Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
Clin Pediatr (Phila) ; 60(11-12): 465-473, 2021 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34486411

RESUMEN

A chest radiograph (CXR) is not routinely indicated in children presenting with their first episode of wheezing; however, it continues to be overused. A survey was distributed electronically to determine what trainees are taught and their current practice of obtaining a CXR in children presenting with their first episode of wheezing and the factors that influence this practice. Of the 1513 trainees who completed surveys, 35.3% (535/1513) reported that they were taught that pediatric patients presenting with their first episode of wheezing should be evaluated with a CXR. In all, 22.01% (333/1513) indicated that they would always obtain a CXR in these patients, and 13.75% (208/1513) would always obtain a CXR under a certain age (4 weeks to 12 years, median of 2 years). Our study identifies a target audience that would benefit from education to decrease the overuse of CXRs in children.


Asunto(s)
Uso Excesivo de los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Radiografía Torácica/estadística & datos numéricos , Ruidos Respiratorios/diagnóstico , Procedimientos Innecesarios/estadística & datos numéricos , Niño , Preescolar , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Masculino
2.
Pediatr Emerg Care ; 36(1): 16-20, 2020 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31851079

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Routine use of chest X-ray (CXR) in pediatric patients presenting with their first episode of wheezing was recommended by many authors. Although recent studies conclude that a CXR is not routinely indicated in these children, there continues to be reports of overuse. OBJECTIVE: To examine the attitudes of practicing physicians in ordering CXRs in pediatric patients presenting with their first episode of wheezing to an emergency department (ED) and the factors that influence this practice by surveying ED physicians. METHODS: A survey targeting pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) and general emergency medicine attending physicians was distributed electronically to the nearly 3000 members of the PEM Brown listserve and the Pediatric Section of American College of Emergency Physicians listserve. The 14-item survey included closed ended and free text questions to assess the respondent's demographic characteristics, their belief and current practice of obtaining a CXR in pediatric patients presenting with their first episode of wheezing. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and χ test. RESULTS: Of the 537 attending physicians who participated, their primary residency training was: 42% pediatrics, 54% emergency medicine, and 4% other. Seventy-two percent of participating physicians supervise residents, 54% were board-eligible or -certified in PEM. Thirty percent (95% confidence interval [CI], 26-34) of participants indicated that they would always obtain a CXR in pediatric patients presenting with their first episode of wheezing. Eighty-one percent (95% CI, 75-87) of those who always obtain a CXR believe that it is the standard of care. Of the 376 physicians who do not always obtain a CXR, 18% (95% CI, 15-23) always obtain a CXR under certain age (2 weeks to 12 years, median of 1 year). Physicians who report a primary residency in pediatrics, who supervise residents, who were board-eligible or -certified in PEM, and who were practicing for greater than 5 years were less likely to obtain a CXR (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, a significant number of practicing ED physicians routinely obtain a CXR in children with their first episode of wheezing presenting to the ED. The factors influencing this practice are primary residency training, fellowship training, resident supervision, and years of independent practice. This identifies a target audience that would benefit from education to decrease the overuse of CXRs in children with wheezing.


Asunto(s)
Asma/diagnóstico por imagen , Medicina de Emergencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Pulmón/diagnóstico por imagen , Radiografía Torácica/estadística & datos numéricos , Ruidos Respiratorios , Niño , Medicina de Emergencia/educación , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Femenino , Humanos , Internado y Residencia , Masculino , Cuerpo Médico de Hospitales , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados Unidos , Procedimientos Innecesarios/estadística & datos numéricos
3.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol ; 36(11): 1402-8, 2013 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23875736

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing at the time of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation is widely used in clinical practice, but reliable data supporting its routine use are lacking. We undertook a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of DFT testing compared to no DFT testing at the time of ICD implantation. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for studies evaluating the effect of DFT testing on total mortality and ventricular arrhythmias during follow-up. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random effects modeling. RESULTS: Eight studies involving 5,020 patients (3,068 undergoing DFT and 1,952 not undergoing DFT) were included. Of those, only one study was randomized. Reasons for not performing DFT included patient characteristics (four studies), center's standard practice (three studies), or randomization (one study). Median follow-up was 24 months. Overall, the quality of the included studies was rather poor. On the basis of the pooled estimate across the studies, DFT testing did not reduce total mortality or ventricular arrhythmias at follow-up (RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.74-1.21; P = 0.65 and RR = 1.19, 95% CI 0.85-1.68; P = 0.30, respectively). No individual study had a major impact on the estimated RR or the statistical significance based on a sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: Recognizing the limited quality of current studies in the area of DFT testing and outcomes, available data suggest that DFT testing at the time of ICD implantation does not appear to predict total mortality and ventricular arrhythmias during follow-up. Large randomized controlled trials, adequately powered to detect clinical outcomes, are warranted.


Asunto(s)
Desfibriladores Implantables/estadística & datos numéricos , Análisis de Falla de Equipo/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/mortalidad , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/prevención & control , Fibrilación Ventricular/mortalidad , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Prevalencia , Pronóstico , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Factores de Riesgo , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Tasa de Supervivencia , Resultado del Tratamiento
4.
Am J Ther ; 20(6): e720-2, 2013.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21768871

RESUMEN

Sertraline is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, which is a commonly used drug for major depressive disorder. Most frequently reported adverse effects of sertraline in patients receiving 50-150 mg/d are dry mouth, headache, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, sweating, and dizziness. We hereby report one of the few cases of sertraline-induced ventricular tachycardia, which has been for the first time objectively assessed by the Naranjo scale. We therefore urge the primary care physicians and the cardiologists to keep sertraline as a possible precipitating factor for evaluation of ventricular tachycardia.


Asunto(s)
Inhibidores Selectivos de la Recaptación de Serotonina/efectos adversos , Sertralina/efectos adversos , Taquicardia Ventricular/inducido químicamente , Trastorno Depresivo Mayor/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Inhibidores Selectivos de la Recaptación de Serotonina/uso terapéutico , Sertralina/uso terapéutico
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA