4.6 Article

Henoch Schonlein Purpura - A 5-Year Review and Proposed Pathway

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 7, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029512

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Henoch Schonlein Purpura (HSP) is the commonest systemic vasculitis of childhood typically presenting with a palpable purpuric rash and frequently involving the renal system. We are the first group to clinically assess, critically analyse and subsequently revise a nurse led monitoring pathway for this condition. A cohort of 102 children presenting with HSP to a secondary/tertiary level UK paediatric hospital over a five year period, were monitored using a nurse led care pathway. Using this cohort, the incidence (6.21 cases per 100,000 children per year) and natural disease course of HSP nephritis (46% initial renal inflammation; 9% subsequent renal referral; 1% renal biopsy and immunosuppression) was determined. Older patients were at higher risk of requiring a renal referral (renal referral 12.3 (8.4-13.5) years vs. normal outcome 6.0 (3.7-8.5) years; p<0.01). A normal urinalysis on day 7 had a 97% (confidence interval 90 to 99%) negative predictive value in predicting a normal renal outcome. Using this data and existing literature base, The Alder Hey Henoch Schonlein Purpura Pathway was developed, a revised pathway for the screening of poor renal outcome in HSP. This is based on a six-month monitoring period for all patients presenting with HSP, which importantly prioritises patients according to the urine findings on day 7 and thus intensively monitors those at higher risk of developing nephritis. The pathway could be easily adapted for use in different settings and resources. The introduction of a standardised pathway for the monitoring of HSP will facilitate the implementation of disease registries to further our understanding of the condition and permit future clinical trials.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available