Variations in Care for Breastfed Infants Admitted to US Children's Hospitals: A Multicenter Survey of Inpatient Providers.

BACKGROUND: Studies have revealed an association between hospitalization of breastfed infants and weaning posthospitalization. It is unknown what steps inpatient providers at children's hospitals are currently taking to support breastfeeding mothers of hospitalized infants, their comfort providing breastfeeding counseling, and what training they receive. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter survey study of pediatric providers who care for infants hospitalized at 3 urban, tertiary-care children's hospitals over a 12-month period. A convenience sample of nurses, residents, and attending physicians agreed to participate. Participants completed a 24-question questionnaire addressing provider practices, comfort with breastfeeding counseling, and previous breastfeeding education. Data were summarized as medians (interquartile ranges) and frequencies (percentages). Kruskal-Wallis and χ2 tests were used to compare between provider types. RESULTS: A total of 361 out of 1097 (33%) eligible providers completed the survey: 133 (21%) nurses, 166 (45%) residents, and 62 (63%) attending physicians. Provider practices varied by provider type. We observed a general trend that providers do not routinely review breastfeeding techniques, directly observe feeds, or use standardized breastfeeding assessment tools. Residents and attending physicians were more likely than nurses to feel comfortable with breastfeeding counseling (P = .02). Residents were more likely than nurses and attending physicians to have received breastfeeding education in the last 3 years (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Practices, comfort, and previous education varied by provider type. There was a general pattern that providers do not routinely perform certain practices. Further studies are needed to determine if inpatient provider practices affect weaning posthospitalization and if inpatient quality improvement initiatives will help mothers continue breastfeeding posthospitalization.

A Randomized, Prospective, Double-Blinded Study of Physostigmine to Prevent Sedation-Induced Ventilatory Arrhythmias.

BACKGROUND: Physostigmine, a centrally acting acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, is most commonly used by anesthesiologists in the postanesthetic setting to reverse confusion caused by central anticholinergic medication effects. It has also been proposed as a treatment for sleep-disordered breathing. We investigated whether physostigmine was effective in decreasing the frequency of ventilatory arrhythmias produced during moderate sedation with midazolam and remifentanil during the conditions of breathing room air or 2 L/min nasal O2. METHODS: Ten healthy male volunteers participated in this randomized, double-blind control trial of physostigmine (0.24 µg·kg·min) versus placebo. Moderate sedation was achieved with infusions of midazolam and remifentanil and monitored with full and processed electroencephalogram. Analgesia was quantified with subjective pain score to thermal stimulation. Ventilatory arrhythmias, as measured by the sedation apnea-hypopnea index (S-AHI), were scored as the number of apneas and hypopneas during two 1-hour periods on room air or 2 L/min nasal O2. RESULTS: All subjects tolerated the sedation and physostigmine without significant adverse effects. Sedation during placebo infusion resulted in clinically significant (S-AHI > 15) ventilatory arrhythmias in 5 conditions in 3 subjects (2 on room air and then O2, and 1 on O2 only). Physostigmine did not significantly (P > 0.46) reduce the total number of ventilatory arrhythmias on either room air or O2 (13.4 ± 18.8 events/h [mean ± SEM], 95% confidence interval [CI] = -9.9 to 62.7; and 6.2 ± 8.0, 95% CI = -3.1 to 28.7, respectively). Physostigmine did reduce the S-AHI in all 5 instances of clinically significant ventilatory arrhythmias (S-AHI decreased by 67.0 ± 22.2; CI = 29.2-111.7; P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Physostigmine does not appear to be useful as a pretreatment to prevent ventilatory arrhythmias during moderate sedation. However, it may be useful as a treatment for clinically significant ventilatory arrhythmias during moderate sedation.

Validation of a measurement to predict upper airway collapsibility during sedation for colonoscopy.

Techniques to quantify the effects of sedation on upper airway collapsibility have been used as research tools in the laboratory and operating room. However, they have not been used previously in the usual clinical practice environment of colonoscopy sedation. The propensity for upper airway collapsibility, quantified as the critical pharyngeal pressure (P(crit)), was hypothesized to correlate with the need for clinical intervention to maintain ventilation. Twenty patients scheduled for colonoscopy with sedation were prospectively recruited to undergo measurement of upper airway collapsibility using negative airway pressure (NAP) provocation with a minimum pressure of -18 cmH(2)O. The P(crit) was the negative pressure that collapses the airway, either directly or by extrapolation from the pressure-flow relationship. An exponential transformation was applied to the P(crit) data for statistical analysis. A clinical intervention score (CIS) was used to quantify required interventions by the sedation nurse. The measurement of the P(crit) during sedation was significantly larger (less negative) than both the baseline ("awake") (P = 0.0029) and late recovery (P = 0.01) values. The CIS was not predicted by the transformed baseline or sedated P(crit) with or without including demographics associated with sleep apnea syndrome. Although the NAP technique showed the expected changes with sedation in this clinical situation, we did not find that it predicted the need for clinical intervention during endoscopy. Our study was not large enough to test for subpopulations in which the test might be predictive; further studies of these particular groups are needed to determine the clinical utility of the NAP measurement.