Mirjam Binnekamp1,2, Karlijn J van Stralen2, Larissa den Boer2, Marlies A van Houten3,4. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Spaarne Gasthuis, Boerhaavelaan 22, 2035 RC, Haarlem, The Netherlands. 2. Spaarne Gasthuis Academy, Spaarnepoort 1, 2134 TM, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Pediatrics, Spaarne Gasthuis, Boerhaavelaan 22, 2035 RC, Haarlem, The Netherlands. mvanhouten2@spaarnegasthuis.nl. 4. Spaarne Gasthuis Academy, Spaarnepoort 1, 2134 TM, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands. mvanhouten2@spaarnegasthuis.nl.
Abstract
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is well known for causing a potentially severe course of bronchiolitis in infants. Many paediatric healthcare workers claim to be able to diagnose RSV based on cough sound, which was evaluated in this study. Parents of children < 1 year old admitted to the paediatric ward because of airway complaints were asked to record cough sounds of their child. In all children, MLPA analysis-a variation of PCR analysis-on nasopharyngeal swab was performed (golden standard). Sixteen cough fragments representing 4 different viral pathogens were selected and presented to paediatric healthcare workers. Thirty-two paediatric nurses, 16 residents and 16 senior staff members were asked to classify the audio files and state whether the cough was due to RSV infection or not. Senior staff, nurses and residents correctly identified RSV with a sensitivity of 76.2%, 73.1% and 51.3% respectively. Correct exclusion of RSV cases was performed with a specificity of 60.8%, 60.2% and 65.3% respectively. Sensitivity ranged from 0 to 100% between colleagues; no one correctly identified all negatives. Residents had significantly lower rates of sensitivity than senior staff and nurses. This was strongly related to work experience, in which more than 3.5 years of work experience was related to the best result. Conclusion: Senior staff and nurses were better in making a cough-based diagnosis of RSV compared to residents. Both groups were able to detect the same proportion of true RSV patients based on cough sounds compared to bedside tests but could not validly distinguish RSV from other pathogens based on cough sounds. What is Known: • Many paediatric healthcare workers claim to be capable of diagnosing RSV in infants based on cough sound • Up to now, no studies investigating the recognisability of RSV based on cough sound are published What is New: • Senior staff and paediatric nurses performed better than various other bedside tests in diagnosing RSV but could not replace MLPA analysis • Residents need at least 3.5 years of work experience to be able to make a RSV diagnosis based on cough sound.
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is well known for causing a potentially severe course of bronchiolitis in infants. Many paediatric healthcare workers claim to be able to diagnose RSV based on cough sound, which was evaluated in this study. Parents of children < 1 year old admitted to the paediatric ward because of airway complaints were asked to record cough sounds of their child. In all children, MLPA analysis-a variation of PCR analysis-on nasopharyngeal swab was performed (golden standard). Sixteen cough fragments representing 4 different viral pathogens were selected and presented to paediatric healthcare workers. Thirty-two paediatric nurses, 16 residents and 16 senior staff members were asked to classify the audio files and state whether the cough was due to RSVinfection or not. Senior staff, nurses and residents correctly identified RSV with a sensitivity of 76.2%, 73.1% and 51.3% respectively. Correct exclusion of RSV cases was performed with a specificity of 60.8%, 60.2% and 65.3% respectively. Sensitivity ranged from 0 to 100% between colleagues; no one correctly identified all negatives. Residents had significantly lower rates of sensitivity than senior staff and nurses. This was strongly related to work experience, in which more than 3.5 years of work experience was related to the best result. Conclusion: Senior staff and nurses were better in making a cough-based diagnosis of RSV compared to residents. Both groups were able to detect the same proportion of true RSVpatients based on cough sounds compared to bedside tests but could not validly distinguish RSV from other pathogens based on cough sounds. What is Known: • Many paediatric healthcare workers claim to be capable of diagnosing RSV in infants based on cough sound • Up to now, no studies investigating the recognisability of RSV based on cough sound are published What is New: • Senior staff and paediatric nurses performed better than various other bedside tests in diagnosing RSV but could not replace MLPA analysis • Residents need at least 3.5 years of work experience to be able to make a RSV diagnosis based on cough sound.
