Diagnostic testing for evaluation of brief resolved unexplained events.

BACKGROUND: Since the publication of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) clinical practice guideline for brief resolved unexplained events (BRUEs), a few small, single-center studies have suggested low yield of diagnostic testing in infants presenting with such an event. We conducted this large retrospective multicenter study to determine the role of diagnostic testing in leading to a confirmatory diagnosis in BRUE patients. METHODS: Secondary analysis from a large multicenter cohort derived from 15 hospitals participating in the BRUE Quality Improvement and Research Collaborative. The study subjects were infants < 1 year of age presenting with a BRUE to the emergency departments (EDs) of these hospitals between October 1, 2015, and September 30, 2018. Potential BRUE cases were identified using a validated algorithm that relies on administrative data. Chart review was conducted to confirm study inclusion/exclusion, AAP risk criteria, final diagnosis, and contribution of test results. Findings were stratified by ED or hospital discharge and AAP risk criteria. For each patient, we identified whether any diagnostic test contributed to the final diagnosis. We distinguished true (contributory) results from false-positive results. RESULTS: Of 2036 patients meeting study criteria, 63.2% were hospitalized, 87.1% qualified as AAP higher risk, and 45.3% received an explanatory diagnosis. Overall, a laboratory test, imaging, or an ancillary test supported the final diagnosis in 3.2% (65/2036, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.7%-4.4%) of patients. Out of 5163 diagnostic tests overall, 1.1% (33/2897, 95% CI 0.8%-1.5%) laboratory tests and 1.5% (33/2266, 95% CI 1.0%-1.9%) of imaging and ancillary studies contributed to a diagnosis. Although 861 electrocardiograms were performed, no new cardiac diagnoses were identified during the index visit. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic testing to explain BRUE including for those with AAP higher risk criteria is low yield and rarely contributes to an explanation. Future research is needed to evaluate the role of testing in more specific, at-risk populations.

Diagnostic testing for and detection of physical abuse in infants with brief resolved unexplained events.

BACKGROUND: A Brief Resolved Unexplained Event (BRUE) can be a sign of occult physical abuse. OBJECTIVES: To identify rates of diagnostic testing able to detect physical abuse (head imaging, skeletal survey, and liver transaminases) at BRUE presentation. The secondary objective was to estimate the rate of physical abuse diagnosed at initial BRUE presentation through 1 year of age. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Infants who presented with a BRUE at one of 15 academic or community hospitals were followed from initial BRUE presentation until 1 year of age for BRUE recurrence or revisits. METHODS: This study was part of the BRUE Research and Quality Improvement Network, a multicenter retrospective cohort examining infants with BRUE. Generalized estimating equations assessed associations with performance of diagnostic testing (adjusted odds ratio (aOR)). RESULTS: Of the 2036 infants presenting with a BRUE, 6.2 % underwent head imaging, 7.0 % skeletal survey, and 12.1 % liver transaminases. Infants were more likely to undergo skeletal survey if there were physical examination findings concerning for trauma (aOR 8.23, 95 % CI [1.92, 35.24], p < 0.005) or concerning social history (aOR 1.89, 95 % CI [1.13, 3.16], p = 0.015). There were 7 (0.3 %) infants diagnosed with physical abuse: one at BRUE presentation, one <3 days after BRUE presentation, and five >30 days after BRUE presentation. CONCLUSION: There were low rates of diagnostic testing and physical abuse identified in infants presenting with BRUE. Further study including standardized testing protocols is warranted to identify physical abuse in infants presenting with a BRUE.

Risk Prediction After a Brief Resolved Unexplained Event.

OBJECTIVES: Only 4% of brief resolved unexplained events (BRUE) are caused by a serious underlying illness. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) guidelines do not distinguish patients who would benefit from further investigation and hospitalization. We aimed to derive and validate a clinical decision rule for predicting the risk of a serious underlying diagnosis or event recurrence. METHODS: We retrospectively identified infants presenting with a BRUE to 15 children's hospitals (2015-2020). We used logistic regression in a split-sample to derive and validate a risk prediction model. RESULTS: Of 3283 eligible patients, 565 (17.2%) had a serious underlying diagnosis (n = 150) or a recurrent event (n = 469). The AAP's higher-risk criteria were met in 91.5% (n = 3005) and predicted a serious diagnosis with 95.3% sensitivity, 8.6% specificity, and an area under the curve of 0.52 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.47-0.57). A derived model based on age, previous events, and abnormal medical history demonstrated an area under the curve of 0.64 (95%CI: 0.59-0.70). In contrast to the AAP criteria, patients >60 days were more likely to have a serious underlying diagnosis (odds ratio:1.43, 95%CI: 1.03-1.98, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Most infants presenting with a BRUE do not have a serious underlying pathology requiring prompt diagnosis. We derived 2 models to predict the risk of a serious diagnosis and event recurrence. A decision support tool based on this model may aid clinicians and caregivers in the discussion on the benefit of diagnostic testing and hospitalization (https://www.mdcalc.com/calc/10400/brief-resolved-unexplained-events-2.0-brue-2.0-criteria-infants).

