Background and objective
We explored how systematic reviews evaluated paracetamol and ibuprofen for treating pain in children, as these two non‐opioid analgesics are well‐established medicines included in most national essential medicines lists.
Databases and data treatment
We carried out an overview of systematic reviews (SRs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions (PROSPERO registration: 42016045367). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Database of Reviews of Effects (DARE) up to 23 August 2017. We used AMSTAR checklist to analyse methodological quality of included SRs.
Results
We found 17 SRs with 72 unique RCTs; the majority of those trials included under 100 children. Positive conclusive evidence was found in only one SR, regarding safety of paracetamol. Conclusions of other SRs for efficacy and safety of ibuprofen and paracetamol were inconclusive, unclear, or there was no opinion. Only one SR analysed efficacy of ibuprofen and other non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in chronic pain and the conclusion was that there was no evidence from RCTs that NSAIDs were effective for chronic non‐cancer pain in children and adolescents. Most of the SRs addressed very narrow questions, included few trials, with few children and were of low or medium methodological quality.
Conclusions
Most SRs on two relevant medicines have inconsistent conclusions and doubt upon their effectiveness. Instead of focusing on very narrow questions, SRs should examine more comprehensive research topics to obtain a general sense of consistency, particularly when analysing established medicines.
Significance
Evidence behind two analgesics—ibuprofen and paracetamol—that are well‐established medicines for children in most countries appears limited, judging by the systematic reviews. The discrepancy between clinical use and the extensive evidence we reviewed may be a result of the selective criteria in the reviews examined. We need new, and better evidence syntheses supporting the use of these two medicines in wide indications regarding pain in children.
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 presents a threat to the mental health of the medical staff working with COVID-19 patients. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of working during the COVID-19 pandemic on resident physicians. METHODS: The study was conducted via anonymous online survey and included resident physicians. The survey contained questions about sociodemographic information, general job satisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their personal lives. RESULTS: This study included a response from 728 resident physicians. The majority of residents rated that the COVID-19 pandemic had a mostly negative impact on their satisfaction with professional life (59.9%) and quality of work (62.8%), their personal lives (44.7%) and quality of life (57.1%). Half of all residents indicated that they did not have enough personal protective equipment (PPE). About one-third of residents indicated that the level of stress at work during the COVID-19 pandemic was higher. CONCLUSIONS: Working as resident physicians during COVID-19 pandemic had a negative effect on participants’ professional and personal lives. Residents did not have all the necessary PPE nor felt safe working with patients with suspected or proven COVID-19. Further action is needed to provide support for physician residents working during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Background: One of the frequently used methods for assessing research trends and the impact of published scientific literature in a particular discipline is citation analysis. Journals may strive to improve their metrics by choosing manuscripts and study designs that are more likely to be cited. The aim of this study was to identify the 50 most-cited articles in the field of pediatrics, analyze their study design and other characteristics of those articles, and assess the prevalence of systematic reviews among them. Methods: In December 2017, we searched Web of Science (WoS) for all articles published in the field of pediatrics. Two authors screened articles independently and in the further analysis included 50 articles with the highest number of citations. To avoid bias for scientific papers published earlier, the citation density was calculated. We also analyzed Journal Impact Factor (JIF) of journals where citation classics were published. Results: The citation density in top 50 cited articles in the field of pediatrics ranged from 33.16 to 432.8, with the average of 119.95. Most of the articles reported clinical science. Median 2016 JIF for journals that published them was 6.226 (range: 2.778 to 72.406). Half of the top 10 highly cited articles in pediatrics were published in a journal with JIF below 5. Most of the studies among the citation classics in pediatrics were cross-sectional studies (N = 22), followed by non-systematic narrative reviews (N = 10), randomized controlled trials (N = 5), cohort studies (N = 5), systematic reviews (N = 2), case-control studies (N = 2), case reports (N = 2), and there was one study protocol and one expert opinion. Conclusion: Few randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews were among citation classics in the field of pediatrics. Articles that use observational research methodology, and are published in journals with lower impact factors, can become citation classics.
Background and Objectives: When the human body is disabled to naturally ingest food through the mouth, enteral or parenteral nutritional support should be started. Percutaneous gastrostomy (PEG) is a flexible feeding tube that is inserted into the stomach through the abdominal wall in patients who will need long-term enteral nutrient intake. The aim of this study is to analyze clinical characteristic of children at the time of PEG placement as well as to determine indications, complications and outcomes associated with PEG at the Department of Pediatrics of the University Hospital of Split. Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis of the medical records of patients treated from 2010 to 2020 was performed. The following data were collected from medical records: age, gender, information about nasogastric feeding before PEG placement, indication for PEG insertion, duration of PEG, procedure-related complications and treatment outcomes. Malnutrition was determined according to the z-score range for BMI for age and sex. According to the indication for PEG placement, patients were divided into five categories: central nervous system (CNS) diseases, neuromuscular diseases, genetic disorders, metabolic diseases, and group of children with polytrauma. Results: A total of 40 patients with median age of 110 months were included in study. At the time of PEG placement, most patients had deviations in body weight and height compared to expected values for age and sex. The most common underlying diagnoses were diseases of the central nervous system. Minor complications were found in 13 (35%) of patients. One patient (2.7%) developed major complication (gastrocolic fistula) and consequently underwent reoperation. The median duration of PEG in patients with complications before the need for replacement was 27 months, and in patients without complications, 43 months. Conclusions: Negative deviations of z-score body weight, body height, and body mass index could indicate the need for possible earlier placement of PEG. PEG can be considered as a safe therapeutic option in children since PEG-related complications, mostly in minor forms, were found in a small number of patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.