Evidence Hub

Clinical Features and Preventability of Delayed Diagnosis of Pediatric Appendicitis

Michelson KA, Reeves SD, Grubenhoff JA, Cruz AT, Chaudhari PP, Dart AH, Finkelstein JA, Bachur RG

JAMA network open, 2021

748 participants · 46 citations

Abstract

Importance: Delayed diagnosis of appendicitis is associated with worse outcomes than timely diagnosis, but clinical features associated with diagnostic delay are uncertain, and the extent to which delays are preventable is unclear.

Objective: To determine clinical features associated with delayed diagnosis of pediatric appendicitis, assess the frequency of preventable delay, and compare delay outcomes.

Design, setting, and participants: This case-control study included 748 children treated at 5 pediatric emergency departments in the US between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2019. Participants were younger than 21 years and had a diagnosis of appendicitis.

Exposures: Individual features of appendicitis and pretest likelihood of appendicitis were measured by the Pediatric Appendicitis Risk Calculator (pARC).

Main outcomes and measures: Case patients had a delayed diagnosis of appendicitis, defined as 2 emergency department visits leading to diagnosis and a case review showing the patient likely had appendicitis at the first visit. Control patients had a single emergency department visit yielding a diagnosis. Clinical features and pARC scores were compared by case-control status. Preventability of delay was assessed as unlikely, possible, or likely. The proportion of children with indicated imaging based on an evidence-based cost-effectiveness threshold was determined. Outcomes of delayed diagnosis were compared by case-control status, including hospital length of stay,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case-control, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 748 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