A cross-sectional study of screening for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at the pediatric emergency department in Vilnius during the first wave of the pandemic

Epidemiological changes of acute respiratory infections in children: A single-center experience after COVID-19 lockdown

BACKGROUND

Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, the epidemiology of acute respiratory infections (ARIs) has continually changed, making it difficult to predict. Our study aimed to evaluate epidemiological changes and clinical outcomes of ARIs in pediatric patients in the post-lockdown period.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective cross-sectional study was performed in one of the largest pediatric emergency departments in Lithuania during two cold seasons-from October 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Season I) and in the same period in 2022-2023 (Season II). Patients under 18 years of age who had been tested for COVID-19 were enrolled in the study. Additional data about other respiratory pathogens in the study group (specifically influenza A/B, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and group A Streptococcus (GAS)), were included.

RESULTS

During both seasons of our study, 19,366 children were screened for COVID-19. Positive tests for COVID-19 decreased from 14.5% in Season I to 5.9% in Season II, while at the same time, the rates of other infections increased significantly: influenza from 17.5% to 27.1%, RSV from 8.8% to 27.6%, and GAS from 8.4% to 44%, respectively. In Season II, COVID-19 infection presented in fewer admissions to pediatric intensive care (0.8% vs. 3.7%, p<0.01) and there were no deaths, while influenza presented in a higher proportion of hospitalizations (10.5% vs. 6.1%, p<0.01) and there was one death. The proportion of RSV hospitalizations also increased in Season II (34.6% vs. 44.0%, p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The early post-lockdown period saw a decline of COVID-19 and re-emergence of influenza, RSV and GAS infections in children. In Season II, COVID-19 cases became milder contrary to influenza. RSV infection contributed significantly to hospitalizations for respiratory infections in children in both seasons, particularly in Season II. Coinfections were not associated with a more severe course of the disease.

COVID-19 Screening in the Pediatric Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Screening for COVID-19 infection in pediatrics is challenging as its clinical presentation may be asymptomatic or mimic other common childhood infections. We examined the use of a COVID-19 screening protocol (CSP) in the pediatric emergency department (PED) to determine the incidence of positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests in patients who are CSP+ and CSP-.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of pediatric patients with SARS-CoV-2 testing completed in an urban tertiary care PED from November 1 to December 31, 2020. Demographics, CSP designation, test results, and disposition were compared. Statistical significance was determined using chi-square or a comparison of means. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 1,613 patients had SARS-CoV-2 tests completed with 9.1% (N=147) having positive test results. Of 1,014 (62.9%) patients who were CSP+, 12.9% tested positive. Comparatively, 599 (37.1%) patients were CSP- with only 2.7% positive tests, p<0.0001. The sensitivity, specificity, NPV, and PPV of the CSP in all tested patients were 89.1%, 39.8%, 97.3%, and 12.9%, respectively. Of tested patients, 887 (55.0%) were admitted to the hospital and were more likely to be positive if CSP+, p≤0.001. Within the admitted group, 16.8% were admitted to the operating room, of whom 83.9% were CSP- with 4.0% testing positive for SARS-CoV-2.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 screening in the pediatric population is a useful modality to risk stratify most patients presenting to the PED for the purpose of selective testing and guiding personal protective equipment use. This may be particularly useful in low-resource settings.

A Strategy Formulation Framework for Efficient Screening during the Early Stage of a Pandemic

For viruses that can be transmitted by contacts of people, efficiently screening infected individuals is beneficial for controlling outbreaks rapidly and avoiding widespread diffusion, especially during the early stage of a pandemic. The process of virus transmission can be described as virus diffusion in complex networks such as trajectory networks. We propose a strategy formulation framework (SFF) for generating various screening strategies to identify influential nodes in networks. We propose two types of metrics to measure the nodes' influence and three types of screening modes. Then, we can obtain six combinations, i.e., six strategies. To verify the efficiencies of the strategies, we build a scenario model based on the multi-agent modelling. In this model, people can move according to their self-decisions, and a virtual trajectory network is generated by their contacts. We found that (1) screening people will have a better performance based on their contact paths if there is no confirmed case yet, and (2) if the first confirmed case has been discovered, it is better to screen people sequentially by their influences. The proposed SFF and strategies can provide support for decision makers, and the proposed scenario model can be applied to simulate and forecast the virus-diffusion process.

