Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Disposition and Follow-up for Low-Risk Febrile Infants: A Secondary Analysis of a Multicenter Study

  • the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Collaborative Research Committee Febrile Infants and Health Disparities Study Group
    • Central Michigan University
    • Children's Hospital of Michigan
    • University of Utah
    • Duke University
    • Texas Children's Pediatrics
    • Case Western Reserve University
    • Lincoln Medical and Mental Health Center
    • University of California at Los Angeles
    • University of Florida
    • University of Iowa
    • Yale University
    • University of Washington
    • Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center Seattle
    • Baylor College of Medicine
    • The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
    • University of South Carolina
    • St. Christopher's Hospital for Children
    • Johns Hopkins University
    • The Children's Hospital, Aurora
    • Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital
    • Southern Illinois University
    • Emory University
    • Seattle Children's
    • Weill Cornell Medical Center
    • Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center
    • Medical College of Wisconsin
    • University of California at San Diego
    • UT Health Houston
    • University of California at Irvine
    • Oregon Health and Science University
    • Randall Children's Hospital
    • Nicklaus Children's Hospital
    • Children's Memorial Hospital
    • Children's National Medical Center
    • University of Vermont
    • Children's Minnesota
    • University of Pittsburgh

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    OBJECTIVE: American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines recommend that febrile infants at low risk for invasive bacterial infection be discharged from the emergency department (ED) if primary care provider (PCP) follow-up occurs within 24 hours. We aimed to (1) assess the association between having electronic health record (EHR) documentation of a PCP and ED disposition and (2) describe documentation of potential barriers to discharge and plans for post-discharge follow-up in low-risk febrile infants. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multicenter, cross-sectional study of low-risk febrile infants. Descriptive statistics characterized ED disposition on the basis of the day of the visit, EHR documentation of PCP, scheduled or recommended PCP follow-up, and barriers to discharge. RESULTS: Most infants (3565/4042, 90.5%) had EHR documentation of a PCP. Compared with discharged infants, a similar proportion of hospitalized infants had EHR documentation of PCP (90.3% vs 91.2%, P 5.47). Few infants (1.5%) had barriers to discharge documented. Of the 3360 infants (83.1%) discharged from the ED, 1544 (46.0%) had documentation of scheduled or recommended 24-hour PCP follow-up. Discharged infants with weekday visits were more likely than those with weekend visits to have documentation of scheduled or recommended 24-hour follow-up (50.0% vs 35.5%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Most infants had a documented PCP, yet fewer than half had documentation of a scheduled or recommended 24-hour follow-up. A dedicated focus on determining post-ED care plans that are safe and patient-centered may improve the quality of care for this population.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)e379-e384
    JournalHospital pediatrics
    Volume14
    Issue number9
    DOIs
    StatePublished - 1 Sep 2024

    Keywords

    • Aftercare/statistics & numerical data
    • Cross-Sectional Studies
    • Electronic Health Records/statistics & numerical data
    • Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data
    • Female
    • Fever/therapy
    • Humans
    • Infant
    • Infant, Newborn
    • Male
    • Patient Discharge/statistics & numerical data
    • Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Disposition and Follow-up for Low-Risk Febrile Infants: A Secondary Analysis of a Multicenter Study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this