No antibiotics for kids under 3 yrs old with positive strep?

SingALong

Wed, Nov 29 2017, 11:44 pm

I took ds 9 months old to dr today, low grade fever, irritable, congested...
He did a throat culture and was positive for strep. However, dr said they are recommending no antibiotics for kids under age 3 who test positive, and I should wait it out. And as far as contagion 25% of kids at any given time have strep anyways so it’s ok.
This is the first im hearing about this not giving antibiotics with symptoms and positive culture. Anyone ever hear of this? Had it with their own kid and they recovered without medicine?

amother

Puce

Wed, Nov 29 2017, 11:50 pm

Yes! Just went through the same thing recently..the pediatrician didn’t even want to culture my baby for strep because he said they’re trying to limit giving antibiotics under 3 years of age..(basically the “receptors” don’t grow in until after age 3 and therefore the strep will remain in the throat and won’t travel into the blood-that’s the very shortened version)

amother

Plum

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 12:05 am

Pediatric nurse here.

A healthy person with a healthy immune system can typically fight strep on their own. The reason we treat strep over the age of 2 or 3 (depending on your pediatrician) is due to the risk of rheumatic fever, which can occur as a result of untreated strep, and can cause heart damage. Under the age of 2, there is no risk of rheumatic fever, and therefore most doctors will allow the baby's immune system to fight it on it's own as it does a virus.

Here's a link to an article on rheumatic fever:

https://medlineplus.gov/ency/a.....0.htm

unexpected

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 12:20 am

I have had this with my daughter. Dr said it's okay not to medicate, and since she was a terrible medicine-taker I gave it a try. It took about 2 weeks to recover and during that time, my entire family (including myself and my husband) came down with strep. I never tried it again.

amother

Plum

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 7:46 am

amother wrote:

WHAT? I'd demand it for strep.

There's no "demanding" it. The accepted and appropriate practice for infants is not to treat and that's up to the doctor, not the "demanding" patient.

amother

Ginger

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 8:08 am

amother wrote:

There's no "demanding" it. The accepted and appropriate practice for infants is not to treat and that's up to the doctor, not the "demanding" patient.

Then you've been seeing the wrong doctor.

thunderstorm

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 8:09 am

My pediatrician doesn't give under age one . They always have antibiotics for strep to my toddlers between one and three. It's the first time I've heard of waiting so long.

amother

Plum

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 9:33 am

amother wrote:

Then you've been seeing the wrong doctor.

No I haven't. I'm a nurse working with multiple pediatricians. And it's really irritating when a parent "demands" something they know nothing about.

amother

Burlywood

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 9:44 am

Both pediatricians we have used (one in bklyn and now in kj) don't treat it until 2.
They wouldn't even check and rightly so. Why torture and culture a kid if your anyways not gonna treat it?

Also, when it is treated, I'd suggest to do an overnight and check for about resistence.
I've had experience with that. Dds started about first strep. It was an instant that came back positive. Two days later the doc called to say that he sent a sample overnight and the abX he gave her was not the right for the strain she has. And not to send her to school before 24 hours of about even though fever has gone down.
And also have had close neighbors struggle with getting rid of strep and then only to get it back as soon as abx was done 3-4 times in a row. When she told me about it, I suggested she ask the ped to test it. And sure enough that strain was resistant to all three abx has been taking.

amother

Teal

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 1:51 pm

amother wrote:

Then you've been seeing the wrong doctor.

Why do you need the doctor if you already know what to do? I always wonder about people who "demand" treatments from doctors. I go to the doctor because he has the training and knowledge that I don't have to treat me properly

amother

Ginger

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 2:14 pm

amother wrote:

Because you don't know the dose, the exact med, and you need a prescription, maybe? Hummm take a wild guess. BH my doctors are efficient and TREAT their patients.

amother

Yellow

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 2:20 pm

This is part of why my kids and I all share a PCP- family physician rather than a pediatrician and an internist. I hear the medical reasoning behind not giving it to the toddler who's unlikely to have complications, but what about their infecting and reinfecting parents and older siblings? It's not as if toddlers are known for good hygiene (I.e. keeping things out of their mouths, covering their mouth when they cough or sneeze).

creditcards

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 3:52 pm

amother wrote:

No I haven't. I'm a nurse working with multiple pediatricians. And it's really irritating when a parent "demands" something they know nothing about.

Parents usually know what they are talking about when they request something. I respectful doctor includes the mother's opinions in her decisions.

creditcards

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 3:56 pm

amother wrote:

For a prescription. You can know until tomorrow that you need antibiotics but you can't prescribe it yourself.

I don't like this attitude that a lot of doctors have of "I know better than you because I have training that you don't have" There or plenty of parents that do a lot of research and know their kids very well to know better than a doctor at times.

amother

Apricot

Thu, Nov 30 2017, 4:04 pm

amother wrote:

My son's pediatrician didn't treat his strep under the age of two until I told her we were passing it back and forth to each other. We each got it about 3-4 times until she treated it in him and eradicated it once and for all (at least for that winter).