UPDATE
|
UPDATE |
| Number 3 | August 1997 |
TALKING FEVER
by: Stacia Finch, MA, Febrile Infant Study, Research Assistant
Thomas Newman, MD, MPH, Febrile Infant Study InvestigatorFirst, thanks to all of you who returned the feedback page from the last newsletter. We seriously consider all of your comments, and, whenever possible, incorporate them into the study. One recurring request we received was to report preliminary results. As some of you may know, four abstracts related to the Febrile Infant Study were accepted for presentation at the Pediatric Academic Societies’ 1997 Annual Meeting in May.
One of these abstracts entitled “Frequency and yield of tests for urinary tract infection in young febrile infants: the PROS (Pediatric Research in Office Settings) Fever Study” was presented in the Presidential Plenary Session. Since many of you have contributed to the reported preliminary findings, we would like to take this opportunity to share what we found when the first 899 infants enrolled in the study were analyzed. The study investigators were interested in how often the participating PROS practitioners do urine tests on febrile infants less than 3 months old, and the frequency and predictors of their results. Of the 899 infants enrolled, at least one urinalysis was obtained in 501 (56%), and at least one urine culture in 455 (51%). The majority of the specimens (66%) were obtained by urethral catheterization (UC): 30% were obtained by bag, 3% by suprapubic aspiration (SPA) and 2% by clean catch. The rate of apparent UTI in those cultured was 11%. A positive dipstick for leukocytes was 85% sensitive and 91% specific for UTI while other urine tests performed less well. Bacteremia with the organism found in the urine occurred in 12% of the 49 patients with UTI; none had temperatures above 38.7 degrees, two were judged to appear at least moderately ill and four had positive dipsticks for leukocytes. We look forward to seeing the results of the final sample of 3000 patients!
SUBSTUDIES
Billing StudyThe purpose of the Billing Study is to examine the cost-effectiveness of different treatment strategies used to care for hospitalized infants enrolled in the Febrile Infant Study (FIS). The first round of this study has been fielded to 188 practitioners who are requesting billing information for 366 infants who were hospitalized prior to 7/1/96.
We would like to reiterate to those of you who are completing data collection and have not had the chance to begin that the PROS staff would be happy to review the protocol with you or a member of your staff. Or, if you have requested the information from the hospital but have still not received the data, please contact PROS and we will supply you with a follow-up letter to send to the hospital. The second round will be fielded soon that will request billing information for infants hospitalized between 7/1/96-12/31/96.
Chart Review
Another substudy which will be fielded soon is the Chart Review Substudy, a critical aspect of FIS. This substudy has two purposes. The first purpose is to compare infants enrolled in FIS to those not enrolled. The second is to verify the data on enrolled patients. Of the practices participating in FIS, 48 practices have been randomly chosen to participate in this substudy. Look for more information about the progress of this substudy in the next newsletter!
Patient Enrollment Update (Total Sample Size at End of Each Quarter)
QUESTIONS?
Please call PROS Central or UCSF with any questions you may have!
800/433-9016 X7620
800/468-7803
| Core support for the PROS network is provided by a grant from the Health Resources and Services Administration Maternal and Child Health Bureau |  |
About PROS | Study Updates | Join PROS | Network News Excerpts
PROS Bibliography | Funding Sources | PROS Home Page
