METHODS: This cross-sectional study in a tertiary hospital in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia involved parents of children with asthma. Parents of children without asthma were the control group. Eleven validated video clips showing wheeze, stridor, transmitted noises, snoring or normal breathing were shown to the parents. Parents were asked, in English or Malay, "What do you call the sound this child is making?" and "Where do you think the sound is coming from?"
RESULTS: Two hundred parents participated in this study: 100 had children with asthma while 100 did not. Most (71.5 %) answered in Malay. Only 38.5 % of parents correctly labelled wheeze. Parents were significantly better at locating than labelling wheeze (OR 2.4, 95 % CI 1.64-3.73). Parents with asthmatic children were not better at labelling wheeze than those without asthma (OR1.04, 95 % CI 0.59-1.84). Answering in English (OR 3.4, 95 % CI 1.69-7.14) and having older children with asthma (OR 9.09, 95 % CI 3.13-26.32) were associated with correct labelling of wheeze. Other sounds were mislabelled as wheeze by 16.5 % of respondents.
CONCLUSION: Parental labelling of wheeze was inaccurate especially in the Malay language. Parents were better at identifying the origin of wheeze rather than labelling it. Physicians should be wary about parental reporting of wheeze as it may be inaccurate.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the HRQoL and developmental outcome of children on HMV.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study used the TNO-AZL Preschool children's Quality Of Life (TAPQOL; <5 years old) and Health Utilities Index (HUI) 2/3 (≥5 years old) to assess the quality of life and the Schedule of Growing Skills-II to assess development. Instruments were used on children currently or previously on HMV (≥3 months) and compared with age and sex-matched controls.
RESULTS: Sixty-five patients and 130 controls were recruited. Patients' median (interquartile range) age was 3.12 (1.65, 5.81) years. Patients had significantly lower TAPQOL scores in the domains of lung, liveliness, positive mood, social functioning, motor functioning, and communication, and lower HUI 2/3 scores in hearing, sensation, pain, speech, mobility, ambulatory, dexterity, and self-care domains. The developmental outcome of patients was poorer in all domains. However, patients had fewer behavioral problems. Those with respiratory tract disease and without comorbidities had better HRQoL and developmental scores. Having a parent as the primary caregiver was associated with better speech and language skills.
CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL and the developmental outcome are lower in children on HMV compared to controls. Children with respiratory tract disease and without comorbidities have a better outcome. Parents play a crucial role in the acquisition of speech.
METHODOLOGY: This prospective cohort study involved children 1 month to 5-years-old admitted with an LRTI. Children with asthma were excluded. Patients were reviewed at 1-, 6-, and 12-months post-hospital discharge. The parent cough-specific quality of life, the depression, anxiety, and stress scale questionnaire and cough diary for 1 month, were administered. Outcomes reviewed were number of unscheduled healthcare visits, respiratory symptoms and final respiratory diagnosis at 6 and/or 12 month-review by pediatric pulmonologists.
RESULTS: Three hundred patients with a mean ± SD age of 14 ± 15 months old were recruited. After 1 month, 239 (79.7%) returned: 28.5% (n = 68/239) had sought medical advice and 18% (n = 43/239) had cough at clinic review. Children who received antibiotics in hospital had significantly lower total cough scores (P = .005) as per the cough diary. After 1 year, 26% (n = 78/300) had a respiratory problem, predominantly preschool wheezing phenotype (n = 64/78, 82.1%). Three children had bronchiectasis or bronchiolitis obliterans. The parent cough-specific quality of life (PCQOL) was significantly lower in children with respiratory sequelae (P
OBJECTIVES: To determine the a) aetiology, b) factors associated with bacterial pneumonia and c) association between co-infections (bacteria + virus) and severity of disease, in children admitted with severe pneumonia.
METHODS: A prospective cohort study involving children aged 1-month to 5-years admitted with very severe pneumonia, as per the WHO definition, over 2 years. Induced sputum and blood obtained within 24 hrs of admission were examined via PCR, immunofluorescence and culture to detect 17 bacteria/viruses. A designated radiologist read the chest radiographs.