Authors: Ting Shi; David A McAllister; Katherine L O'Brien; Eric A F Simoes; Shabir A Madhi; Bradford D Gessner; Fernando P Polack; Evelyn Balsells; Sozinho Acacio; Claudia Aguayo; Issifou Alassani; Asad Ali; Martin Antonio; Shally Awasthi; Juliet O Awori; Eduardo Azziz-Baumgartner; Henry C Baggett; Vicky L Baillie; Angel Balmaseda; Alfredo Barahona; Sudha Basnet; Quique Bassat; Wilma Basualdo; Godfrey Bigogo; Louis Bont; Robert F Breiman; W Abdullah Brooks; Shobha Broor; Nigel Bruce; Dana Bruden; Philippe Buchy; Stuart Campbell; Phyllis Carosone-Link; Mandeep Chadha; James Chipeta; Monidarin Chou; Wilfrido Clara; Cheryl Cohen; Elizabeth de Cuellar; Duc-Anh Dang; Budragchaagiin Dash-Yandag; Maria Deloria-Knoll; Mukesh Dherani; Tekchheng Eap; Bernard E Ebruke; Marcela Echavarria; Carla Cecília de Freitas Lázaro Emediato; Rodrigo A Fasce; Daniel R Feikin; Luzhao Feng; Angela Gentile; Aubree Gordon; Doli Goswami; Sophie Goyet; Michelle Groome; Natasha Halasa; Siddhivinayak Hirve; Nusrat Homaira; Stephen R C Howie; Jorge Jara; Imane Jroundi; Cissy B Kartasasmita; Najwa Khuri-Bulos; Karen L Kotloff; Anand Krishnan; Romina Libster; Olga Lopez; Marilla G Lucero; Florencia Lucion; Socorro P Lupisan; Debora N Marcone; John P McCracken; Mario Mejia; Jennifer C Moisi; Joel M Montgomery; David P Moore; Cinta Moraleda; Jocelyn Moyes; Patrick Munywoki; Kuswandewi Mutyara; Mark P Nicol; D James Nokes; Pagbajabyn Nymadawa; Maria Tereza da Costa Oliveira; Histoshi Oshitani; Nitin Pandey; Gláucia Paranhos-Baccalà; Lia N Phillips; Valentina Sanchez Picot; Mustafizur Rahman; Mala Rakoto-Andrianarivelo; Zeba A Rasmussen; Barbara A Rath; Annick Robinson; Candice Romero; Graciela Russomando; Vahid Salimi; Pongpun Sawatwong; Nienke Scheltema; Brunhilde Schweiger; J Anthony G Scott; Phil Seidenberg; Kunling Shen; Rosalyn Singleton; Viviana Sotomayor; Tor A Strand; Agustinus Sutanto; Mariam Sylla; Milagritos D Tapia; Somsak Thamthitiwat; Elizabeth D Thomas; Rafal Tokarz; Claudia Turner; Marietjie Venter; Sunthareeya Waicharoen; Jianwei Wang; Wanitda Watthanaworawit; Lay-Myint Yoshida; Hongjie Yu; Heather J Zar; Harry Campbell; Harish Nair Journal: Lancet Date: 2017-07-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Brigitte Fauroux; Eric A F Simões; Paul A Checchia; Bosco Paes; Josep Figueras-Aloy; Paolo Manzoni; Louis Bont; Xavier Carbonell-Estrany Journal: Infect Dis Ther Date: 2017-03-29
Authors: Andrea H L Bruning; Mariska M G Leeflang; Johanna M B W Vos; Rene Spijker; Menno D de Jong; Katja C Wolthers; Dasja Pajkrt Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2017-09-15 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Kawther S Alqudaihi; Nida Aslam; Irfan Ullah Khan; Abdullah M Almuhaideb; Shikah J Alsunaidi; Nehad M Abdel Rahman Ibrahim; Fahd A Alhaidari; Fatema S Shaikh; Yasmine M Alsenbel; Dima M Alalharith; Hajar M Alharthi; Wejdan M Alghamdi; Mohammed S Alshahrani Journal: IEEE Access Date: 2021-07-15 Impact factor: 3.367