Influenza and Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections in Pediatric Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Single-Center Experience

The overlap of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with other common respiratory pathogens may complicate the course of the disease and prognosis. The aim of the study was to evaluate the rates, characteristics, and outcomes of pediatric patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), influenza A/B infections, and their coinfections. A single-center prospective cross-sectional study was performed at the pediatric emergency department in Vilnius from 1 October 2021 to 30 April 2022. In total, 5127 children were screened for SARS-CoV-2, RSV, and influenza A/B. SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests were positive for 21.0% of children (1074/5127). The coinfection rate of respiratory viruses (RSV, influenza A) in patients with COVID-19 was 7.2% (77/1074). Among the 4053 SARS-CoV-2 negative patients, RSV was diagnosed in 405 (10.0%) patients and influenza A/B in 827 (20.4%) patients. Patients with COVID-19 and coinfection did not have a more severe clinical course than those with RSV or influenza infection alone. RSV and SARS-CoV-2 primarily affected younger patients (up to 2 years), while the influenza was more common in older children (4-10 years). Patients infected with RSV were more severely ill, reflected by higher hospitalization proportion and need for respiratory support.

Signs and symptoms to determine if a patient presenting in primary care or hospital outpatient settings has COVID-19

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 illness is highly variable, ranging from infection with no symptoms through to pneumonia and life-threatening consequences. Symptoms such as fever, cough, or loss of sense of smell (anosmia) or taste (ageusia), can help flag early on if the disease is present. Such information could be used either to rule out COVID-19 disease, or to identify people who need to go for COVID-19 diagnostic tests. This is the second update of this review, which was first published in 2020.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of signs and symptoms to determine if a person presenting in primary care or to hospital outpatient settings, such as the emergency department or dedicated COVID-19 clinics, has COVID-19.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook electronic searches up to 10 June 2021 in the University of Bern living search database. In addition, we checked repositories of COVID-19 publications. We used artificial intelligence text analysis to conduct an initial classification of documents. We did not apply any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were eligible if they included people with clinically suspected COVID-19, or recruited known cases with COVID-19 and also controls without COVID-19 from a single-gate cohort. Studies were eligible when they recruited people presenting to primary care or hospital outpatient settings. Studies that included people who contracted SARS-CoV-2 infection while admitted to hospital were not eligible. The minimum eligible sample size of studies was 10 participants. All signs and symptoms were eligible for this review, including individual signs and symptoms or combinations. We accepted a range of reference standards.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of review authors independently selected all studies, at both title and abstract, and full-text stage. They resolved any disagreements by discussion with a third review author. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the QUADAS-2 checklist, and resolved disagreements by discussion with a third review author. Analyses were restricted to prospective studies only. We presented sensitivity and specificity in paired forest plots, in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) space and in dumbbell plots. We estimated summary parameters using a bivariate random-effects meta-analysis whenever five or more primary prospective studies were available, and whenever heterogeneity across studies was deemed acceptable.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 90 studies; for this update we focused on the results of 42 prospective studies with 52,608 participants. Prevalence of COVID-19 disease varied from 3.7% to 60.6% with a median of 27.4%. Thirty-five studies were set in emergency departments or outpatient test centres (46,878 participants), three in primary care settings (1230 participants), two in a mixed population of in- and outpatients in a paediatric hospital setting (493 participants), and two overlapping studies in nursing homes (4007 participants). The studies did not clearly distinguish mild COVID-19 disease from COVID-19 pneumonia, so we present the results for both conditions together. Twelve studies had a high risk of bias for selection of participants because they used a high level of preselection to decide whether reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing was needed, or because they enrolled a non-consecutive sample, or because they excluded individuals while they were part of the study base. We rated 36 of the 42 studies as high risk of bias for the index tests because there was little or no detail on how, by whom and when, the symptoms were measured. For most studies, eligibility for testing was dependent on the local case definition and testing criteria that were in effect at the time of the study, meaning most people who were included in studies had already been referred to health services based on the symptoms that we are evaluating in this review. The applicability of the results of this review iteration improved in comparison with the previous reviews. This version has more studies of people presenting to ambulatory settings, which is where the majority of assessments for COVID-19 take place. Only three studies presented any data on children separately, and only one focused specifically on older adults. We found data on 96 symptoms or combinations of signs and symptoms. Evidence on individual signs as diagnostic tests was rarely reported, so this review reports mainly on the diagnostic value of symptoms. Results were highly variable across studies. Most had very low sensitivity and high specificity. RT-PCR was the most often used reference standard (40/42 studies). Only cough (11 studies) had a summary sensitivity above 50% (62.4%, 95% CI 50.6% to 72.9%)); its specificity was low (45.4%, 95% CI 33.5% to 57.9%)). Presence of fever had a sensitivity of 37.6% (95% CI 23.4% to 54.3%) and a specificity of 75.2% (95% CI 56.3% to 87.8%). The summary positive likelihood ratio of cough was 1.14 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.25) and that of fever 1.52 (95% CI 1.10 to 2.10). Sore throat had a summary positive likelihood ratio of 0.814 (95% CI 0.714 to 0.929), which means that its presence increases the probability of having an infectious disease other than COVID-19. Dyspnoea (12 studies) and fatigue (8 studies) had a sensitivity of 23.3% (95% CI 16.4% to 31.9%) and 40.2% (95% CI 19.4% to 65.1%) respectively. Their specificity was 75.7% (95% CI 65.2% to 83.9%) and 73.6% (95% CI 48.4% to 89.3%). The summary positive likelihood ratio of dyspnoea was 0.96 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.11) and that of fatigue 1.52 (95% CI 1.21 to 1.91), which means that the presence of fatigue slightly increases the probability of having COVID-19. Anosmia alone (7 studies), ageusia alone (5 studies), and anosmia or ageusia (6 studies) had summary sensitivities below 50% but summary specificities over 90%. Anosmia had a summary sensitivity of 26.4% (95% CI 13.8% to 44.6%) and a specificity of 94.2% (95% CI 90.6% to 96.5%). Ageusia had a summary sensitivity of 23.2% (95% CI 10.6% to 43.3%) and a specificity of 92.6% (95% CI 83.1% to 97.0%). Anosmia or ageusia had a summary sensitivity of 39.2% (95% CI 26.5% to 53.6%) and a specificity of 92.1% (95% CI 84.5% to 96.2%). The summary positive likelihood ratios of anosmia alone and anosmia or ageusia were 4.55 (95% CI 3.46 to 5.97) and 4.99 (95% CI 3.22 to 7.75) respectively, which is just below our arbitrary definition of a 'red flag', that is, a positive likelihood ratio of at least 5. The summary positive likelihood ratio of ageusia alone was 3.14 (95% CI 1.79 to 5.51). Twenty-four studies assessed combinations of different signs and symptoms, mostly combining olfactory symptoms. By combining symptoms with other information such as contact or travel history, age, gender, and a local recent case detection rate, some multivariable prediction scores reached a sensitivity as high as 90%.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most individual symptoms included in this review have poor diagnostic accuracy. Neither absence nor presence of symptoms are accurate enough to rule in or rule out the disease. The presence of anosmia or ageusia may be useful as a red flag for the presence of COVID-19. The presence of cough also supports further testing. There is currently no evidence to support further testing with PCR in any individuals presenting only with upper respiratory symptoms such as sore throat, coryza or rhinorrhoea. Combinations of symptoms with other readily available information such as contact or travel history, or the local recent case detection rate may prove more useful and should be further investigated in an unselected population presenting to primary care or hospital outpatient settings. The diagnostic accuracy of symptoms for COVID-19 is moderate to low and any testing strategy using symptoms as selection mechanism will result in both large numbers of missed cases and large numbers of people requiring testing. Which one of these is minimised, is determined by the goal of COVID-19 testing strategies, that is, controlling the epidemic by isolating every possible case versus identifying those with clinically important disease so that they can be monitored or treated to optimise their prognosis. The former will require a testing strategy that uses very few symptoms as entry criterion for testing, the latter could focus on more specific symptoms such as fever and anosmia.