RESULTS: Three hundred patients with a mean (SD) age of 14 (±15) months old were recruited. Significant pathogens were detected in 62% of patients (n = 186). Viruses alone were detected in 23.7% (n = 71) with rhinovirus (31%), human metapneumovirus (HMP) [22.5%] and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) [16.9%] being the commonest. Bacteria alone was detected in 25% (n = 75) with Haemophilus influenzae (29.3%), Staphylococcus aureus (24%) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (22.7%) being the commonest. Co-infections were seen in 13.3% (n = 40) of patients. Male gender (AdjOR 1.84 [95% CI 1.10, 3.05]) and presence of crepitations (AdjOR 2.27 [95% CI 1.12, 4.60]) were associated with bacterial infection. C-reactive protein (CRP) [p = 0.007]) was significantly higher in patients with co-infections but duration of hospitalization (p = 0.77) and requirement for supplemental respiratory support (p = 0.26) were not associated with co-infection.
CONCLUSIONS: Bacteria remain an important cause of very severe pneumonia in developing countries with one in four children admitted isolating bacteria alone. Male gender and presence of crepitations were significantly associated with bacterial aetiology. Co-infection was associated with a higher CRP but no other parameters of severe clinical illness.
METHODS: A review of medical records of children who underwent adenotonsillectomy between January 2011 and December 2014 was performed. Association between demographic variables and post-operative complications were examined using chi-square and Mann-Whitney tests.
RESULTS: A total of 214 children were identified, and of these, 19 (8.8%) experienced post-operative complications. Six children (2.8%) had respiratory complications: hypoxaemia in four and laryngospasm requiring reintubation in a further two. Both of the latter patients were extubated upon arrival to PICU and required no escalation of therapy. A total of 13 (6.1%) children had non-respiratory complications: 8 (3.7%) had infection and 5 (2.3%) had haemorrhage. A total of 26 (12.1%) children were electively admitted to PICU and mean stay was 19.5 (SD ± 13) h. No association between demographic characteristics, comorbid conditions or polysomnographic parameters and post-operative complications were noted. A total of 194 (90.7%) children stayed only one night in hospital (median 1 day, range 1-5 days).
CONCLUSION: The previously identified risk factors and criteria for PICU admission need revision, and new recommendations are necessary.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess preoperative predictors for intraoperative IPAA and review management.
DESIGN: This is a retrospective review.
SETTING: This study was conducted at Cleveland Clinic between January 2010 and May 2018.
PATIENTS: Patients ≥18 years of age who underwent ileoanal pouch surgery were included. Patients with successful pouch creation as planned were grouped as "successful IPAA creation." Operative reports of patients who underwent alternative procedures were reviewed to identify cases when the pouch was preoperatively planned but intraoperatively abandoned (IPAA-abandoned group). Multivariate logistic regression models were developed to determine predictors of intraoperative pouch abandonment. We also reviewed the management of patients in whom the initial pouch creation failed.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were preoperative predictors for intraoperative ileoanal pouch abandonment.
RESULTS: A total of 1438 patients were offered an ileoanal pouch; 21 (1.5%) experienced pouch abandonment due to inadequate reach (n = 17) and other technical reasons (n = 4). These patients underwent alternative procedures such as end or loop ileostomy with/without proctectomy. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated male sex (OR, 6.021; 95% CI, 1.540-23.534), BMI (OR, 1.217; 95% CI, 1.114-1.329), and a 2-stage procedure (OR, 14.510; 95% CI, 4.123-51.064) as independent factors associated with intraoperative abandonment of pouch creation. Alternative procedures were total proctocolectomy with end ileostomy (n = 14) and total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy without proctectomy (n = 7). Ultimately, pouch creation was achieved in 6 of 21 patients after a median interval of 8.8 (range, 4.1-34.8) months. All patients had intentional weight loss before a reattempt and total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy without proctectomy as their initial procedure.
LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective nature.
