Validation of the Computerized Pediatric Triage Tool, pediaTRI, in the Pediatric Emergency Department of Lenval Children's Hospital in Nice: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study.

Introduction: A reliable pediatric triage tool is essential for nurses working in pediatric emergency departments to quickly identify children requiring priority care (high-level emergencies) and those who can wait (low-level emergencies). In the absence of a gold standard in France, the objective of our study was to validate our 5-level pediatric triage tool -pediaTRI- against the reference tool: the Pediatric Early Warning Score (PEWS) System. Materials and Methods: We prospectively included 100,506 children who visited the Pediatric Emergency Department at Lenval Children's Hospital (Nice, France) in 2016 and 2017. The performance of pediaTRI to identify high-level emergencies (severity levels 1 and 2) was evaluated in comparison with a PEWS ≥ 4/9. Data from 2018-19 was used as an independent validation cohort. Results: pediaTRI agreed with the PEWS score for 84,896 of the patients (84.5%): 15.0% (14.8-15.2) of the patients were over-triaged and 0.5% (0.5-0.6) under-triaged compared with the PEWS score. pediaTRI had a sensitivity of 76.4% (74.6-78.2), a specificity of 84.7% (84.4-84.9), and positive and negative likelihood ratios of 5.0 (4.8-5.1) and 0.3 (0.3-0.3), respectively, for the identification of high-level emergencies. However, the positive likelihood ratios were lower for patients presenting with a medical complaint [4.1 (4.0-4.2) v 10.4 (7.9-13.7 for trauma), and for younger children [1.2 (1.1-1.2) from 0 to 28 days, and 1.9 (1.8-2.0) from 28 days to 3 months]. Conclusion: pediaTRI has a moderate to good validity to triage children in a Pediatric Emergency Department with a tendency to over-triage compared with the PEWS system. Its validity is lower for younger children and for children consulting for a medical complaint.

Evaluation of compliance with early postbirth follow-up and unnecessary visits to the paediatric emergency department: a prospective observational study at the Lenval Children's Hospital in Nice.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate compliance with the French National Authority for Health's (Haute Autorité de Santé, HAS) postbirth follow-up recommendations for newborns attending our paediatric emergency department (PED) and identify risk factors associated with non-compliance and unnecessary emergency department utilisation. DESIGN: Prospective, single centre. SETTING: Fourth biggest PED in France in terms of attendance (CHU-Lenval). PATIENTS: 280 patients of whom 249 were included in the statistical analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome of this study was the evaluation of compliance of the care pathway for newborns consulting at the PED with respect to the French postbirth follow-up recommendations. Secondary outcome was the assessment of whether the visit to the PED was justified by means of PED reception software and two postconsultation interviews RESULTS: 77.5% (193) of the newborns had non-compliant care pathways and 43% (107) of PED visits were unnecessary. Risk factors associated with a non-compliance regarding the HAS's postbirth follow-up recommendations were: unnecessary visit to the PED (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.9), precariousness (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.4 to 6.2), birth in a public maternity hospital (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.3 to 4.8) and no information about HAS's postbirth follow-up recommendations on discharge from maternity ward (OR 11.4, 95% CI 5.8 to 23.3). Risk factors for unnecessary PED visits were: non-compliant care pathway (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.9) and a first medical visit at a PED (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.1). CONCLUSION: Postbirth follow-up may lead to decrease unnecessary emergency department visits unnecessary emergency department visits. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study bears the clinical trial number NCT02863627.

Quick-Wee versus bladder stimulation to collect midstream urine from precontinent infants under 1 year of age: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (ES.Stimquick.U).

INTRODUCTION: Urinary tract infections occur in around 1%-4% of boys and 3%-8% of girls under 2 years old. Diagnosis is difficult because of non-specific symptoms and the risk of urine analysis contamination depending on the sampling method used for precontinent infants. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommend transurethral catheterisation and suprapubic aspiration because of a low contamination rate but these techniques are invasive. On the other hand, while the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence advocate clean catch urine for its minimal invasiveness and acceptable contamination rate, it is difficult to accomplish in precontinent infants. Two recent methods have been described: the Quick-Wee method by Kaufman et al (suprapubic stimulation with cold saline-soaked gauze); and bladder stimulation by Herreros et al then by Tran et al (pubic tapping alternating with lumbar massage). This study aims to compare the effectiveness in collecting midstream urine by bladder stimulation vs the Quick-Wee method in infants under 1 year, before walking. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a multicentre randomised controlled trial of 230 infants under 1 year and before walking who need urine analysis, conducted in four paediatric emergency departments in France. Patients will be randomised into two groups: bladder stimulation and Quick-Wee method.The primary endpoint will be the success rate of voiding at least 2 mL of urine in less than 5 min.Secondary outcomes are the time to collect at least 2 mL of urine, comfort, quality of urine and the risk factors associated with failure of the two techniques. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the French national ethic committee (consultative committee of the protection of persons). The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinical Trials Registry - NCT04587999. DATE AND PROTOCOL VERSION IDENTIFIER: October 2020, V.1.