Educational interventions on fever management in children: A scoping review.
Daniel Arias, Timothy F Chen, Rebekah J Moles
PMID 31367392WHAT IT FOUND
Most of 37 fever education studies reported improved caregiver and clinician knowledge, but methods were too varied to show which format works best or changes long-term care.
Key findings
01The review mapped 37 studies of active educational interventions for children's fever, including caregivers, nurses, clinicians, pharmacists, students, child health workers and shopkeepers.
02Only 2/37 interventions showed no positive improvement in any outcome measure.
03Heterogeneity in interventions, target measures and assessment tools prevented firm conclusions about the most effective fever education method.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The review included 37 studies, but they differed too much in participants, settings, interventions and outcomes to compare them reliably. Most included studies were pre-post or other non-random designs, and many had moderate to high risk of bias. There was no standardized fever knowledge tool, and outcomes were measured at different times using many different methods. The review excluded non-English studies and studies published before January 1980, so relevant work may be missing. Publication bias is possible because most studies showed positive effects.
Declared interests
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as proof that any fever education programme works. The review found mostly positive knowledge results across heterogeneous studies, but it did not test a single intervention and cannot show lasting behaviour change or reduced emergency visits.