常规经验性抗生素应用于长期胎膜破裂母亲所生新生儿的价值

IF 0.2 Q4 PEDIATRICS South African Journal of Child Health Pub Date : 2023-03-10 DOI:10.7196/sajch.2023.v17i1.xx
T. C. Gcaba, R. Singh, P. Jeena
{"title":"常规经验性抗生素应用于长期胎膜破裂母亲所生新生儿的价值","authors":"T. C. Gcaba, R. Singh, P. Jeena","doi":"10.7196/sajch.2023.v17i1.xx","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. The routine use of empiric antibiotics in neonates born to mothers with prolonged rupture of membranes (PROM) iscontroversial.Objectives. To determine the incidence of probable and proven sepsis in such neonates and identify risk factors for sepsis and theiroutcomes.Methods. This was a retrospective chart review conducted at King Edward VIII Hospital over two years. Study participants included 200neonates and 181 mothers. Data were captured onto Microsoft Excel, collated and analysed using descriptive statistics and comparative data utilising the R Core Team’s R Statistical Computing Software, 2020.Results. Seven neonates (3.5%) had proven sepsis, 58 (29%) had probable sepsis, and 135 (67.5%) were without sepsis. Two (1.0%) neonates died and 188 (94.0%) received antibiotics. White cell count was normal in all cases without sepsis and abnormal in 65.5% and 28.6% of cases with probable and proven sepsis, respectively. A raised C-reactive protein was observed in only 22.4% and 14.3% of neonates with probable and proven sepsis, respectively. One hundred and sixty-seven (83.5%) mothers had no Group B Streptococcus (GBS) screening. Of those screened, three had GBS infection, but two did not receive antibiotics.Conclusions. The incidence of sepsis following PROM is low. Identifying neonates at risk is challenging, but the absence of clinical features and normal rapidly obtained supportive laboratory markers of sepsis provides reassurance that antibiotics could be temporarily withheld. Better GBS screening programmes and appropriate antibiotic responses for pregnant women should be implemented rigorously.","PeriodicalId":44732,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Child Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The value of routine empiric antibiotic use in neonates born to mothers with prolonged rupture of membranes\",\"authors\":\"T. C. Gcaba, R. Singh, P. Jeena\",\"doi\":\"10.7196/sajch.2023.v17i1.xx\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background. The routine use of empiric antibiotics in neonates born to mothers with prolonged rupture of membranes (PROM) iscontroversial.Objectives. To determine the incidence of probable and proven sepsis in such neonates and identify risk factors for sepsis and theiroutcomes.Methods. This was a retrospective chart review conducted at King Edward VIII Hospital over two years. Study participants included 200neonates and 181 mothers. Data were captured onto Microsoft Excel, collated and analysed using descriptive statistics and comparative data utilising the R Core Team’s R Statistical Computing Software, 2020.Results. Seven neonates (3.5%) had proven sepsis, 58 (29%) had probable sepsis, and 135 (67.5%) were without sepsis. Two (1.0%) neonates died and 188 (94.0%) received antibiotics. White cell count was normal in all cases without sepsis and abnormal in 65.5% and 28.6% of cases with probable and proven sepsis, respectively. A raised C-reactive protein was observed in only 22.4% and 14.3% of neonates with probable and proven sepsis, respectively. One hundred and sixty-seven (83.5%) mothers had no Group B Streptococcus (GBS) screening. Of those screened, three had GBS infection, but two did not receive antibiotics.Conclusions. The incidence of sepsis following PROM is low. Identifying neonates at risk is challenging, but the absence of clinical features and normal rapidly obtained supportive laboratory markers of sepsis provides reassurance that antibiotics could be temporarily withheld. Better GBS screening programmes and appropriate antibiotic responses for pregnant women should be implemented rigorously.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Journal of Child Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Journal of Child Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7196/sajch.2023.v17i1.xx\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Child Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7196/sajch.2023.v17i1.xx","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景长期胎膜早破(PROM)母亲所生新生儿常规使用经验性抗生素具有争议性。目标。确定此类新生儿中可能和已证实的败血症的发生率,并确定败血症的危险因素及其结果。方法。这是爱德华八世国王医院两年来进行的一次回顾性图表审查。研究参与者包括200名新生儿和181名母亲。数据被收集到Microsoft Excel中,使用描述性统计数据和比较数据进行整理和分析,使用R核心团队的R统计计算软件,2020。结果:7名新生儿(3.5%)被证实患有败血症,58名新生儿(29%)可能患有败血症,135名新生儿(67.5%)没有败血症。2例(1.0%)新生儿死亡,188例(94.0%)接受抗生素治疗。在所有没有败血症的病例中,白细胞计数正常,在可能和已证实的败血症病例中,分别有65.5%和28.6%的白细胞计数异常。在可能和已证实败血症的新生儿中,C反应蛋白升高的比例分别为22.4%和14.3%。167名(83.5%)母亲未进行B组链球菌(GBS)筛查。在接受筛查的患者中,有三人感染了GBS,但有两人没有接受抗生素治疗。结论。胎膜早破术后败血症的发生率较低。识别有风险的新生儿具有挑战性,但由于缺乏败血症的临床特征和正常快速获得的支持性实验室标志物,可以保证抗生素可以暂时保留。应严格执行更好的GBS筛查计划和孕妇适当的抗生素反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The value of routine empiric antibiotic use in neonates born to mothers with prolonged rupture of membranes
Background. The routine use of empiric antibiotics in neonates born to mothers with prolonged rupture of membranes (PROM) iscontroversial.Objectives. To determine the incidence of probable and proven sepsis in such neonates and identify risk factors for sepsis and theiroutcomes.Methods. This was a retrospective chart review conducted at King Edward VIII Hospital over two years. Study participants included 200neonates and 181 mothers. Data were captured onto Microsoft Excel, collated and analysed using descriptive statistics and comparative data utilising the R Core Team’s R Statistical Computing Software, 2020.Results. Seven neonates (3.5%) had proven sepsis, 58 (29%) had probable sepsis, and 135 (67.5%) were without sepsis. Two (1.0%) neonates died and 188 (94.0%) received antibiotics. White cell count was normal in all cases without sepsis and abnormal in 65.5% and 28.6% of cases with probable and proven sepsis, respectively. A raised C-reactive protein was observed in only 22.4% and 14.3% of neonates with probable and proven sepsis, respectively. One hundred and sixty-seven (83.5%) mothers had no Group B Streptococcus (GBS) screening. Of those screened, three had GBS infection, but two did not receive antibiotics.Conclusions. The incidence of sepsis following PROM is low. Identifying neonates at risk is challenging, but the absence of clinical features and normal rapidly obtained supportive laboratory markers of sepsis provides reassurance that antibiotics could be temporarily withheld. Better GBS screening programmes and appropriate antibiotic responses for pregnant women should be implemented rigorously.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Hepatocardiopulmonary hydatid cysts: A rare paediatric case Exploring adolescent fertility inequality in Southern Africa Hyperglycaemia and outcome in neonates with hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy An audit of infants presenting with cholestatic jaundice at a secondary hospital in Johannesburg, South Africa A description of the management and outcomes of infants with short bowel syndrome in a South African context
×
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