Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been an increased interest in telehealth as a means of providing care for children by a pediatric cardiologist. In this article, we provide an overview of telehealth utilization as an extension of current pediatric cardiology practices and provide some insight into the rapid shift made to quickly implement these telehealth services into our everyday practices due to COVID-19 personal distancing requirements. Our panel will review helpful tips into the selection of appropriate patient populations and specific cardiac diagnoses for telehealth that put patient and family safety concerns first. Numerous practical considerations in conducting a telehealth visit must be taken into account to ensure optimal use of this technology. The use of adapted staffing and billing models and expanded means of remote monitoring will aid in the incorporation of telehealth into more widespread pediatric cardiology practice. Future directions to sustain this platform include the refinement of telehealth care strategies, defining best practices, including telehealth in the fellowship curriculum and continuing advocacy for technology.
Background Recent evaluation of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) mortality demonstrates disproportionate disease burden within the United States. However, there are few contemporary data on US children living with acute rheumatic fever (ARF) and RHD. Methods and Results Twenty‐two US pediatric institutions participated in a 10‐year review (2008–2018) of electronic medical records and echocardiographic databases of children 4 to 17 years diagnosed with ARF/RHD to determine demographics, diagnosis, and management. Geocoding was used to determine a census tract‐based socioeconomic deprivation index. Descriptive statistics of patient characteristics and regression analysis of RHD classification, disease severity, and initial antibiotic prescription according to community deprivation were obtained. Data for 947 cases showed median age at diagnosis of 9 years; 51% and 56% identified as male and non‐White, respectively. Most (89%) had health insurance and were first diagnosed in the United States (82%). Only 13% reported travel to an endemic region before diagnosis. Although 96% of patients were prescribed secondary prophylaxis, only 58% were prescribed intramuscular benzathine penicillin G. Higher deprivation was associated with increasing disease severity (odds ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.08–1.46). Conclusions The majority of recent US cases of ARF and RHD are endemic rather than the result of foreign exposure. Children who live in more deprived communities are at risk for more severe disease. This study demonstrates a need to improve guideline‐based treatment for ARF/RHD with respect to secondary prophylaxis and to increase research efforts to better understand ARF and RHD in the United States.
Neurodevelopmental impairment is a common and important long-term morbidity among infants with congenital heart disease (CHD). More than half of those with complex CHD will demonstrate some form of neurodevelopmental, neurocognitive, and/or psychosocial dysfunction requiring specialized care and impacting long-term quality of life. Preventing brain injury and treating long-term neurologic sequelae in this high-risk clinical population is imperative for improving neurodevelopmental and psychosocial outcomes. Thus, cardiac neurodevelopmental care is now at the forefront of clinical and research efforts. Initial research primarily focused on neurocritical care and operative strategies to mitigate brain injury. As the field has evolved, investigations have shifted to understanding the prenatal, genetic, and environmental contributions to impaired neurodevelopment. This article summarizes the recent literature detailing the brain abnormalities affecting neurodevelopment in children with CHD, the impact of genetics on neurodevelopmental outcomes, and the best practices for neonatal neurocritical care, focusing on developmental care and parental support as new areas of importance. A framework is also provided for the infrastructure and resources needed to support CHD families across the continuum of care settings.
Background Absorbable or non-absorbable sutures can be used for superficial skin closure following excisional skin surgery. There is no consensus among clinicians nor high-quality evidence supporting the choice of suture. The aim of the present study was to determine current suture use and complications at 30 days after excisional skin surgery. Methods An international, prospective service evaluation of adults undergoing excision of skin lesions (benign and malignant) in primary and secondary care was conducted from 1 September 2020 to 15 April 2021. Routine patient data collected by UK and Australasian collaborator networks were uploaded to REDCap©. Choice of suture and risk of complications were modelled using multivariable logistic regression. Results Some 3494 patients (4066 excisions) were included; 3246 (92.9 per cent) were from the UK and Ireland. Most patients were men (1945, 55.7 per cent), Caucasian (2849, 81.5 per cent) and aged 75–84 years (965, 27.6 per cent). The most common clinical diagnosis was basal cell carcinoma (1712, 42.1 per cent). Dermatologists performed most procedures, with 1803 excisions (44.3 per cent) on 1657 patients (47.4 per cent). Most defects were closed primarily (2856, 81.9 per cent), and there was equipoise in regard to use of absorbable (2127, 57.7 per cent) or non-absorbable (1558, 42.2 per cent) sutures for superficial closure. The most common complications were surgical-site infection (103, 2.9 per cent) and delayed wound healing (77, 2.2 per cent). In multivariable analysis, use of absorbable suture type was associated with increased patient age, geographical location (UK and Ireland), and surgeon specialty (oral and maxillofacial surgery and plastic surgery), but not with complications. Conclusion There was equipoise in suture use, and no association between suture type and complications. Definitive evidence from randomized trials is needed.
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.