Evidence Hub

Burden of RSV infections among young children in primary care: a prospective cohort study in five European countries (2021-23)

Sarah F. Hak, V. Sankatsing, J. Wildenbeest, R. Venekamp, B. Casini, C. Rizzo, M. Bangert, Daan Van Brusselen et al.

The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, 2025

3,414 participants · 28 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The majority of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections in young children are managed in primary care, however, the disease burden in this setting remains poorly defined.

METHODS

We did a prospective cohort study in primary care settings in Belgium, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, and the UK during the RSV seasons of 2020-21 (UK only; from Jan 1, 2021), 2021-22, and 2022-23. Children aged younger than 5 years presenting to their general practitioner or primary care paediatrician with symptoms of an acute respiratory tract infection were eligible for RSV testing. Children who tested positive for RSV were consented and followed up for 30 days via a physician clinical report (initial primary care visit on day 1) and two parent-report questionnaires (days 14 and 30). We assessed the burden of RSV in terms of clinical course (symptoms, illness duration, and complications), health-care resource utilisation (primary care visits, emergency department visits, hospitalisation rate, and medication use), and societal impact (daycare or school absence and parental work absence) for the 30-day follow-up period.

FINDINGS

Among 3414 tested children, 1124 (32·9%; 95% CI 31·3-34·5) tested positive for RSV. Among children with data on age, RSV positivity rate was 38·9% (36·1-41·7; n=466 of 1198) in children younger than 1 year and 25·9% (24·0-27·9; n=513 of 1979) in those aged 1 to <5 years. Of the 1124 RSV-positive children, 878 (78·1%) were enrolled and had day 1 data…

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: 3,414 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