CONCLUSIONS: Ileoanal pouch abandonment is rare and can be mitigated by initial total abdominal colectomy and weight loss. Male, obese patients are at a higher risk of failure. Intraoperative assessment of ileoanal pouch feasibility should occur before rectal dissection. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B156. PREDICCIÓN MULTIVARIANTE DEL ABANDONO INTRAOPERATORIO DE LA ANASTOMOSIS ANAL CON BOLSA ILEAL: La proctocolectomía total restaurativa con anastomosis de bolsa ileoanal puede no ser posible en algunos pacientes debido a limitaciones técnicas intraoperatorias.Evaluar los predictores preoperatorios para el abandono intraoperatorio de la bolsa ileoanal y revisar el manejo.Revisión retrospectiva.Cleveland Clinic entre Enero de 2010 y mayo de 2018.Pacientes > 18 años que se sometieron a cirugía de bolsa ileoanal. Los pacientes con una creación exitosa de la bolsa según lo planeado se agruparon como "creación exitosa de anastomosis de bolsa ileoanal". Se revisaron los informes operativos de los pacientes que se sometieron a procedimientos alternativos para identificar los casos en que la bolsa se planificó preoperatoriamente pero se abandonó intraoperatoriamente (grupo de "anastomosis anal de bolsa ileoanal abandonada"). Se desarrollaron modelos de regresión logística multivariante para determinar los predictores del abandono intraoperatorio de la bolsa. También revisamos el manejo de pacientes que fallaron en la creación inicial de la bolsa.Predictores preoperatorios para el abandono intraoperatorio de la bolsa ileoanal.A un total de 1438 pacientes se les ofreció una bolsa ileoanal; 21 (1.5%) experimentaron abandono de la bolsa debido a un alcance inadecuado (n = 17) y otras razones técnicas (n = 4). Estos pacientes se sometieron a procedimientos alternativos como ileostomía final o de asa con / sin proctectomía. El análisis de regresión logística multivariante indicó género masculino (OR, 6.021; IC 95%, 1.540-23.534), índice de masa corporal (OR, 1.217; IC 95%, 1.114-1.329) y procedimiento en 2 etapas (OR, 14.510; IC 95%, 4.123-51.064) como factores independientes asociados con el abandono intraoperatorio de la creación de la bolsa. Los procedimientos alternativos fueron la proctocolectomía total con ileostomía final (n = 14) y la colectomía abdominal total con ileostomía final sin proctectomía (n = 7). Finalmente, la creación de la bolsa se logró en 6/21 pacientes después de un intervalo medio de 8.8 (rango, 4.1-34.8) meses. Todos los pacientes tuvieron pérdida de peso intencional antes de la reintenta y colectomía abdominal total con ileostomía final sin proctectomía como procedimiento inicial.Naturaleza retrospectiva.El abandono de la bolsa ileoanal es raro y puede mitigarse mediante la colectomía abdominal total inicial y la pérdida de peso. Los pacientes masculinos y obesos tienen un mayor riesgo de fracaso. La evaluación intraoperatoria de la viabilidad de la bolsa ileoanal debe ocurrir antes de la disección rectal. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B156. (Traducción-Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Kahlil).
METHODS: The GI-COVID-19 is a prospective, multicenter, controlled study. Patients with and without COVID-19 diagnosis were recruited at hospital admission and asked for GI symptoms at admission and after 1 month, using the validated Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale questionnaire.
RESULTS: The study included 2036 hospitalized patients. A total of 871 patients (575 COVID+ and 296 COVID-) were included for the primary analysis. GI symptoms occurred more frequently in patients with COVID-19 (59.7%; 343/575 patients) than in the control group (43.2%; 128/296 patients) (P < 0.001). Patients with COVID-19 complained of higher presence or intensity of nausea, diarrhea, loose stools, and urgency as compared with controls. At a 1-month follow-up, a reduction in the presence or intensity of GI symptoms was found in COVID-19 patients with GI symptoms at hospital admission. Nausea remained increased over controls. Factors significantly associated with nausea persistence in COVID-19 were female sex, high body mass index, the presence of dyspnea, and increased C-reactive protein levels.
DISCUSSION: The prevalence of GI symptoms in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is higher than previously reported. Systemic and respiratory symptoms are often associated with GI complaints. Nausea may persist after the resolution of COVID-19 infection.