Limited Additive Diagnostic Impact of Isolated Gastrointestinal Involvement for the Triage of Children with Suspected COVID-19

The strategy for the selection of patients with a suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection is relevant for the organization of a children’s hospital to provide optimal separation into COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 areas and pathways. We analyzed the proportion of children with COVID-19 presenting with gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms in 137 consecutive patients admitted between January 2020 and August 2021. GI symptoms were present as follows: diarrhea in 35 patients (26%), vomiting in 16 (12%), and both of them in five (3%); the combination of fever, respiratory symptoms, and diarrhea was observed in 16 patients (12%). Of the 676 adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to our hospital in the same time interval, 62 (9.2%) had diarrhea, 30 (4.4%) had vomiting, and 11 (1.6%) had nausea; only one patient, a 38-year-old male, presented with isolated GI symptoms at the diagnosis. Although diarrhea was observed in one quarter of cases, one-half of them had the complete triad of fever, respiratory syndrome, and diarrhea, and only five had isolated diarrhea, of which two were diagnosed with a Campylobacter infection. The occurrence of either respiratory symptoms or gastrointestinal symptoms in our patients was not related to the patient age, while younger children were more likely to have a fever. Of the 137 patients, 73 (53%) could be tested for their serum level of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies. The observed titer ranged between 0 (n = 3) and 1729 BAU/mL (median, 425 BAU/mL). Of 137 consecutive patients with COVID-19 admitted to our referral children’s hospital, only three presented with an isolated GI manifestation. It is interesting to note that this finding turned out to be fully in keeping with what was observed on adult patients with COVID-19 in our hospital. The additive diagnostic impact of gastrointestinal involvement for the triage of children with suspected COVID-19 appears limited.

