Evidence Hub

Outpatient management of young febrile infants with urinary tract infections

Schnadower D, Kuppermann N, Macias CG, Freedman SB, Agrawal D, Mao J, Dayan PS, American Academy of Pediatrics Pediatric Emergency Medicine Collaborative Research Committee UTI Study Group

Pediatric emergency care, 2014

1,764 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Controversy exists regarding the disposition of young febrile infants who present to emergency departments (EDs) with urinary tract infections (UTIs). In a large multicenter cohort of such patients, we aimed to determine the variation in patient disposition and clinical factors independently associated with outpatient management.

METHODS: Secondary analysis of a retrospective study of infants 29 to 60 days with fever (≥38.0°C), urinalysis finding, and culture-proven UTIs presenting to 20 North American EDs belonging to the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Collaborative Research Committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics. We determined independent factors associated with outpatient management.

RESULTS: Of 1764 infants with UTIs, 132 (7.5%) were discharged home from the ED. The proportion of infants managed as outpatients varied among sites (0%-20.0%). Of the 132 infants, 29 (22.0%) were subsequently hospitalized after culture results were known, including 5 patients with bacteremia. None of the 107 patients initially discharged from the ED for whom outcomes were known had adverse events (0%; 95% CI, 0%-2.7%). On multivariable regression and generalized estimated equations analyses, only clinical site, presence of upper respiratory tract infection symptoms, absence of vomiting, and having fewer than 10 white blood cells per microliter on cerebrospinal fluid examination were independently associated with discharge from the ED. Clinical site was the factor most…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,764 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free