OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify the determinants of non-adherence to unintentional home injury prevention practice among parents of under-five children in the North Seberang Perai district, Penang.
METHODS: This sequential explanatory mixed-methods study consists of two phases consisting of a quantitative study which looks into respondents and their child's sociodemographic status, their home injury prevention practice and the independent variables, followed by a qualitative study that interviews parents with non-adherence to home injury prevention practice and explore their barriers. In phase I, the parent or primary caregiver of a child age less than five years old who age 18 or older and is a Malaysian will be included in the study while being disabled or having a severe psychiatric disorder or having the index child diagnosed with chronic disease will make them not eligible to participate in the study. Derived using the two-group proportion formula, a sample size of 453 parents will be sampled among those with under-five children following up at the Maternal Child Health Department in the health clinics of North Seberang Perai using stratified systematic sampling. Chi-square/Fisher Exact test, simple logistic regression and multiple logistic regression will be used for data analysis. The sample will be stratified according to household income to look for associated factors and determinants of low prevention practice. In phase II, parents with a low score from the quantitative study will be selected to participate in the qualitative study using purposive sampling. A semi-structured interview using the help of an interview guide will be carried out and recorded with a voice recorder. The thematic analysis approach will be used to analyse the qualitative data.
RESULTS: The study has been registered under the National Medical Research Registry.
CONCLUSION: It is hoped that findings from this study can shed light on the barriers faced by under-five parents in carrying out preventive measures at home.
METHODS: A total of 16,040 primary procedures were identified over a two-year period. Centers that submitted procedures were dichotomized to low/middle income (LMI) and high income (HI) by the Gross National Income per capita categorization. Mortality was defined as any death following the primary procedure to discharge or 90 days inpatient. Multiple logistic regression models were utilized to identify independent predictors of mortality.
RESULTS: Of the total number of procedures analyzed, 83% (n = 13,294) were from LMI centers. Among all centers, the mean age at operation was 2.2 years, with 36% (n = 5,743) less than six months; 85% (n = 11,307) of procedures were STAT I/II for LMI centers compared with 77% (n = 2127) for HI centers (P
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among children who received the COVID-19 vaccine between 3 February and 8 May 2022. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire filled out by the parent or legal guardian.
RESULTS: The mean age of the study participants was 9 years old and 43.1% were males. Out of the 195 participants in the study, 62 (31.8%) reported side effects after vaccination. The most frequently reported side effects were pain at the injection site (29.7%, n=58), fever (15.9%, n=31), localised inflammation (10.8%, n=21) and arthralgia/myalgia (9.2%, n=18). There were no reported severe adverse events such as anaphylaxis or myocarditis. Most side effects occurred within the first two days post-vaccination. There was a higher proportion of side effects among children with underlying co-morbidities. No significant differences were observed based on age, weight, ethnicity and the presence of allergies, or the use of premedication.
CONCLUSION: The BNT162b2 vaccine was generally welltolerated in children, with most side effects being mild and self-limiting. These findings support the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine and would guide healthcare professionals, parents and policy-makers in making informed decisions about COVID-19 vaccination, especially among high-risk groups.
METHODS: A retrospective, multicentre, observational study was performed among children ≤15 years old who were hospitalized for MIS-C between January 18, 2021 and June 30, 2023. The incidence of MIS-C was estimated using reported SARS-CoV-2 cases and census population data. Descriptive analyses were used to summarize the clinical presentation and outcomes.
RESULTS: The study included 53 patients with a median age of 5.7 years (IQR 1.8-8.7 years); 75.5% were males. The overall incidence of MIS-C was approximately 5.9 cases per 1,000,000 person-months. Pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admission was required for 22 (41.5%) patients. No mortalities were recorded. Children aged 6-12 years were more likely to present with cardiac dysfunction/shock (odds ratio [OR] 5.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.67-17.66), whereas children below 6 years were more likely to present with a Kawasaki disease phenotype (OR 5.50, 95% CI 1.33-22.75). Twenty patients (37.7%) presented with involvement of at least four organ systems, but four patients (7.5%) demonstrated single-organ system involvement.
CONCLUSION: An age-based variation in the clinical presentation of MIS-C was demonstrated. Our findings suggest MIS-C could manifest in a spectrum, including single-organ involvement. Despite the high requirement for PICU admission, the prognosis of MIS-C was favorable, with no recorded mortalities.
METHODS: We performed an observational cohort study in tertiary care hospitals from 14 countries across Asia and Ibero-America. We included patients <5 years old who were admitted to participating pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). We performed descriptive analysis and multivariable logistic regression for risk factors of AHT.
RESULTS: 47 (12%) out of 392 patients were diagnosed with AHT. Compared to those with accidental injuries, children with AHT were more frequently < 2 years old (42, 89.4% vs 133, 38.6%, p
CASES: In Malaysia, until end of February 2020, there were four COVID-19 paediatric cases with ages ranging from 20 months to 11 years. All four cases were likely to have contracted the virus in China. The children had no symptoms or mild flu-like illness. The cases were managed symptomatically. None required antiviral therapy.
DISCUSSION: There were 2 major issues regarding the care of infected children. Firstly, the quarantine of an infected child with a parent who tested negative was an ethical dilemma. Secondly, oropharyngeal and nasal swabs in children were at risk of false negative results. These issues have implications for infection control. Consequently, there is a need for clearer guidelines for child quarantine and testing methods in the management of COVID-19 in children.
METHODS: This multinational, cross-sectional study included data from 1071 children 3-5 yr old from 19 countries, collected between 2018 and 2020 (pre-COVID). Sedentary behavior was measured for three consecutive days using activPAL accelerometers. Sedentary time, sedentary fragmentation, and seated transport duration were calculated. Linear mixed models were used to examine the differences in sedentary behavior variables between sex, country-level income groups, urban/rural settings, and population density.
RESULTS: Children spent 56% (7.4 h) of their waking time sedentary. The longest average bout duration was 81.1 ± 45.4 min, and an average of 61.1 ± 50.1 min·d-1 was spent in seated transport. Children from upper-middle-income and high-income countries spent a greater proportion of the day sedentary, accrued more sedentary bouts, had shorter breaks between sedentary bouts, and spent significantly more time in seated transport, compared with children from low-income and lower-middle-income countries. Sex and urban/rural residential setting were not associated with any outcomes. Higher population density was associated with several higher sedentary behavior measures.
CONCLUSIONS: These data advance our understanding of young children's sedentary behavior patterns globally. Country income levels and population density appear to be stronger drivers of the observed differences, than sex or rural/urban residential setting.