Improving Emergency Department Use of Safety-Net Antibiotic Prescriptions for Acute Otitis Media.

OBJECTIVES: Acute otitis media (AOM) is the most common reason for pediatric antibiotic prescriptions. The 2013 American Academy of Pediatrics' AOM guidelines recommend observation for nonsevere AOM. Our aim was to increase the percentage safety-net antibiotic prescription (SNAP) offered to patients 6 months of age or older diagnosed with AOM in 2 pediatric emergency departments (EDs) from a baseline of 0.5% to 15% in 20 months. METHODS: This is a quality improvement study at a quaternary pediatric medical center with 2 locations, both with EDs. A random chart review revealed that 27.5% of patients diagnosed with AOM in the ED would qualify for a SNAP, but only 0.5% were offered it. Quality improvement interventions were designed to improve safety-net antibiotic prescribing. Both EDs conducted multiple interventions, including algorithm development, provider education, and electronic medical record aids. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of patients offered a SNAP for AOM. RESULTS: A total of 8226 children 6 months of age or older were diagnosed with AOM in our 2 EDs during the 20-month intervention period. The percentage offered a SNAP increased at both EDs. One ED had a single shift in the mean to 7.9%, whereas the other had 2 shifts in the mean, an initial shift to 5.1% and a second to 7.3%. Providers consistently used the algorithm and electronic medical record aids. CONCLUSIONS: Safety-net antibiotic prescriptions in conjunction with parent education was effective in reducing the use of immediate antibiotic prescriptions in children with AOM in 2 pediatric EDs. Offering a SNAP can reduce unnecessary use of antibiotics, which in turn may decrease antibiotic-related adverse events and antibiotic resistance.

Optimizing Critical Care Documentation in a Pediatric Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVE: Emergency department (ED) physicians frequently provide critical care (CC) but document inconsistently. Variability in documentation can result in underbilling and is inconsistent with financial stewardship. We used admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU) as a proxy for CC provision. At baseline, CC notes were correctly documented for 20% of eligible visits, with potential missed charges of $1.8 million per year.Our objective was to increase CC note placement for eligible patients from 20% to 60% over 2 years. Additionally, we measured CC notes and the number of ICU admissions per 1000 ED visits, and change in facility fees. METHODS: We performed this project at a midwestern quaternary children's hospital with 2 EDs (combined volume 120,000 visits/year). We surveyed the ED physicians to inform our interventions. We used maintenance of certification points and financial incentives for quality improvement work to obtain buy-in. We used serial interventions with plan-do-study-act cycles: (1) CC note simplification, (2) education, (3) follow-up surveys, (4) additional location for CC note, and (5) timely reminders. We reviewed sample charts and used χ2 test and control charts for analysis. RESULTS: Critical care note placement for ICU admissions increased from 20% to 60% in 8 months, and further to greater than 75%. The CC notes increased from 4 to 16 per 1000 ED visits. Intensive care unit admissions increased but remained appropriate. The billed facility fee for CC increased by 263%. CONCLUSIONS: This project resulted in significant and sustained improvements in CC note completion. We believe providing education, simplifying the documentation process, automating reminders, and incentivizing optimal documentation were vital to success.

Explanatory Diagnoses Following Hospitalization for a Brief Resolved Unexplained Event.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Most young infants presenting to the emergency department (ED) with a brief resolved unexplained event (BRUE) are hospitalized. We sought to determine the rate of explanatory diagnosis after hospitalization for a BRUE. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study of infants hospitalized with a BRUE after an ED visit between October 1, 2015, and September 30, 2018. We included infants without an explanatory diagnosis at admission. We determined the proportion of patients with an explanatory diagnosis at the time of hospital discharge and whether diagnostic testing, consultation, or observed events occurring during hospitalization were associated with identification of an explanatory diagnosis. RESULTS: Among 980 infants hospitalized after an ED visit for a BRUE without an explanatory diagnosis at admission, 363 (37.0%) had an explanatory diagnosis identified during hospitalization. In 805 (82.1%) infants, diagnostic testing, specialty consultations, and observed events did not contribute to an explanatory diagnosis, and, in 175 (17.9%) infants, they contributed to the explanatory diagnosis (7.0%, 10.0%, and 7.0%, respectively). A total of 15 infants had a serious diagnosis (4.1% of explanatory diagnoses; 1.5% of all infants hospitalized with a BRUE), the most common being seizure and infantile spasms, occurring in 4 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Most infants hospitalized with a BRUE did not receive an explanation during the hospitalization, and a majority of diagnoses were benign or self-limited conditions. More research is needed to identify which infants with a BRUE are most likely to benefit from hospitalization for determining the etiology of the event.

