Aim  To establish a prevalence estimate for drooling and explore factors associated with drooling in a population sample of children with cerebral palsy (CP) aged 7 to 14 years living in Victoria, Australia. Method  A self‐report questionnaire was used to collect data on drooling from parents of children born between 1996 and 2001, and registered with the Victorian Cerebral Palsy Register. Results  A total of 385 children (231 males, 154 females; mean age 10y 9mo [SD 1y 7mo], range 8–14y) were studied. The clinical type and distribution of CP were spastic (341), ataxic (16), dyskinetic (17), hypotonic (10), and unknown (1). Distribution in Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) levels was I (103), II (98), III (52), IV (63), V (61), and unknown (8). After adjustment for topographical pattern of motor impairment and GMFCS level, 40% were reported to have experienced drooling between 4 years of age and the time of completing the questionnaire. A significantly higher prevalence of drooling was found in children with poor gross motor function and in those with more severe presentations of CP, including poor head control, difficulty with eating, and inability to sustain lip closure (p<0.001 for each). Drooling was shown to be significantly associated with both intellectual disability and epilepsy in this group of children (p<0.001 for both). Interpretation  With a prevalence of 40%, drooling is an important comorbidity in CP. It was considered severe in 15% of children. Poor oromotor function was associated with drooling and could be the target of interventions for this under‐researched problem.

BackgroundDespite recent improvements in malaria prevention strategies, malaria case management remains a weakness in Northern Nigeria, which is underserved and suffers the country’s highest rates of under-five child mortality. Understanding malaria care-seeking patterns and comparing case management outcomes to World Health Organization (WHO) and Nigeria’s National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP) guidelines are necessary to identify where policy and programmatic strategies should focus to prevent malaria mortality and morbidity.MethodsA cross-sectional survey based on lot quality assurance sampling was used to collect data on malaria care-seeking for children under five with fever in the last two weeks throughout Sokoto and Bauchi States. The survey assessed if the child received NMCP/WHO recommended case management: prompt treatment, a diagnostic blood test, and artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT). Deviations from this pathway and location of treatment were also assessed. Lastly, logistic regression was used to assess predictors of seeking treatment.ResultsOverall, 76.7% of children were brought to treatment—45.5% to a patent medicine vendor and 43.8% to a health facility. Of children brought to treatment, 61.5% sought treatment promptly, but only 9.8% received a diagnostic blood test and 7.2% received a prompt ACT. When assessing adherence to the complete case management pathway, only 1.0% of children received NMCP/WHO recommended treatment. When compared to other treatment locations, health facilities provided the greatest proportion of children with NMCP/WHO recommended treatment. Lastly, children 7–59 months old were at 1.74 (p = 0.003) greater odds of receiving treatment than children ≤6 months.ConclusionsNorthern Nigeria’s coverage rates of NMCP/WHO standard malaria case management for children under five with fever fall short of the NMCP goal of 80% coverage by 2010 and universal coverage thereafter. Given the ability to treat a child with malaria differs greatly between treatment locations, policy and logistics planning should address the shortages of essential malaria supplies in recommended and frequently accessed treatment locations. Particular emphasis should be placed on integrating the private sector into standardized care and educating caregivers on the necessity for testing before treatment and the availability of free ACT in public health facilities for uncomplicated malaria.

Results-Vaccine coverage for hepatitis B dropped sharply from 99% to 53% to 39% for the first, second, and third doses respectively. In contrast, vaccine coverage was maintained at 97-99% for the three doses of poliomyelitis vaccine. Serological evaluation of vaccine efficacy showed that only 3-5% of recipients of all three doses failed to develop antibodies to hepatitis B surface antigen. Only 6-6% of vaccine recipients were vaccinated according to either the early or later schedules whereas 93 4% received their doses of vaccine at intervals beyond the limits of either of the planned schedules. There was, however, no significant difference in seroconversion to the surface antigen between the "unscheduled" or scheduled groups or those who were vaccinated according to the early or late schedules. The pattern of prevalence of antibodies to hepatitis B core antigen, which showed a sharp fail in children aged over 7 months, suggested that the antibodies were acquired passively rather than by active infection.Conclusions -Supplementation of the present expanded programme on immunisation with hepatitis B vaccine in rural Africa is fraught with difficulties. However, the vaccine was effective within a fairly wide spacing of dosage. Adding hepatitis B vaccine to diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis as a tetravalent vaccine is proposed as a means of effectively integrating it into the expanded programme on immunisation in Third World settings.

Prescribing errors are relatively common in general practice. Jennifer McCutcheon provides an overview of common prescribing errors and how they can be prevented Nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals are increasingly becoming prescribers and many of them work autonomously in general practice. Prescribing professionals have a duty to understand what a prescribing error is, common examples of errors in practice, how they are prevented and how they can be investigated and reported should they occur.

Nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals are increasingly becoming prescribers and many of them work autonomously in general practice. Prescribing professionals have a duty to understand what a prescribing error is, common examples of errors in practice, how they are prevented and how they can be investigated and reported should they occur.