Corticosteroids in the Treatment of Pediatric Retropharyngeal and Parapharyngeal Abscesses.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Treatment of retropharyngeal abscesses (RPAs) and parapharyngeal abscesses (PPAs) includes antibiotics, with possible surgical drainage. Although corticosteroids may decrease inflammation, their role in the management of RPAs and PPAs is unclear. We evaluated the association of corticosteroid administration as part of initial medical management on drainage rates and length of stay for children admitted with RPAs and PPAs. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study using administrative data of children aged 2 months to 8 years discharged with RPAs and PPAs from 2016 to 2019. Exposure was defined as systemic corticosteroids administered as part of initial management. Primary outcome was surgical drainage. Bivariate comparisons were made between patients in the corticosteroid and noncorticosteroid groups by using Wilcoxon rank or χ2 tests. Outcomes were modeled by using generalized linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Of the 2259 patients with RPAs and PPAs, 1677 (74.2%) were in the noncorticosteroid group and 582 (25.8%) were in the corticosteroid group. There were no significant differences in age, sex, or insurance status. There was a lower rate of drainage in the corticosteroid cohort (odds ratio: 0.28; confidence interval: 0.22-0.36). Patients in this group were more likely to have repeat computed tomography imaging performed, had lower hospital costs, and were less likely to have opioid medications administered. The corticosteroid cohort had a higher 7-day emergency department revisit rate, but there was no difference in length of stay (rate ratio 0.97; confidence interval: 0.92-1.02). CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroids were associated with lower odds of surgical drainage among children with RPAs and PPAs.

Comparison of Clinical and Epidemiologic Characteristics of Young Febrile Infants with and without Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 Infection.

OBJECTIVE: To determine features that distinguish febrile young infants with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective single-center study included febrile infants <57 days of age evaluated in the emergency department of Cohen Children's Medical Center of Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, New York, from March 1 to April 30 of 2018, 2019, and 2020. Sociodemographic and clinical features were compared between those seen during the 2020 coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic and previous years, as well as between infants with SARS-CoV-2 infection and infants without SARS-CoV-2 infection (SARS-CoV-2 negative or evaluated during 2018 and 2019). RESULTS: In all, 124 febrile infants <57 days of age were identified; 38 during the 2-month study period in 2018, 33 in 2019, and 53 in 2020. During 2020, fewer febrile infants had a serious bacterial infection or a positive respiratory viral panel than in prior years (6% vs 21% [P = .02]; 15% vs 53% [P < .001], respectively). SARS-CoV-2 was the most frequent pathogen detected in 2020; of 30 infants tested, 20 tested positive. Infants with SARS-CoV-2 were more likely to identify as Hispanic (P = .004), have public insurance or be uninsured (P = .01), exhibited lethargy (P = .02), had feeding difficulties (P = .002), and had lower white blood cell (P = .001), neutrophil (P < .001), and lymphocyte counts (P = .005) than the 81 infants without SARS-CoV-2 infection. None of the infants with SARS-CoV-2 had concurrent serious bacterial infection or detection of another virus. Overall, disease in infants with SARS-CoV-2 was mild. CONCLUSIONS: During the peak of the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 was the predominant pathogen among febrile infants. Socioeconomic, historical, and laboratory features differed significantly between infants infected or not infected with SARS-CoV-2. None of the 20 infants with SARS-CoV-2 infection had an identified coviral or serious bacterial infection.

Early Experience of COVID-19 in a US Children's Hospital.

OBJECTIVES: We aim to describe the demographics, clinical presentation, hospital course, and severity of pediatric inpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with an emphasis on healthy, immunocompromised, and chronically ill children. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of hospitalized children aged younger than 22 years with COVID-19 infection at Steven and Alexandra Cohen Children's Medical Center at Northwell Health. Cases were identified from patients with fever and/or respiratory symptoms who underwent a nucleic acid amplification-based test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were identified. The median age was 10.3 years (interquartile range, 1.4 months to 16.3 years), with 48% of patients older than 12 years and 29% of patients younger than 60 days of age. Fever was present in 86% of patients, lower respiratory symptoms or signs in 60%, and gastrointestinal symptoms in 62%. Thirty-five percent of patients required ICU care. The white blood cell count was elevated in severe disease (P = .0027), as was the C-reactive protein level (P = .0192), compared with mild and moderate disease. Respiratory support was required in 34% of patients. Severity was lowest in infants younger than 60 days of age and highest in chronically ill children; 79% of immunocompromised children had mild disease. One death was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Among children who are hospitalized for COVID-19, most are younger than 60 days or older than 12 years of age. Children may have severe infection requiring intensive care support. The clinical course of immunocompromised patients was not more severe than that of other children. Elevated white blood cell count and C-reactive protein level are associated with greater illness severity.

Lost in translation: impact of language barriers on children's healthcare.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: As the cultural and linguistic diversity of the United States grows, a greater number of patients with limited English proficiency will enter the healthcare system. Best practices for the care of these individuals include identification of their language assistance needs and prompt provision of interpreter services. This review will summarize the legal basis for providing language access in the healthcare setting, discuss the impact of interpretation services on clinical care, and explore the effects of language barriers on health outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: There has been greater awareness of language as an important and independent determinant in the racial and ethnic disparities that exist in healthcare. Studies have shown that there is suboptimal identification of patients who require linguistic assistance and, as such, there are missed opportunities to bridge language gaps with many of our patients. The lack of interpretation, or use of informal, untrained interpreters, has significant effects on patient safety, quality of care, and patient satisfaction. SUMMARY: Though federal and regulatory guidelines mandate meaningful access to language services, such processes are still a work in progress in many healthcare settings. Further research and quality improvement initiatives are needed to provide clinicians the knowledge and skills needed to effectively communicate with their limited English proficient patients.