首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Emergency Medicine International >Management of Fever in Postpneumococcal Vaccine Era: Comparison of Management Practices by Pediatric Emergency Medicine and General Emergency Medicine Physicians
【2h】

Management of Fever in Postpneumococcal Vaccine Era: Comparison of Management Practices by Pediatric Emergency Medicine and General Emergency Medicine Physicians

机译:肺炎球菌疫苗后时代的发烧管理:儿科急诊医学和普通急诊医学医师管理实践的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background. The primary objective of this study was to compare management practices of general emergency physicians (GEMPs) and pediatric emergency medicine physicians (PEMPs) for well-appearing young febrile children. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed the charts of well-appearing febrile children aged 3–36 months who presented to a large urban children's hospital (PED), staffed by PEMPs, or a large urban general emergency department (GED), staffed by GEMPs. Demographics, immunization status, laboratory tests ordered, antibiotic usage, and final diagnoses were collected. Results. 224 cases from the PED and 237 cases from the GED were reviewed. Children seen by PEMPs had significantly less CXRs (23 (10.3%) versus 51 (21.5%), P = 0.001) and more rapid viral testing done (102 (45%) versus 40 (17%), P < 0.0001). A diagnosis of a viral infection was more common in the PED, while a diagnosis of bacterial infection (including otitis media) was more common in the GED. More GED patients were prescribed antibiotics (41% versus 27%, P = 0.002), while more PED patients were treated with oseltamivir (6.7% versus 0.4%, P < 0.001). Conclusions. Our findings identify important differences in the care of the young, well-appearing febrile child by PEMPs and GEMPs and highlight the need for standardization of care.
机译:背景。这项研究的主要目的是比较外科医生的表现良好的一般急诊医师(GEMPs)和儿科急诊医学医师(PEMPs)的管理实践。方法。我们回顾性地回顾了3至36个月内表现良好的发热儿童的图表,这些儿童出现在由PEMP配备的大型城市儿童医院(PED)或由GEMP配备的大型城市普通急诊科(GED)。收集了人口统计学,免疫状况,下令进行的实验室检查,抗生素的使用以及最终诊断。结果。审查了PED的224例和GED的237例。 PEMP所见儿童的CXR显着减少(23(10.3%)比51(21.5%),P = 0.001),并且完成的病毒检测速度更快(102(45%)对40(17%),P <0.0001)。在PED中,病毒感染的诊断更为常见,而在GED中,细菌感染(包括中耳炎)的诊断更为常见。接受处方抗生素治疗的GED患者更多(41%比27%,P = 0.002),而更多的PED患者接受了奥司他韦治疗(6.7%vs 0.4%,P <0.001)。结论。我们的发现确定了PEMP和GEMP在照顾年轻,好运的发热儿童方面的重要区别,并强调了标准化护理的必要性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号