Risk Factors and Outcomes After a Brief Resolved Unexplained Event: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of the risk criteria for brief resolved unexplained events (BRUEs) from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is unknown. We sought to evaluate if AAP risk criteria and event characteristics predict BRUE outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective cohort included infants <1 year of age evaluated in the emergency departments (EDs) of 15 pediatric and community hospitals for a BRUE between October 1, 2015, and September 30, 2018. A multivariable regression model was used to evaluate the association of AAP risk factors and event characteristics with risk for event recurrence, revisits, and serious diagnoses explaining the BRUE. RESULTS: Of 2036 patients presenting with a BRUE, 87% had at least 1 AAP higher-risk factor. Revisits occurred in 6.9% of ED and 10.7% of hospital discharges. A serious diagnosis was made in 4.0% (82) of cases; 45% (37) of these diagnoses were identified after the index visit. The most common serious diagnoses included seizures (1.1% [23]) and airway abnormalities (0.64% [13]). Risk is increased for a serious underlying diagnosis for patients discharged from the ED with a history of a similar event, an event duration >1 minute, an abnormal medical history, and an altered responsiveness (P < .05). AAP risk criteria for all outcomes had a negative predictive value of 90% and a positive predictive value of 23%. CONCLUSIONS: AAP BRUE risk criteria are used to accurately identify patients at low risk for event recurrence, readmission, and a serious underlying diagnosis; however, their use results in the inaccurate identification of many patients as higher risk. This is likely because many AAP risk factors, such as age, are not associated with these outcomes.

Accuracy of Diagnostic Codes for Identifying Brief Resolved Unexplained Events.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) coding strategies for the identification of patients with a brief resolved unexplained event (BRUE). METHODS: Multicenter retrospective cohort study, including patients aged <1 year with an emergency department (ED) visit between October 1, 2015, and September 30, 2018, and an ICD-10 code for the following: (1) BRUE; (2) characteristics of BRUE; (3) serious underlying diagnoses presenting as a BRUE; and (4) nonserious diagnoses presenting as a BRUE. Sixteen algorithms were developed by using various combinations of these 4 groups of ICD-10 codes. Manual chart review was used to assess the performance of these ICD-10 algorithms for the identification of (1) patients presenting to an ED who met the American Academy of Pediatrics clinical definition for a BRUE and (2) the subset of these patients discharged from the ED or hospital without an explanation for the BRUE. RESULTS: Of 4512 records reviewed, 1646 (36.5%) of these patients met the American Academy of Pediatrics criteria for BRUE on ED presentation, 1016 (61.7%) were hospitalized, and 959 (58.3%) had no explanation on discharge. Among ED discharges, the BRUE ICD-10 code alone was optimal for case ascertainment (sensitivity: 89.8% to 92.8%; positive predictive value: 51.7% to 72.0%). For hospitalized patients, ICD-10 codes related to the clinical characteristics of BRUE are preferred (specificity 93.2%, positive predictive value 32.7% to 46.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The BRUE ICD-10 code and/or the diagnostic codes for the characteristics of BRUE are recommended, but the choice between approaches depends on the investigative purpose and the specific BRUE population and setting of interest.

Intravenous acetaminophen use in pediatrics.

Acetaminophen is a commonly used pediatric medication that has recently been approved for intravenous use in the United States. The purpose of this article was to review the pharmacodynamics, indications, contraindications, and precautions for the use of intravenous acetaminophen in pediatrics.

Kohler's Disease.

We present a pediatric case report of foot pain due to Kohler's disease.

Pediatric button battery and small magnet coingestion: two cases with different outcomes.

Ingestion of button batteries and ingestion of 2 or more small magnets have both been increasingly recognized as having high potential for injury. Coingestion of a button battery and a small magnet has only rarely been described but has the potential for both ischemic injury due to the tight magnetic adherence and the electric current injury from the button battery. We report 2 cases of button battery and small magnet coingestion; one required surgical repair of an important bowel injury, while the other had a benign course. We discuss the management and role of radiography in these cases and the potential factors to consider when predicting which patients will have serious injury and which will do well.