INTRODUCTION: Serious bacterial infections in infants under 2-years-of-age with fever without a source remains, despite advances in vaccination, a matter of concern for both physicians and parents. Having cost-effectiveness information is relevant to guide decision making in clinical practice in this scenario. Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of four different strategies of screening in Argentina for serious bacterial infection in children presenting with fever without a source. Materials and methods: We designed a decision tree to model a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 children with fever without a source. We compared the incremental cost-effectiveness of four strategies to detect serious bacterial infection: Rochester criteria + C reactive protein test, Rochester criteria + procalcitonin test, Rochester criteria, and expectant observation. Results: Rochester criteria + C reactive protein test was the most cost-effective strategy with USD$ 784 for each correctly diagnosed case versus USD$ 839 of Rochester criteria + procalcitonin test, USD$ 1,116 of expectant observation or USD$ 1,193 of Rochester criteria. When the probability of serious bacterial infections was equal or less than 14%, the strategy of choice was expectant observation. Conclusions: The Rochester criteria + C reactive protein test was the most cost-effective strategy to detect serious bacterial infection in one to three months old children with fever without a source. However, in low risk settings for such infection, the strategy of choice is expectant observation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Buendía et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: