SENTINEL1: Two-Season Study of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Hospitalizations among U.S. Infants Born at 29 to 35 Weeks' Gestational Age Not Receiving Immunoprophylaxis.
Humans; Male; Female; Infant; Infant Newborn; Odds Ratio; Multivariate Analysis; Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use; United States/epidemiology; Intensive Care Units Pediatric; Community-Acquired Infections/epidemiology; Respiration Artificial; Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data; Infant Premature; Respiratory Syncytial Virus Human; Infant Premature Diseases/epidemiology/prevention & control/therapy; Palivizumab/therapeutic use; Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections/epidemiology/prevention & control/therapy
OBJECTIVE: The SENTINEL1 observational study characterized confirmed respiratory syncytial virus hospitalizations (RSVH) among U.S. preterm infants born at 29 to 35 weeks' gestational age (wGA) not receiving respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) immunoprophylaxis (IP) during the 2014 to 2015 and 2015 to 2016 RSV seasons. STUDY DESIGN: All laboratory-confirmed RSVH at participating sites during the 2014 to 2015 and 2015 to 2016 RSV seasons (October 1-April 30) lasting ≥24 hours among preterm infants 29 to 35 wGA and aged <12 months who did not receive RSV IP within 35 days before onset of symptoms were identified and characterized. RESULTS: Results were similar across the two seasons. Among infants with community-acquired RSVH (N = 1,378), 45% were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and 19% required invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). There were two deaths. Infants aged <6 months accounted for 78% of RSVH observed, 84% of ICU admissions, and 91% requiring IMV. Among infants who were discharged from their birth hospitalization during the RSV season, 82% of RSVH occurred within 60 days of birth hospitalization discharge. CONCLUSION: Among U.S. preterm infants 29 to 35 wGA not receiving RSV IP, RSVH are often severe with almost one-half requiring ICU admission and about one in five needing IMV.
Anderson EJ; DeVincenzo JP; Simões EAF; Krilov LR; Forbes ML; Pannaraj PS; Espinosa CM; Welliver RC; Wolkoff LI; Yogev R; Checchia PA; Domachowske JB; Halasa N; McBride SJ; Kumar VR; McLaurin KK; Rizzo CP; Ambrose CS
American Journal of Perinatology
2020
2020-03
Article information provided for research and reference use only. All rights are retained by the journal listed under publisher and/or the creator(s).
journalArticle
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1681014" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">10.1055/s-0039-1681014</a>
Efficacy of intravenous lidocaine to reduce pain and distress associated with propofol infusion in pediatric patients during procedural sedation.
Female; Male; Child; Infant; Prospective Studies; Pain Measurement; Analysis of Variance; Placebos; Injections; Human; Chi Square Test; Preschool; Intravenous; Anesthetics; Treatment Outcomes; Double-Blind Studies; Hypnotics and Sedatives – Administration and Dosage; Lidocaine – Administration and Dosage; Local – Administration and Dosage; Propofol – Administration and Dosage
BACKGROUND: Research suggests that young children experience an increased incidence and severity of discomfort during propofol infusion. Evaluations of varied interventions to reduce or eliminate this discomfort with adult subjects suggest that premedication with intravenously administered lidocaine (0.5 mg/kg) offers the best overall effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: Because this regimen's efficacy in a pediatric population is undocumented, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to determine the effectiveness of intravenous lidocaine pretreatment to alleviate pain in pediatric subjects before propofol infusion. METHODS: Subjects (aged 2-7 years) scheduled for painless diagnostic procedures received either a saline placebo or 1 of 2 lidocaine doses before administering propofol. To capture the patient's baseline behavioral state, a trained observer administered the validated Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability Pain Assessment Scale before propofol infusion. During deep sedation induction, the sedating physician, a trained research assistant, and the patient's parent documented maximum distress using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: Ninety-one subjects participated. We found no difference in VAS pain scores between groups pretreated with lidocaine 0.25 mg/kg, lidocaine 0.5 mg/kg, and placebo. Statistical analysis also found no interrater differences between parents, physician, or observer VAS scores. CONCLUSIONS: Our data do not support using lidocaine pretreatment to alleviate pain/discomfort in pediatric patients during propofol infusion.
Depue K; Christopher NC; Raed M; Forbes ML; Besunder J; Reed MD
Pediatric emergency care
2013
2013-01
Article information provided for research and reference use only. All rights are retained by the journal listed under publisher and/or the creator(s).
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1097/PEC.0b013e31827b227e" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">10.1097/PEC.0b013e31827b227e</a>