ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Since the 2001 anthrax attacks, an extensive body of literature has evolved, but there has been a limited focus on the management of pediatric-specific issues. We looked at the symptom complexes of all pediatric patients presenting to the emergency department of our hospital during this period and examined whether their presentations would likely allow current guidelines to be used as potential screening criteria to identify children infected with anthrax. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed emergency department records of all adult and pediatric patients (up to the age of 21 years) at Inova Fairfax Hospital during this time, when a large, and at the time ill-defined, group in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area was at risk for pulmonary anthrax. Two cases of anthrax infection were identified at this hospital in exposed adult postal workers. Screening algorithms (described by Mayer et al. and Hupert et al.) were applied to adult and pediatric patients with the presence of fever (38 degrees C), tachycardia, or other symptoms compatible with pulmonary anthrax. Specifically, the usefulness of these guidelines as potential screening tools to identify possibly infected children was examined. RESULTS: Of 767 pediatric patients seen in the emergency department during the study period, 312 met criteria for review (41%; 95% CI: 37-44%). Four adult patients (0.4%; 95% CI: 0.1-0.9%) had at least five clinical symptoms, fever, and tachycardia; two of them had inhalational anthrax. No pediatric patient presented with five or more clinical symptoms. Twelve children (3.9%; 95% CI: 2-6.6%) presented with four clinical symptoms; five of the 12 had neither fever nor tachycardia. Children, particularly infants and toddlers, presented with nonspecific symptom complexes primarily limited to fever, vomiting, cough, and trouble breathing. CONCLUSIONS: Existing guidelines are likely to be unreliable as a screening tool for inhalational anthrax in children, largely because of the children's inability to adequately communicate a suggestive symptom complex.
Subject(s)
Anthrax/diagnosis , Bioterrorism , Inhalation Exposure , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Emergency Service, Hospital , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Medical Audit , Pediatrics , Retrospective Studies , Triage/standards , VirginiaABSTRACT
Eleven known cases of bioterrorism-related inhalational anthrax (IA) were treated in the United States during 2001. We retrospectively compared 2 methods that have been proposed to screen for IA. The 2 screening protocols for IA were applied to the emergency department charts of patients who presented with possible signs or symptoms of IA at Inova Fairfax Hospital (Falls Church, Virginia) from 20 October 2001 through 3 November 2001. The Mayer criteria would have screened 4 patients (0.4%; 95% CI, 0.1%-0.9%) and generated charges of 1900 dollars. If 29 patients (2.6%; 95% CI, 1.7%-3.7%) with >or=5 symptoms (but without fever and tachycardia) were screened, charges were 13,325 dollars. The Hupert criteria would have screened 273 patients (24%; 95% CI, 22%-27%) and generated charges of 126,025 dollars. In this outbreak of bioterrorism-related IA, applying the Mayer criteria would have identified both patients with IA and would have generated fewer charges than applying the Hupert criteria.
Subject(s)
Anthrax/diagnosis , Bioterrorism , Disease Outbreaks , Mass Screening , Adult , Anthrax/diagnostic imaging , Anthrax/drug therapy , Anthrax/economics , Anthrax/epidemiology , Biological Warfare , Doxycycline/therapeutic use , Early Diagnosis , Humans , Inhalation , Radiography , Retrospective Studies , VirginiaABSTRACT
A panel of 10 physicians used the nominal group technique to assess the ability of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) interim guidelines for clinical evaluation of persons with possible inhalational anthrax (IA) to retrospectively identify the 11 patients with IA seen during the October 2001 bioterrorism outbreak. The guidelines would not have identified 10 of 11 of these patients, primarily because the guidelines were designed to address only those patients with a known history of exposure or clearly identified environmental or occupational risk. The panel suggested revisions to the guidelines, primarily consisting of broadening the criteria for evaluation to include either known exposure or environmental occupational risk, or to include clinical symptoms consistent with IA. These extensions of the guidelines retrospectively identified 8 of 11 of the patients with IA from October 2001.
