P-2106. Streamlining Care Delivery in the Pediatric Emergency Department Using Rapid Point-Of-Care Molecular Diagnostics For Group A Streptococcus: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background As per IDSA guidelines, throat swab testing for group A Streptococcus is important to ensure appropriate antimicrobial use for children with pharyngitis that is not obviously viral. Bacterial culture is the diagnostic reference standard but takes days to result. With culture, physicians often initially provide a prescription that is only to be filled later on if GAS testing is positive. Unfortunately, this strategy can result in inappropriate treatment if parents of children with negative tests fill the script anyway, or if parents of children with positive tests cannot be contacted later. Point-of-care (POC) antigen testing in children is specific but not sensitive, so a negative test still requires culture verification, which limits its overall usefulness. POC molecular GAS testing is as sensitive as culture, and provides a result in minutes, which simplifies prescribing. ED physician satisfaction at enrolment Satisfaction was captured using a 5-point Likert scale on the day of enrolment. Methods A randomized controlled trial was done in a Canadian children’s emergency department (ED). Children aged >3 y with throat swabs ordered to diagnose GAS pharyngitis were eligible. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either the IDNOW Strep A2 (intervention) or bacterial culture (control). The primary outcome was appropriate treatment, ie taking antibiotics if GAS-positive or not taking antibiotics if GAS-negative. Secondary outcomes included physician and parent satisfaction and time to symptom resolution. Caregiver satisfaction at enrolment Satisfaction was captured using a 5-point Likert scale on the day of enrolment. Results 392 participants were recruited from Jan 2021 – Mar 2024. Intervention and control groups were similar in terms of mean age (8.2 vs 8.3 y) and mean MacIsaac score (both 3.3); 29% of the intervention group and 41% of the control group were GAS-positive. Participants in the intervention group were significantly more likely to receive appropriate antibiotics (90.8% vs 76.3%, OR 3.1 [95%CI 1.7-5.7], p< 0.001). ED physicians (pOR 147, p< 0.001) and parents (pOR 2.4, p< 0.001) were also much more likely to be satisfied with POC molecular testing. There were no statistically significant differences in time to resolution of symptoms, though comparisons favoured the intervention. Conclusion In the largest RCT of molecular GAS testing yet done, the intervention was associated with substantial improvements in appropriate antibiotic prescribing and was clearly preferred by both ED physicians and parents. Disclosures Jeffrey Pernica, MD, MSc, FRCPC, DTMH, MedImmune: Grant/Research Support|Merck: Grant/Research Support
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".