4.1 Article

Application of Pediatric Appendicitis Score on the Emergency Department of a Secondary Level Hospital

Journal

PEDIATRIC EMERGENCY CARE
Volume 28, Issue 6, Pages 489-492

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e3182586d34

Keywords

appendicitis; score; abdominal pain

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency during childhood. Accurate early diagnosis is important to avoid complications and unnecessary interventions. In 2002, Samuel developed the Pediatric Appendicitis Score (PAS) based on a series of data obtained from anamnesis, physical examination, and laboratory tests. The main purpose of this study was to check the validity of PAS and its applicability to our population. Methods: Prospective observational study, carried out at Hospital Rio Hortega (Valladolid, Spain), between June 2009 and May 2010. Data from 101 patients who presented to the emergency department experiencing abdominal pains were recovered. Results: A total of 101 patients were included in the study: 55 were boys and 46 girls. The mean age was 9.51 (2.76) years. Diagnosis was acute appendicitis in 28 patients, adenitis in 8 patients, nonspecific abdominal pain in 51 patients, and other diagnoses in 14 patients. The mean (SD) PAS for children with and without appendicitis was 7.43 (1.79) and 4.97 (1.67), respectively (P < 0.001). Conclusions: With a cutoff PAS of 3 or lower, there were no patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis; hence, these patients could be discharged without any image studies. If all the patients with a PAS of 8 or higher undergo surgery, we would find in our sample a 4.95% rate of negative appendicectomy, less than other studies have shown. The application of this score in the emergency department could help in the decision making process, aiding in the identification of patients with a low risk of having appendicitis and enabling a better use of resources by avoiding unnecessary diagnostic tests.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available