The "Petechiae in children" (PiC) study: evaluating potential clinical decision rules for the management of feverish children with non-blanching rashes, including the role of point of care testing for Procalcitonin & Neisseria meningitidis DNA - a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Children commonly present to Emergency Departments (ED) with a non-blanching rash in the context of a feverish illness. While most have a self-limiting viral illness, this combination of features potentially represents invasive serious bacterial infection, including meningococcal septicaemia. A paucity of definitive diagnostic testing creates diagnostic uncertainty for clinicians; a safe approach mandates children without invasive disease are often admitted and treated with broad-spectrum antibiotics. Conversely, a cohort of children still experience significant mortality and morbidity due to late diagnosis. Current management is based on evidence which predates (i) the introduction of meningococcal B and C vaccines and (ii) availability of point of care testing (POCT) for procalcitonin (PCT) and Neisseria meningitidis DNA. METHODS: This PiC study is a prospective diagnostic accuracy study evaluating (i) rapid POCT for PCT and N. meningitidis DNA and (ii) performance of existing clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for feverish children with non-blanching rash. All children presenting to the ED with a history of fever and non-blanching rash are eligible. Children are managed as normal, with detailed prospective collection of data pertinent to CPGs, and a throat swab and blood used for rapid POCT. The study is running over 2 years and aims to recruit 300 children. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: Report on the diagnostic accuracy of POCT for (i) N. meningitidis DNA and (ii) PCT in the diagnosis of early MD Report on the diagnostic accuracy of POCT for PCT in the diagnosis of Invasive bacterial infection Secondary objectives: Evaluate the performance accuracy of existing CPGs Evaluate cost-effectiveness of available diagnostic testing strategies Explore views of (i) families and (ii) clinicians on research without prior consent using qualitative methodology Report on the aetiology of NBRs in children with a feverish illness DISCUSSION: The PiC study will provide important information for policy makers regarding the value of POCT and on the utility and cost of emerging diagnostic strategies. The study will also identify which elements of existing CPGs may merit inclusion in any future study to derive clinical decision rules for this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03378258 . Retrospectively registered on December 19, 2017.

The impact of financial incentives on the implementation of asthma or diabetes self-management: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Financial incentives are utilised in healthcare systems in a number of countries to improve quality of care delivered to patients by rewarding practices or practitioners for achieving set targets. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the evidence investigating the impact of financial incentives for implementation of supported self-management on quality of care including: organisational process outcomes, individual behavioural outcomes, and health outcomes for individuals with asthma or diabetes; both conditions with an extensive evidence base for self-management. METHODS: We followed Cochrane methodology, using a PICOS search strategy to search eight databases in November 2015 (updated May 2017) including a broad range of implementation methodologies. Studies were weighted by robustness of methodology, number of participants and the quality score. We used narrative synthesis due to heterogeneity of studies. RESULTS: We identified 2,541 articles; 12 met our inclusion criteria. The articles were from the US (n = 7), UK (n = 4) and Canada (n = 1). Measured outcomes were HbA1c tests undertaken and/or the level achieved (n = 10), written action plans for asthma (n = 1) and hospital/emergency department visits (n = 1). Three of the studies were part of a larger incentive scheme including many conditions; one focused on asthma; eight focussed on diabetes. In asthma, the proportion receiving 'perfect care' (including providing a written action plan) increased from 4% to 88% in one study, and there were fewer hospitalisations/emergency department visits in another study. Across the diabetes studies, quality-of-care/GP performance scores improved in three, were unchanged in six and deteriorated in one. CONCLUSIONS: Results for the impact of financial incentives for the implementation of self-management were mixed. The evidence in diabetes suggests no consistent impact on diabetic control. There was evidence from a single study of improved process and health outcomes in asthma. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and understand the process by which financial incentives may impact (or not) on care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Protocol registration number: CRD42016027411.

The epidemiology, healthcare and societal burden and costs of asthma in the UK and its member nations: analyses of standalone and linked national databases.

BACKGROUND: There are a lack of reliable data on the epidemiology and associated burden and costs of asthma. We sought to provide the first UK-wide estimates of the epidemiology, healthcare utilisation and costs of asthma. METHODS: We obtained and analysed asthma-relevant data from 27 datasets: these comprised national health surveys for 2010-11, and routine administrative, health and social care datasets for 2011-12; 2011-12 costs were estimated in pounds sterling using economic modelling. RESULTS: The prevalence of asthma depended on the definition and data source used. The UK lifetime prevalence of patient-reported symptoms suggestive of asthma was 29.5 % (95 % CI, 27.7-31.3; n = 18.5 million (m) people) and 15.6 % (14.3-16.9, n = 9.8 m) for patient-reported clinician-diagnosed asthma. The annual prevalence of patient-reported clinician-diagnosed-and-treated asthma was 9.6 % (8.9-10.3, n = 6.0 m) and of clinician-reported, diagnosed-and-treated asthma 5.7 % (5.7-5.7; n = 3.6 m). Asthma resulted in at least 6.3 m primary care consultations, 93,000 hospital in-patient episodes, 1800 intensive-care unit episodes and 36,800 disability living allowance claims. The costs of asthma were estimated at least £1.1 billion: 74 % of these costs were for provision of primary care services (60 % prescribing, 14 % consultations), 13 % for disability claims, and 12 % for hospital care. There were 1160 asthma deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma is very common and is responsible for considerable morbidity, healthcare utilisation and financial costs to the UK public sector. Greater policy focus on primary care provision is needed to reduce the risk of asthma exacerbations, hospitalisations and deaths, and reduce costs.

Clinical and Cost-Effectiveness of Procalcitonin Test for Prodromal Meningococcal Disease-A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite vaccines and improved medical intensive care, clinicians must continue to be vigilant of possible Meningococcal Disease in children. The objective was to establish if the procalcitonin test was a cost-effective adjunct for prodromal Meningococcal Disease in children presenting at emergency department with fever without source. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Data to evaluate procalcitonin, C-reactive protein and white cell count tests as indicators of Meningococcal Disease were collected from six independent studies identified through a systematic literature search, applying PRISMA guidelines. The data included 881 children with fever without source in developed countries.The optimal cut-off value for the procalcitonin, C-reactive protein and white cell count tests, each as an indicator of Meningococcal Disease, was determined. Summary Receiver Operator Curve analysis determined the overall diagnostic performance of each test with 95% confidence intervals. A decision analytic model was designed to reflect realistic clinical pathways for a child presenting with fever without source by comparing two diagnostic strategies: standard testing using combined C-reactive protein and white cell count tests compared to standard testing plus procalcitonin test. The costs of each of the four diagnosis groups (true positive, false negative, true negative and false positive) were assessed from a National Health Service payer perspective. The procalcitonin test was more accurate (sensitivity=0.89, 95%CI=0.76-0.96; specificity=0.74, 95%CI=0.4-0.92) for early Meningococcal Disease compared to standard testing alone (sensitivity=0.47, 95%CI=0.32-0.62; specificity=0.8, 95% CI=0.64-0.9). Decision analytic model outcomes indicated that the incremental cost effectiveness ratio for the base case was £-8,137.25 (US $ -13,371.94) per correctly treated patient. CONCLUSIONS: Procalcitonin plus standard recommended tests, improved the discriminatory ability for fatal Meningococcal Disease and was more cost-effective; it was also a superior biomarker in infants. Further research is recommended for point-of-care procalcitonin testing and Markov modelling to incorporate cost per QALY with a life-time model.