Children with COVID-19 like symptoms in Italian Pediatric Surgeries: the dark side of the coin

  1. Gianfranco Trapani
  2. Vassilios Fanos
  3. Enrico Bertino
  4. Giulia Maiocco
  5. Osama Al Jamal
  6. Michele Fiore
  7. Vincenzo Bembo
  8. Domenico Careddu
  9. Lando Barberio
  10. Luisella Zanino
  11. Giuseppe Verlato

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

Symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection in children are nonspecific and shared with other common acute viral illnesses (fever, respiratory or gastrointestinal symptoms, and cutaneous signs), thus making clinical differential diagnosis tricky. In Italy, first line management of pediatric care is handed over to Primary Care Pediatricians (PCPs), who were not allowed to directly perform diagnostic tests during the recent COVID-19 outbreak. Without a confirmatory diagnosis, PCPs could only collect information on “COVID-19 like symptoms” rather than identify typical COVID-19 symptoms.

Aim

To evaluate the prevalence of COVID-19 like symptoms in outpatient children, during Italian lockdown. To provide PCPs a risk score to be used in clinical practice during the differential diagnosis process.

Methods

A survey was submitted to 50 PCPs (assisting 47,500 children) from 7 different Italian regions between the 4 th of March and the 23 rd of May 2020 (total and partial lockdown period). COVID-19 like symptoms in the assisted children were recorded, as well as presence of confirmed/suspected cases in children’s families, which was taken as proxy of COVID-19. Multivariable logistic regression was accomplished to estimate the risk of having suspected/confirmed cases in families, considering symptoms as potential determinants.

Results

2,300 children (4.8% of overall survey population) fell ill with COVID-19 like symptoms, 3.1% and 1.7% during total and partial lockdown period respectively. The concurrent presence of fatigue, cough, and diarrhea in children, in absence of sore throat/earache and abnormal skin signs, represents the maximum risk level of having a suspected/confirmed case of COVID-19 at home.

Conclusions

The percentage of children presenting COVID-19 like symptoms at home has been remarkable also during the total lockdown period. The present study identified a pattern of symptoms which could help, in a cost-effective perspective, PCPs in daily clinical practice to define priorities in addressing children to the proper diagnostic procedure.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.27.20149757: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    The main limitation of this study was the lack of nasopharyngeal swab as a diagnostic tool for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of note, this limitation was not peculiar of the present study but affected the entire primary care setting in Italy, for both children and adults. To circumvent this limitation the presence of suspected/confirmed case of COVID-19 at home was assumed as a proxy of COVID-19.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.27.20149757: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.Randomizationnot detected.Blindingnot detected.Power Analysisnot detected.Sex as a biological variableMales (n=1,242, 54.0%) were more prevalent than females (n=1,058, 46%), and median age was 4 years (range 0-16 years).

    Table 2: Resources

    Data from additional tools added to each annotation on a weekly basis.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore is not a substitute for expert review. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers) in the manuscript, and detects sentences that appear to be missing RRIDs. SciScore also checks to make sure that rigor criteria are addressed by authors. It does this by detecting sentences that discuss criteria such as blinding or power analysis. SciScore does not guarantee that the rigor criteria that it detects are appropriate for the particular study. Instead it assists authors, editors, and reviewers by drawing attention to sections of the manuscript that contain or should contain various rigor criteria and key resources. For details on the results shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.07.27.20149757v1 on medRxiv