Association of respiratory viral detection with complex febrile seizures and hospitalisation in children after the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective observational study - Summary - MDSpire
Coming Soon: Introducing MDSpire News. Learn more
Conexiant’s news site is now MDSpire News. Learn more

Impact of Respiratory Virus Detection on Complex Febrile Seizures and Hospitalization Rates in Children Following the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective Observational Analysis

  • By

  • Ho-Young Song

  • So-Hyun Paek

  • Jae-Hyun Kwon

  • Soo Hyun Park

  • Min-Jung Kim

  • Young-Hoon Byun

  • Jin Hee Kim

  • Sung-Ha Kim

  • June 10, 2026

Share

Objective:

To evaluate associations between respiratory viral detection and clinical outcomes in children with febrile seizures (FS).

Approach:
  • Study Design: Retrospective analysis of children aged 6–60 months with FS who underwent multiplex respiratory virus RT-PCR in a tertiary pediatric emergency department from April 2023 to March 2025.
  • Statistical Analysis: Logistic regression was used to assess associations of individual viruses and viral co-detection with risks of complex febrile seizures (CFS) and hospitalization, adjusting for various covariates.
Key Findings:
  • Among 558 children, 95 (17.0%) had CFS.
  • Parainfluenza virus (PIV) was associated with lower odds of CFS (adjusted OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.89).
  • Seasonal coronaviruses were associated with lower odds of CFS (adjusted OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.89).
  • PIV was associated with lower odds of hospitalization (adjusted OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.80).
  • Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) was associated with lower odds of hospitalization (adjusted OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.78).
  • Viral co-detection occurred in 47.8%, and each additional virus was associated with lower odds of CFS (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.88) and hospitalization (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.90).
Interpretation:

Detection of certain respiratory viruses and viral co-detection was associated with lower odds of CFS and hospitalization, indicating the need for cautious interpretation of multiplex RT-PCR results.

Limitations:
  • Residual confounding and selection bias related to the retrospective design.
  • Clinician-directed testing may have influenced results.
Conclusion:

The study emphasizes the importance of cautious interpretation of multiplex RT-PCR results in relation to clinical presentation.

Original Source(s)

Related Content