Evidence Hub

Mycoplasma pneumoniae incidence, phenotype, and severity in children and adolescents in Denmark before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide multicentre population-based cohort study

K. S. Dungu, Mette Holm, U. Hartling, L. H. Jensen, Allan Bybeck Nielsen, L. Schmidt, L. B. Toustrup, L. H. Hansen et al.

The Lancet Regional Health - Europe, 2024

1,152,000 participants · 64 citations

Abstract

Summary Background Mycoplasma pneumoniae infections resurged globally in 2023–2024 after a three-year decline during the COVID-19 pandemic. We explored the incidence and severity of M pneumoniae infections in children and adolescents before, during, and after the pandemic. Methods This nationwide, population-based cohort study included all Danish children and adolescents aged 0–17 years with a positive M pneumoniae PCR test from May 1, 2016, to April 30, 2024. We obtained clinical details for patients hospitalised for 24 h or more. Risk ratios for infections, hospitalisations, and disease manifestations in 2023–2024 versus pre-COVID-19 seasons were calculated using Fisher’s exact and Pearson’s χ2 tests. A season was defined from May 1 to April 30. Findings Among the Danish population of 1,152,000 children and adolescents, 14,241 with a positive PCR test for M pneumoniae were included. In 2023–2024, children and adolescents with a positive PCR rose 2.9-fold (95% CI 2.8–3.1; p < 0.0001) compared to the pre-COVID-19 seasons, and hospitalisations rose 2.6-fold (95% CI 2.0–3.3; p < 0.0001). M pneumoniae-induced rash and mucositis increased 5.3-fold (95% CI 1.8–15.3; p = 0.0007). In 2023–2024 compared to the pre-COVID-19 seasons, there was no difference in the proportion of hospitalisation (360 [4%] of 8165 versus 230 [4%] of 6009; p = 0.09), the median duration of hospital stay (3 days [IQR 2–5] versus 3 days [IQR 2–5]; p = 0.84), or paediatric intensive care unit admission (14…

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: 1,152,000 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