Highlights About two thirds of caregivers intend to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. Most common reason for acceptance was to protect the child. Most common reason for refusal was the vaccine’s novelty. Child age, chronic illness, vaccination history affects willingness. Caregiver gender, vaccination history, concern about infection affect willingness.
IMPORTANCE Procedural sedation for children undergoing painful procedures is standard practice in emergency departments worldwide. Previous studies of emergency department sedation are limited by their single-center design and are underpowered to identify risk factors for serious adverse events (SAEs), thereby limiting their influence on sedation practice and patient outcomes.OBJECTIVE To examine the incidence and risk factors associated with sedation-related SAEs.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study was conducted in 6 pediatric emergency departments in Canada between July 10, 2010, and February 28, 2015. Children 18 years or younger who received sedation for a painful emergency department procedure were enrolled in the study. Of the 9657 patients eligible for inclusion, 6760 (70.0%) were enrolled and 6295 (65.1%) were included in the final analysis.EXPOSURES The primary risk factor was receipt of sedation medication. The secondary risk factors were demographic characteristics, preprocedural medications and fasting status, current or underlying health risks, and procedure type. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESFour outcomes were examined: SAEs, significant interventions performed in response to an adverse event, oxygen desaturation, and vomiting. RESULTSOf the 6295 children included in this study, 4190 (66.6%) were male and the mean (SD) age was 8.0 (4.6) years. Adverse events occurred in 736 patients (11.7%; 95% CI, 6.4%-16.9%). Oxygen desaturation (353 patients [5.6%]) and vomiting (328 [5.2%]) were the most common of these adverse events. There were 69 SAEs (1.1%; 95% CI, 0.5%-1.7%), and 86 patients (1.4%; 95% CI, 0.7%-2.1%) had a significant intervention. Use of ketamine hydrochloride alone resulted in the lowest incidence of SAEs (17 [0.4%]) and significant interventions (37 [0.9%]). The incidence of adverse sedation outcomes varied significantly with the type of sedation medication. Compared with ketamine alone, propofol alone (3.7%; odds ratio [OR], 5.6; 95% CI, 2.3-13.1) and the combinations of ketamine and fentanyl citrate (3.2%; OR, 6.5; 95% CI, 2.5-15.2) and ketamine and propofol (2.1%; OR, 4.4; 95% CI, 2.3-8.7) had the highest incidence of SAEs. The combinations of ketamine and fentanyl (4.1%; OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.8-8.1) and ketamine and propofol (2.5%; OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.2-3.8) had the highest incidence of significant interventions. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThe incidence of adverse sedation outcomes varied significantly with type of sedation medication. Use of ketamine only was associated with the best outcomes, resulting in significantly fewer SAEs and interventions than ketamine combined with propofol or fentanyl.
Background. Antibiotic administration to individuals with Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) infection remains controversial. We assessed if antibiotic administration to individuals with STEC infection is associated with development of hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS).Methods. The analysis included studies published up to 29 April 2015, that provided data from patients (1) with STEC infection, (2) who received antibiotics, (3) who developed HUS, and (4) for whom data reported timing of antibiotic administration in relation to HUS. Risk of bias was assessed; strength of evidence was adjudicated. HUS was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes restricted the analysis to low-risk-of-bias studies employing commonly used HUS criteria. Pooled estimates of the odds ratio (OR) were obtained using random-effects models.Results. Seventeen reports and 1896 patients met eligibility; 8 (47%) studies were retrospective, 5 (29%) were prospective cohort, 3 (18%) were case-control, and 1 was a trial. The pooled OR, including all studies, associating antibiotic administration and development of HUS was 1.33 (95% confidence interval [CI], .89-1.99; I 2 = 42%). The repeat analysis including only studies with a low risk of bias and those employing an appropriate definition of HUS yielded an OR of 2.24 (95% CI, 1.45-3.46; I 2 = 0%).Conclusions. Overall, use of antibiotics was not associated with an increased risk of developing HUS; however, after excluding studies at high risk of bias and those that did not employ an acceptable definition of HUS, there was a significant association. Consequently, the use of antibiotics in individuals with STEC infections is not recommended.
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.