Objective: A recent Internet survey of pediatric neurosurgeons showed that 86% routinely admitted children with immediate posttraumatic seizures (PTS) for a brief period of observation. We wished to determine whether certain children meeting predefined criteria could instead be safely discharged from the emergency room. Methods: We reviewed the records of children admitted during the past 5 years with a diagnosis of seizure and head injury. Children with a minor head injury, a PTS occurring within 24 h of injury and no intracranial abnormalities on admission CT scan were included. Children with previous neurological conditions, a history of prior seizures (other than PTS or febrile seizures), a prior history of anticonvulsant use, or intracranial abnormalities on the admission CT scan were excluded. Records were abstracted for child’s age, gender, length of admission, previous history of PTS or febrile seizures, mechanism of injury, location of impact, time between impact and PTS, the number, length and type of PTS, Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) on admission, subsequent complications and hospital costs. Results: Seventy-one children met the inclusion criteria. Eleven children presented to the emergency room with prolonged seizures, transient apnea or persistently low GCS and required admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). Among the 60 remaining children with simple PTS, none had further seizures during the follow-up period, and none had significant complications. The average cost of hospitalization was known for 58 children; after excluding the costs for 5 patients who were admitted to the ICU, the average hospital cost amounted to USD 1,615 per patient. Conclusions: Our data suggest that children with isolated minor head injuries and simple PTS who recover fully in the emergency room, whose CT scans show no intracranial abnormalities and who have no prior history of neurological disease, epilepsy or anticonvulsant use are at low risk for recurrent seizures or neurological complications, and could potentially be sent home to a reliable caretaker and a stable home situation. However, because of the limited sample size in this study, the statistical risk of a bad outcome may be as high as 9%; we therefore suggest that much larger studies are potentially needed before this becomes a standard policy.
Objective: Pediatric procedural sedation (PPS) is used to maintain children's safety, comfort, and cooperation during emergency department procedures. Our objective was to gather data describing PPS practice across the United States to highlight the variations in practice and adherence to National Guidelines. Methods:We performed a nationwide survey of PPS practitioners using a secure web-based software program. A link to the survey was sent to all subscribers of a pediatric emergency medicine listserv. We collected participant demographics, their PPS approach for personnel, monitoring, equipment, postsedation observation, and side effects, as well as providers' medication preferences for 3 common PPS scenarios. Results:We received 211 completed surveys from 34 States. There were 20.6% respondents that were based in New York, 83.4% were pediatric emergency medicine attendings, and 91.7% were based in the United States teaching hospitals. Our participants learned PPS by various methods, most commonly: observation of at least 10 PPS (29.9%); self-study (24.8%); and classroom lectures (24.5%). Seventy-seven percent of our participants reported no body mass index cutoff to do PPS. There were 31.5% of our participants that observe children after PPS up to 1 hour, 30.1% up to 2 hours. There were 67.7% of the PPS providers that were a separate person from the practitioner doing the procedure, and 98.2% required a separate trained nurse to be present for monitoring. There were 92.6% of PPS providers that measure end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO 2 ) during the sedation. Most PPS providers reported having no reversal agents (71.4%) and no defibrillator (65.9%) at bedside. For the abscess drainage scenario, 22% of participants preferred local anesthetic alone, and 22.5% preferred utilizing local anesthetic in combination with intravenous ketamine. For a forearm fracture reduction scenario, 62.8% of participants would choose intravenous ketamine alone. For the laceration repair scenario, the most favored drug combination was local anesthesia + intranasal midazolam by 39.8% of participants.Conclusions: Our study demonstrates a wide variability in several aspects of PPS and low adherence to national PPS guidelines.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.