A Cross-Sectional Survey of Pediatric Infectious Disease Physicians' Approach to Congenital Cytomegalovirus Infection.

IF 4 Q1 GENETICS & HEREDITY International Journal of Neonatal Screening Pub Date : 2023-03-24 DOI:10.3390/ijns9020017
Chieko Hoki, Michelle White, Megan H Pesch, Ann J Melvin, Albert H Park
{"title":"A Cross-Sectional Survey of Pediatric Infectious Disease Physicians' Approach to Congenital Cytomegalovirus Infection.","authors":"Chieko Hoki,&nbsp;Michelle White,&nbsp;Megan H Pesch,&nbsp;Ann J Melvin,&nbsp;Albert H Park","doi":"10.3390/ijns9020017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) continues to be a major public health care issue due to its high prevalence throughout the world. However, there is a paucity of studies evaluating how providers manage this infection. This study surveyed North American Pediatric Infectious Disease (PID) physicians to elicit their approach towards the evaluation and treatment of this condition. Thirty-two PID physicians responded to this survey. Institutional testing and screening for cCMV were infrequently reported. The respondents in general agreed upon most laboratory and diagnostic testing except for neuroimaging. For those tests, there was a disparity in indications for head ultrasound versus brain MRI imaging. Most (68.8%) agreed with the clinical practice of starting valganciclovir in an infant less than 1 month of age with one sign or symptom of disease, and 62.5% would do so for an infant with isolated sensorineural hearing loss. However, only 28.1% would treat cCMV-infected infants older than 1 month of age. In conclusion, few healthcare institutions represented by PID physicians in this cohort had a cCMV screening or testing initiative, yet most respondents would test at a much higher level based on their clinical practice. While there is general consensus in evaluation and treatment of these children, there are disparities in practices regarding neuroimaging and indications for antiviral treatment with respect to age and severity of disease. There is a great need for an evidence based policy statement to standardize cCMV workup and treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":14159,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Neonatal Screening","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10123618/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Neonatal Screening","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns9020017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) continues to be a major public health care issue due to its high prevalence throughout the world. However, there is a paucity of studies evaluating how providers manage this infection. This study surveyed North American Pediatric Infectious Disease (PID) physicians to elicit their approach towards the evaluation and treatment of this condition. Thirty-two PID physicians responded to this survey. Institutional testing and screening for cCMV were infrequently reported. The respondents in general agreed upon most laboratory and diagnostic testing except for neuroimaging. For those tests, there was a disparity in indications for head ultrasound versus brain MRI imaging. Most (68.8%) agreed with the clinical practice of starting valganciclovir in an infant less than 1 month of age with one sign or symptom of disease, and 62.5% would do so for an infant with isolated sensorineural hearing loss. However, only 28.1% would treat cCMV-infected infants older than 1 month of age. In conclusion, few healthcare institutions represented by PID physicians in this cohort had a cCMV screening or testing initiative, yet most respondents would test at a much higher level based on their clinical practice. While there is general consensus in evaluation and treatment of these children, there are disparities in practices regarding neuroimaging and indications for antiviral treatment with respect to age and severity of disease. There is a great need for an evidence based policy statement to standardize cCMV workup and treatment.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
儿科感染性疾病医师治疗先天性巨细胞病毒感染的横断面调查。
先天性巨细胞病毒(cCMV)仍然是一个主要的公共卫生保健问题,由于其在世界各地的高患病率。然而,缺乏评估提供者如何管理这种感染的研究。本研究调查了北美儿科传染病(PID)的医生,以引出他们对这种疾病的评估和治疗方法。32名PID医生回应了这项调查。机构检测和筛查cCMV的报道很少。除了神经成像之外,受访者普遍同意大多数实验室和诊断测试。对于这些测试,头部超声和脑部MRI成像的适应症存在差异。大多数(68.8%)的人同意临床实践中对有疾病体征或症状的小于1个月的婴儿开始使用缬更昔洛韦,62.5%的人同意对孤立性感音神经性听力损失的婴儿开始使用缬更昔洛韦。然而,只有28.1%的人会治疗1个月以上感染ccmv的婴儿。总之,在这个队列中,以PID医生为代表的医疗机构很少有cCMV筛查或检测的主动性,但大多数受访者会根据他们的临床实践进行更高水平的检测。虽然在这些儿童的评估和治疗方面存在普遍共识,但在神经影像学和抗病毒治疗指征方面的实践与年龄和疾病严重程度有关。迫切需要一个基于证据的政策声明来规范cCMV的检查和治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Neonatal Screening
International Journal of Neonatal Screening Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
20.00%
发文量
56
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Cystic Fibrosis Screening Efficacy and Seasonal Variation in California: 15-Year Comparison of IRT Cutoffs Versus Daily Percentile for First-Tier Testing. American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics ACT Sheets Are a Vital Resource for State Newborn Screening Programs. DNAJC12 Deficiency, an Emerging Condition Picked Up by Newborn Screening: A Case Illustration and a Novel Variant Identified. Psychological Impact of Presymptomatic X-Linked ALD Diagnosis and Surveillance: A Small Qualitative Study of Patient and Parent Experiences. Incidence of Inborn Errors of Metabolism and Endocrine Disorders Among 40965 Newborn Infants at Riyadh Second Health Cluster of the Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1