ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2025
Impact of the BRUE (Brief Resolved Unexplained event) definition on hospital clinical practice and recurrence: a quasi-experimental study in infants.
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) changed the definition ALTE to BRUE in its 2016 guideline, which provides a precise definition and establishes criteria for severity, need for hospitalization, and complementary tests. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether the AAP-guideline implementation reduced complementary tests, hospital stay, and to analyze recurrence rates and risk factors for recurrence. A quasi-experimental study was conducted on patients admitted for ALTE/BRUE between January 2015 and December 2021, before and after the publication of the AAP-guideline. A total of 277 patients admitted for BRUE were included, 84 (30.3%) before the AAP guideline and 193 (69.7%) after. Following the change in definition, a decrease in average hospital stay was observed (3 vs. 2 days, p = 0.03). There were fewer pHmetry tests (28.5% vs. 16.5%, p = 0.03), metabolic tests (13% vs. 4.1%, p < 0.01), and reduced home monitoring (17.9% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.04). We found no differences in income among critical units (0% vs 2.6% p = 0.32). Patients with underlying conditions has a higher risk of recurrence (OR 4.43 (1.14-2.17; p = 0.04)).
conclusionsThe implementation of the AAP-guideline in 2016 represents a significant change in the management of this condition, with shorter average hospital stays, fewer supplementary tests, and reduced need for home monitoring, all without compromising patient safety. The number of admissions to critical care units has remained stable, and there has been no increase in recurrences. Patients with underlying conditions are at higher risk of recurrence and constitute a vulnerable group that should be carefully evaluated. WHAT IS KNOWN: • The AAP redefined ALTE as BRUE in 2016 to standardize diagnosis and guide risk-based management. • Preliminary reports suggest the guideline may have influenced clinical practice, though evidence remains limited and inconsistent. WHAT IS NEW: • This study shows decreased hospital stays, complementary tests, and home monitoring after AAP guideline implementation. • Infants with mild/moderate underlying conditions had higher recurrence risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40461923What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.