Neonatal Early Onset Sepsis: Impact of Kaiser Calculator in an Italian Tertiary Perinatal Center.

BACKGROUND: Suspected early-onset sepsis (EOS) results in antibiotic treatment and blood withdraw of a substantial number of neonates who are uninfected. We evaluated if the EOS calculator can reduce antibiotic exposure and invasive procedures for suspected EOS in term and late preterm neonates, without any significant increase in adverse outcomes. METHODS: The proportion of EOS risk in neonates ≥35 weeks gestation exposed to antibiotics, intensive monitoring and blood withdrawal was compared between a baseline period (January 2018-May 2018), when Centers for Disease Control guidelines approach was used, and a post-EOS calculator-implementation period (June 2018-December 2019). RESULTS: We included 4363 newborn infants with gestational age ≥35 weeks, respectively 824 in baseline period and 3539 in the EOS calculator period. Among them, 1021 (23.4%) infants presented risk factors for neonatal sepsis. There was a halving in empirical antibiotics exposure: 3% in the baseline and 1.4% in the post-EOS-implementation period, P < 0.05. Blood culture and laboratory evaluations had fallen from 30.6% to 15.4% (P < 0.05). Close monitoring of vital parameters decreased from 25.4% to 4.8% (P < 0.05). The number of antibiotic days per 100 live births decreased from 15.05 to 6.36 days (P <0.05). The incidence of culture-confirmed sepsis and clinical sepsis was very low in 2 periods. Only one infant identified at low-risk by Kaiser calculator at birth developed symptoms after 12 h from birth. We had no readmissions for EOS. CONCLUSIONS: Application of the EOS calculator more than halved the burden of intensive monitoring and antibiotic exposure, without compromising safety in a population with a relatively low incidence of culture-proven EOS and good access to follow-up care.

The impact of chest computed tomography and chest radiography on clinical management of cystic fibrosis lung disease.

BACKGROUND: Recent standards of care mention chest radiography (CR) but not chest computed tomography (CT) in routine annual follow-up of children with cystic fibrosis (CF). To minimise radiation risk, CT or CR should only be performed if they impact clinical decision making. We investigated whether in addition to a wide range of commonly used clinical parameters, chest CT and/or CR in routine follow-up of CF patients influence clinical decisions. METHODS: 36 web based clinical vignettes (i.e. case simulations) were designed using clinical data from patients aged 8-18 years, randomly selected from two CF centres in The Netherlands. In a randomized cross-over design, clinicians assessed eight vignettes and suggested therapeutic/diagnostic management on two occasions, with a ten-week interval. Radiological information (CT or CR) was included at only one of the two assessments, in random order. Any differences in management could be attributed to information from CT or CR, and were compared by McNemar analysis. RESULTS: 44 European and Australian clinicians completed a total of 143 CT vignette pairs and 167 CR vignette pairs. CT was associated with a significant increase in antifungal treatment (Risk Ratio (RR) 2.8 (1.3-6.0, p = .02)), bronchoscopies (RR 1.6 (1.1-2.5, p = .04)), mycobacterial cultures (RR 1.3 (1.0-1.5, p = .02)), and 'need for hospitalization' (i.e. intravenous antibiotics and/or bronchoscopy) (RR 1.4 (1.0-1.9, p = .03)). CR led to a significant increase in inhaled antibiotics only (RR 1.3 (1.0-1.6, p = .04)). CONCLUSIONS: CT but not CR, at routine biennial follow-up was associated with several changes in treatment and/or diagnostic testing, including the need for hospitalization.