Imperial College London, Newcastle Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Newcastle University.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Archives of Disease in Childhood
PY - 2021/7/1
Y1 - 2021/7/1
N2 - Objectives: To 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. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: 12 emergency departments (EDs) in 8 European countries. Patients: Febrile children aged 0-18 years. Main outcome measures: IBI, 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). Results: Of 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%). Conclusions: The 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.
AB - Objectives: To 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. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: 12 emergency departments (EDs) in 8 European countries. Patients: Febrile children aged 0-18 years. Main outcome measures: IBI, 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). Results: Of 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%). Conclusions: The 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.
KW - epidemiology
KW - therapeutics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85096436459&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/archdischild-2020-319794
DO - 10.1136/archdischild-2020-319794
M3 - Article
C2 - 33208397
AN - SCOPUS:85096436459
SN - 0003-9888
VL - 106
SP - 641
EP - 647
JO - Archives of Disease in Childhood
JF - Archives of Disease in Childhood
IS - 7
ER -