Progress in the Diagnosis and Treatment of COVID-19 in Children: A Review

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been circulating in many countries around the world, characterized by long incubation period, strong infectivity, strong variability, high population susceptibility and diversified transmission methods. Its causative agent is severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Compared with adult patients, the clinical manifestations of COVID-19 in children are often dominated by mild or asymptomatic infections, but children are also important virus carriers and play an important role in the transmission of the virus. In addition, some children will show excessive inflammatory response and experience serious complications such as multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C). At present, the research on COVID-19 in children is still imperfect. This article will review epidemiological characteristics, the mechanism of action, variant characteristics, clinical manifestations, auxiliary examinations and treatment of children with COVID-19, in order to provide help for the diagnosis, treatment and research of children with COVID-19.

COVID-19 Screening for Hospitalized Patients: The Role of Expanded Hospital Surveillance in a Low Prevalence Setting

Purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic poses a serious threat to healthcare workers and hospitalized patients. Early detection of COVID-19 cases is essential to control the spread in healthcare facilities. However, real-world data on the screening criteria for hospitalized patients remain scarce. We aimed to explore whether patients with negative results of pre-hospital screening for COVID-19 should be rescreened after admission in a low-prevalence (less than 3% of the world average) setting.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively included patients in central Taiwan who were negative at the first screening but were newly diagnosed with pneumonia or had a body temperature above 38 degrees Celsius during their hospitalization. Each patient might be included as an eligible case several times, and the proportions of cases who were rescreened for COVID-19 and those diagnosed with COVID-19 were calculated. A logistic regression model was constructed to identify factors associated with rescreening. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction tests were used to confirm the diagnosis of COVID-19.

Results

A total of 3549 cases eligible for COVID-19 rescreening were included. There were 242 cases (6.8%) who received rescreening. In the multivariable analysis, cases aged 75 years or older, those with potential exposure to SARS-CoV-2, or patients visiting specific departments, such as the Cardiovascular Center and Department of Neurology, were more likely to be rescreened. None was diagnosed with COVID-19 after rescreening. There was no known cluster infection outbreak in the hospital or in the local community during the study period and in the following two months.

Conclusion

In Taiwan, a country with a low COVID-19 prevalence, it was deemed safe to rescreen only high-risk hospitalized patients. This strategy was effective and reduced unnecessary costs.

A Single-Center (Sibiu, Romania), Retrospective Study (March-November 2020) of COVID-19 Clinical and Epidemiological Features in Children

The aim of this study was to describe and analyze epidemiological and clinical features of children screened for COVID-19 at Sibiu Pediatric Clinical Hospital during the first 9 months (March–November) of coronavirus disease pandemic in Romania. A total of 203 pediatric patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 were included in the study. The median age of the patients was 121 (IQR 18–181) months and 52.22% had mild clinical type with pneumonia, 35.47% were moderate cases, 3.94% severe cases, 0.99% critically ill cases and 7.39% were asymptomatic. The most common symptoms were fever (n = 130, 64.03%), nasal congestion (n = 138, 67.98%), cough (n = 128, 63.05%) followed by sore throat (n = 64, 31.52%), rhinorrhea (n = 63, 31.03%), fatigue (n = 57, 28.07%), headache (n = 47, 23.15%), diarrhea (n = 39, 19.21%), vomiting (n = 32, 15.76%), myalgia (n = 24, 11.82%), abdominal pain (n = 22, 10.83%). A higher proportion of infants with severe or critical disease was encountered with lymphopenia (n = 9, 90%), neutrophilia (n = 5, 50%), leukocytosis (n = 5, 50%) compared with asymptomatic infants (n = 10, 66.67%, n = 1, 6.67%, n = 3, 20%) or mild (n = 53, 50%, n = 19, 17.92%, n = 15, 14.15%) and moderate (n = 37, 51.39%, n = 9, 12.50%, n = 6, 8.33%) cases (p = 0.095, p = 0.042, p = 0.034). Pediatric patients generally had mild or moderate type of COVID-19, and the critically ill cases were rare. In our study, frequent symptoms were observed in both the systemic and respiratory systems, ear, nose and throat system, and less from gastrointestinal system, central nervous system or ocular system. Additionally, there is an increase in liver and myocardial enzyme levels with an increase in disease severity. Understanding the clinical and laboratory characteristics of pediatric patients is important for diagnosis, management and effective control of the disease.