This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Background: Studies of nasopharyngeal secretions serve as reliable surrogate to evaluate the involvement of viruses in acute otitis media (AOM) and upper/lower respiratory tract infections (URIs/LRIs). We explored nasopharyngeal viral studies from children with uncomplicated AOM and examined their cost-effectiveness in relation to their age. Methods: We identified children aged 0–6 years admitted to our pediatrics department in a university-affiliated, secondary hospital with uncomplicated AOM and concurrent URI/LRI between 2012 and 2017, during October–April, when viral studies are performed. Studies were performed either using antigen detection tests, for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza A/B (2012–2016) and for a variety of other common respiratory viruses, utilizing multiplex polymerase chain reaction assays (2017). Results: A total of 249 children were included (median age: 15 months). In 88 (35%) children, viral studies were positive, most of them in children ⩽24 months (78, 89%). RSV was positive in 52 (59%) children, followed by influenza A and B, in 11 (13%) and 5 (6%) children, respectively. First year switch to a molecular assay, 4.5-fold more expensive, resulted in a statistically significant higher yield: 69% positive results in ⩽24 months, and 66% in those aged ⩽12 months ( p < 0.05). In those ⩽24 months, US$23 and US$95 were spent for one positive test in the antigen detection years and the polymerase chain reaction year, respectively, whereas in those >24 months, US$83 and US$878 were invested for one positive test in the same year, respectively. Conclusion: In cost-effectiveness terms, the greatest benefit of nasopharyngeal studies was highest in children ⩽24 months.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marom et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: