Dataset Information

Neonatal early-onset infections: Comparing the sensitivity of the neonatal early-onset sepsis calculator to the Dutch and the updated NICE guidelines in an observational cohort of culture-positive cases.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The early-onset sepsis calculator (EOSC) reduces unnecessary antibiotic treatment in newborns. However, its performance in identifying cases with early-onset disease (EOD) is unclear. We compared the sensitivity of the EOSC to the current Dutch and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines when applied to a cohort of newborns with culture-positive early-onset sepsis and meningitis.

Methods

Culture-positive Streptococcus agalactiae (GBS) and Escherichia coli (E. coli) sepsis and meningitis patients ≤3 days old with a gestational age ≥34 weeks, identified between 1/1/2018 and 31/1/2021 in a Dutch prospective nationwide cohort study were included. Cases were identified by treating physicians and microbiological surveillance. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients that would have been treated according to the EOSC, the Dutch, and the NICE EOD prevention guidelines. Differences between proportions were analysed using McNemar's test.

Findings

We included 81 GBS and 7 E. coli EOD cases. At 4 h after birth, the EOSC would have recommended antibiotic treatment in 32 (36%) patients, compared to 44 (50%) by the Dutch (p<0·01) and 48 (55%) by the NICE guideline (p<0·01). The EOSC would have initially recommended routine care for 52% of patients compared to 31% and 30% for the Dutch and NICE guidelines (p<0·01). At 24 h after birth, the EOSC would have recommended antibiotic treatment in 54 (61%) infants compared to 64 (73%) by the Dutch (p = 0·02) and 63 (72%) by the NICE guidelines (p = 0·06).

Interpretation

The sensitivity of the EOSC in identifying cases of EOD is lower compared to both Dutch and NICE guidelines, especially directly after birth. The EOSC relies more on clinical symptoms and results in less overtreatment of healthy newborns at the cost of later antibiotic treatment in initially well-appearing EOD patients.

Funding

This work was supported by grants received from Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw; NWO-Vidi-Grant (grant number 917·17·308); NWO-Vici-Grant (grant number 918·19·627)), the Academic Medical Centre (AMC Innovative Impulse Grant) and Steun Emma Foundation Grant.

SUBMITTER: Snoek L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8760457 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUpdating is important to ensure clinical guideline (CG) recommendations remain valid. However, little research has been undertaken in this field. We assessed CGs produced by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to identify and describe updated recommendations and to investigate potential factors associated with updating. Also, we evaluated the reporting and presentation of recommendation changes.MethodsWe performed a descriptive analysis of original and updated CGs and recommendations, and an assessment of presentation formats and methods for recording information. We conducted a case-control study, defining cases as original recommendations that were updated ('new-replaced' recommendations), and controls as original recommendations that were considered to remain valid ('not changed' recommendations). We performed a comparison of main characteristics between cases and controls, and we planned a multiple regression analysis to identify potential predictive factors for updating.ResultsWe included nine updated CGs (1,306 recommendations) and their corresponding original versions (1,106 recommendations). Updated CGs included 812 (62%) recommendations 'not reviewed', 368 (28.1%) 'new' recommendations, 104 (7.9%) 'amended' recommendations, and 25 (1.9%) recommendations reviewed but unchanged. The presentation formats used to indicate the changes in recommendations varied widely across CGs. Changes in 'amended', 'deleted', and 'new-replaced' recommendations (n = 296) were reported infrequently, mostly in appendices. These changes were recorded in 167 (56.4%) recommendations; and were explained in 81 (27.4%) recommendations. We retrieved a total of 7.1% (n = 78) case recommendations ('new-replaced') and 2.4% (n = 27) control recommendations ('not changed') in original CGs. The updates were mainly from 'Fertility CG', about 'gynaecology, pregnancy and birth' topic, and 'treatment' or 'prevention' purposes. We did not perform the multiple regression analysis as originally planned due to the small sample of recommendations retrieved.ConclusionOur study is the first to describe and assess updated CGs and recommendations from a national guideline program. Our results highlight the pressing need to standardise the reporting and presentation of updated recommendations and the research gap about the optimal way to present updates to guideline users. Furthermore, there is a need to investigate updating predictive factors.

Project description:ImportanceThe neonatal early-onset sepsis (EOS) calculator is a clinical risk stratification tool increasingly used to guide the use of empirical antibiotics for newborns. Evidence on the effectiveness and safety of the EOS calculator is essential to inform clinicians considering implementation.ObjectiveTo assess the association between management of neonatal EOS guided by the neonatal EOS calculator (compared with conventional management strategies) and reduction in antibiotic therapy for newborns.Data sourcesElectronic searches in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were conducted from 2011 (introduction of the EOS calculator model) through January 31, 2019.Study selectionAll studies with original data that compared management guided by the EOS calculator with conventional management strategies for allocating antibiotic therapy to newborns suspected to have EOS were included.Data extraction and synthesisFollowing PRISMA-P guidelines, relevant data were extracted from full-text articles and supplements. CHARMS (Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modeling Studies) and GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) tools were used to assess the risk of bias and quality of evidence. Meta-analysis using a random-effects model was conducted for studies with separate cohorts for EOS calculator and conventional management strategies.Main outcomes and measuresThe difference in percentage of newborns treated with empirical antibiotics for suspected or proven EOS between management guided by the EOS calculator and conventional management strategies. Safety-related outcomes involved missed cases of EOS, readmissions, treatment delay, morbidity, and mortality.ResultsThirteen relevant studies analyzing a total of 175 752 newborns were included. All studies found a substantially lower relative risk (range, 3%-60%) for empirical antibiotic therapy, favoring the EOS calculator. Meta-analysis revealed a relative risk of antibiotic use of 56% (95% CI, 53%-59%) in before-after studies including newborns regardless of exposure to chorioamnionitis. Evidence on safety was limited, but proportions of missed cases of EOS were comparable between management guided by the EOS calculator (5 of 18 [28%]) and conventional management strategies (8 of 28 [29%]) (pooled odds ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.26-3.52; P = .95).Conclusions and relevanceUse of the neonatal EOS calculator is associated with a substantial reduction in the use of empirical antibiotics for suspected EOS. Available evidence regarding safety of the use of the EOS calculator is limited, but shows no indication of inferiority compared with conventional management strategies.

Project description:BackgroundEarly onset sepsis (EOS) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in preterm infants, yet diagnosis remains inadequate resulting in missed cases or prolonged empiric antibiotics with adverse consequences. Evaluation of acute phase reactant (APR) biomarkers in umbilical cord blood at birth may improve EOS detection in preterm infants with intrauterine infection.MethodsIn this nested case-control study, infants (29.7 weeks gestation, IQR: 27.7-32.2) were identified from a longitudinal cohort with archived cord blood and placental histopathology. Patients were categorized using culture, laboratory, clinical, and antibiotic treatment data into sepsis groups: confirmed sepsis (cEOS, n = 12); presumed sepsis (PS, n = 30); and no sepsis (controls, n = 30). Nine APRs were measured in duplicate from cord blood using commercially available multiplex immunoassays (Bio-Plex Pro™). In addition, placental histopathologic data were linked to biomarker results.ResultscEOS organisms were Escherichia coli, Streptococcus agalactiae, Proteus mirabilis, Haemophilus influenzae and Listeria monocytogenes. C-reactive protein (CRP), serum amyloid A (SAA), haptoglobin (Hp), serum amyloid P and ferritin were significantly elevated in cEOS compared to controls (p<0.01). SAA, CRP, and Hp were elevated in cEOS but not in PS (p<0.01) and had AUCs of 99%, 96%, and 95% respectively in predicting cEOS. Regression analysis revealed robust associations of SAA, CRP, and Hp with EOS after adjustment for covariates. Procalcitonin, fibrinogen, ?-2-macroglobulin and tissue plasminogen activator were not significantly different across groups. Placental acute inflammation was associated with APR elevation and was present in all cEOS, 9 PS, and 17 control infants.ConclusionThis study shows that certain APRs are elevated in cord blood of premature infants with EOS of intrauterine origin. SAA, CRP, and Hp at birth have potential diagnostic utility for risk stratification and identification of infants with EOS.