Abstract Aims: This study aimed to study the viral etiology of bronchiolitis and compare the clinical profile of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) with non-RSV bronchiolitis in hospitalized Indian children. Settings and Design: This was a prospective observational study conducted in a tertiary hospital from October 2016 to 2018 with ethics committee approval. Materials and Methods: Seventy indoor patients aged from 1 month to 2 year with a clinical diagnosis of bronchiolitis were enrolled in the study with prior consent to participate in the study. Nasopharyngeal swabs of patients were taken and sent to the National Institute of Virology for multiple viral detection by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Clinical presentation, severity, and viral etiology were studied. Statistical Analysis Used: Intergroup statistical comparison of the distribution of categorical variables is tested using the Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact probability test. The entire data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS ver 21.0, IBM Corporation, Chicago, IL, USA) for MS Windows. Results: Viral etiology was documented in 74.3% ( n = 52) of patients. RSV (65.7%, n = 46) was the most common, followed by rhinovirus. About 5.7% have both RSV and rhinovirus coinfection. Other detected viral pathogens included parainfluenza virus, human metapneumovirus (HMPV), and adenovirus. Statistically significant correlation was found between saturation on admission and duration of hospital stay and need for mechanical ventilation ( P < 0.001). There was no difference in clinical profile and morbidity of RSV and non-RSV bronchiolitis patients. Conclusions: RSV was the most common viral etiology of bronchiolitis in our study. There was no difference in clinical profile and outcome of RSV and non-RSV bronchiolitis patients.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Ms. Suman Bisht
Sanjay Bafna
Journal of Pediatric Pulmonology
Jehangir Hospital
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Bisht et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69db38534fe01fead37c6934 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jopp.jopp_40_25