Quote:
Well first, no you just left it open and ambigous like you always do. Maybe thats so when pointed out your wrong you left yourself an out. In the future try longer replies.
2nd. did you not read the bold..
Potential downsides of treating fever include delayed identification of an underlying illness and drug toxicity; it is uncertain whether treating fever increases the risk for or complications of certain types of infections. (See 'Benefits and harms' above.)The reason we don't--or shouldn't--treat low grade fever in the ICU is exactly this, it can delay identification and treatment of an underlying infection. My practice is to hold all antipyretics until the temp hits 101*F, then panculture blood, urine, sputum, and make a clinical decision as to whether antibiotics are indicated (some neurologic injuries produce fever of noninfectious origin and we typically prevent any elevation in body temperature for these patients).
As for kids, some don't tolerate even low grade fevers well and may stop taking in fluids. If that persists long enough, likely the risk of dehydration and general misery exceeds the low risk of tylenol and whatever effect it may have on the duration and severity of illness. My guess is the body of evidence suggests the difference falls in the margin and so there's no strong recommendation for or against treating low grade fever, that child and parent tolerance for discomfort typically determine the course and whichever course is chosen, it'll be fine.
But again, my work is in ICU where shit can go south quickly and the bugs are vastly different from what little Jane and Johnny are bringing home from elementary school. So I let fever do its job until it becomes disregulatory. I follow the guidelines.
The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W
