Update on the Coordinated Efforts of Looking After the Health Care Needs of Children and Young People Fleeing the Conflict Zone of Ukraine Presenting to European Emergency Departments-A Joint Statement of the European Society for Emergency Paediatrics and the European Academy of Paediatrics.

This joint statement by the European Society for Emergency Paediatrics and European Academy of Paediatrics aims to highlight recommendations for dealing with refugee children and young people fleeing the Ukrainian war when presenting to emergency departments (EDs) across Europe. Children and young people might present, sometimes unaccompanied, with either ongoing complex health needs or illnesses, mental health issues, and injuries related to the war itself and the flight from it. Obstacles to providing urgent and emergency care include lack of clinical guidelines, language barriers, and lack of insight in previous medical history. Children with complex health needs are at high risk for complications and their continued access to specialist healthcare should be prioritized in resettlements programs. Ukraine has one of the lowest vaccination coverages in the Europe, and outbreaks of cholera, measles, diphtheria, poliomyelitis, and COVID-19 should be anticipated. In Ukraine, rates of multidrug resistant tuberculosis are high, making screening for this important. Urgent and emergency care facilities should also prepare for dealing with children with war-related injuries and mental health issues. Ukrainian refugee children and young people should be included in local educational systems and social activities at the earliest opportunity.

[Impact of a clinical decision model for febrile children at risk for serious bacterial infections at the emergency department: a randomized controlled trial]. / Ernstige infecties bij kinderen met koorts op de SEH: bruikbaarheid en implementatie van een klinisch beslismodel.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of a clinical decision model for febrile children at risk for serious bacterial infections (SBI) attending the emergency department (ED). METHOD: Randomized controlled trial with 439 febrile children, aged 1 month-16 years, attending the pediatric ED of a Dutch university hospital during 2010-2012. Febrile children were randomly assigned to the intervention (clinical decision model; n=219) or the control group (usual care; n=220). The clinical decision model included clinical symptoms, vital signs, and C-reactive protein and provided high/low-risks for "pneumonia" and "other SBI". Nurses were guided by the intervention to initiate additional tests for high-risk children. Primary patient outcome was defined as correct SBI diagnoses. Secondary process outcomes were defined as length of stay; diagnostic tests; antibiotic treatment; hospital admission; revisits and medical costs. RESULTS: The decision model had good discriminative ability for both pneumonia (n=33; AUC 0.83 (95% CI 0.75-0.90)) and other SBI (n=22; AUC 0.81 (95% CI 0.72-0.90)). Compliance to model recommendations was high (86%). No differences in correct SBI determination was observed. Application of the clinical decision model resulted in less full-blood-counts (14% vs. 22%, p-value<0.05) and more urine-dipstick testing (71% vs. 61%, p-value<0.05). CONCLUSION: In contrast to our expectations no substantial impact on patient outcome was perceived. The clinical decision model preserved however, good discriminatory ability to detect SBI, achieved good compliance among nurses and resulted in a more standardized diagnostic approach towards febrile children, with less full blood-counts and more rightfully urine-dipstick testing. Trial registration: Trialregister.nl: NTR2381.

Impact of a clinical decision model for febrile children at risk for serious bacterial infections at the emergency department: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of a clinical decision model for febrile children at risk for serious bacterial infections (SBI) attending the emergency department (ED). METHODS: Randomized controlled trial with 439 febrile children, aged 1 month-16 years, attending the pediatric ED of a Dutch university hospital during 2010-2012. Febrile children were randomly assigned to the intervention (clinical decision model; n = 219) or the control group (usual care; n = 220). The clinical decision model included clinical symptoms, vital signs, and C-reactive protein and provided high/low-risks for "pneumonia" and "other SBI". Nurses were guided by the intervention to initiate additional tests for high-risk children. The clinical decision model was evaluated by 1) area-under-the-receiver-operating-characteristic-curve (AUC) to indicate discriminative ability and 2) feasibility, to measure nurses' compliance to model recommendations. Primary patient outcome was defined as correct SBI diagnoses. Secondary process outcomes were defined as length of stay; diagnostic tests; antibiotic treatment; hospital admission; revisits and medical costs. RESULTS: The decision model had good discriminative ability for both pneumonia (n = 33; AUC 0.83 (95% CI 0.75-0.90)) and other SBI (n = 22; AUC 0.81 (95% CI 0.72-0.90)). Compliance to model recommendations was high (86%). No differences in correct SBI determination were observed. Application of the clinical decision model resulted in less full-blood-counts (14% vs. 22%, p-value < 0.05) and more urine-dipstick testing (71% vs. 61%, p-value < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to our expectations no substantial impact on patient outcome was perceived. The clinical decision model preserved, however, good discriminatory ability to detect SBI, achieved good compliance among nurses and resulted in a more standardized diagnostic approach towards febrile children, with less full blood-counts and more rightfully urine-dipstick testing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register NTR2381.