ABSTRACT
The fetal-to-neonatal transition poses an extraordinary challenge for extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants, and postnatal stabilization in the delivery room (DR) remains challenging. The initiation of air respiration and the establishment of a functional residual capacity are essential and often require ventilatory support and oxygen supplementation. In recent years, there has been a tendency towards the soft-landing strategy and, subsequently, non-invasive positive pressure ventilation has been generally recommended by international guidelines as the first option for stabilizing ELBW in the delivery room. On the other hand, supplementation with oxygen is another cornerstone of the postnatal stabilization of ELBW infants. To date, the conundrum concerning the optimal initial inspired fraction of oxygen, target saturations in the first golden minutes, and oxygen titration to achieve desired stability saturation and heart rate values has not yet been solved. Moreover, the retardation of cord clamping together with the initiation of ventilation with the patent cord (physiologic-based cord clamping) have added additional complexity to this puzzle. In the present review, we critically address these relevant topics related to fetal-to-neonatal transitional respiratory physiology, ventilatory stabilization, and oxygenation of ELBW infants in the delivery room based on current evidence and the most recent guidelines for newborn stabilization.
ABSTRACT
After the publication of the recommendations, agreed by all the scientific societies through the ILCOR, at the end of 2020, the GRN-SENeo began a process of analysis and review of the main changes since the last guidelines, to which a specific consensus positioning on controversial issues, trying to avoid ambiguities and trying to adapt the evidence to our environment. This text summarizes the main conclusions of this work and reflects the positioning of that group.
Subject(s)
Resuscitation , ConsensusABSTRACT
Tras la publicación de las recomendaciones, consensuadas por todas las sociedades científicas a través del ILCOR, a finales del año 2020, el GRN-SENeo inició un proceso de análisis y revisión de los principales cambios desde las últimas guías, a los que se añadió un posicionamiento específico de consenso en temas controvertidos, tratando de evitar ambigüedades, y procurando adaptar la evidencia a nuestro medio. El presente texto, resume las principales conclusiones de este trabajo y refleja el posicionamiento de dicho grupo. (AU)
After the publication of the recommendations, agreed by all the scientific societies through the ILCOR, at the end of 2020, the GRN-SENeo began a process of analysis and review of the main changes since the last guidelines, to which a specific consensus positioning on controversial issues, trying to avoid ambiguities and trying to adapt the evidence to our environment. This text summarizes the main conclusions of this work and reflects the positioning of that group. (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Infant, Newborn , Child Health , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Infant, Newborn , Consensus , NeonatologyABSTRACT
Introducción: El uso de determinadas pseudociencias en niños está documentado en España. El objetivo principal del estudio es estimar el grado de conocimiento, la recomendación y el uso de algunas pseudoterapias por parte de los pediatras españoles. Material y métodos: Estudio transversal, descriptivo y de ámbito nacional, mediante encuesta en línea, enviada por correo electrónico a pediatras socios de la Asociación Española de Pediatría (AEP), entre junio y julio de 2020. (AU)
Introduction: The use of certain Complementary and Alternative Medicines (CAM) in children has been documented in Spain. The main aim of this study is to estimate the knowledge, recommendations, and use of CAM by Spanish paediatricians. Material and methods: A national study was conducted from June to July 2020 using an online questionnaire. Two e-mails were sent to paediatricians who were members of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics (AEP). (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Child , Homeopathy , Pediatrics , Spain , Cross-Sectional StudiesABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The use of certain Complementary and Alternative Medicines (CAM) in children has been documented in Spain. The main aim of this study is to estimate the knowledge, recommendations, and use of CAM by Spanish paediatricians. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A national study was conducted from June to July 2020 using an online questionnaire. Two e-mails were sent to paediatricians who were members of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics (AEP). RESULTS: Out of 1414 responses received, acupuncture was considered as a science by 31.8%. Homeopathy was recommended to parents by 28.1%. CAM was used by 21.3% of physicians, at least once, to improve their own health. Only 3.8% had ever replaced a conventional treatment with CAM. The following variables were associated with a greater disposition to prescribe homeopathy: female, age over 45 years old, paediatricians working in Primary Care, and paediatricians working in private healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: This AEP Committee on Medicines questionnaire provides new data that should be considered alarming and should ask for a serious thinking on the use of CAM in Spain. Some paediatricians are recommending parents to give treatments not supported by scientific evidence to their children. This practice could be potentially harmful, especially when conventional treatment is being replaced.
Subject(s)
Complementary Therapies , Homeopathy , Physicians , Child , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Pediatricians , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
After the publication of the recommendations, agreed by all the scientific societies through the ILCOR, at the end of 2020, the GRN-SENeo began a process of analysis and review of the main changes since the last guidelines, to which a specific consensus positioning on controversial issues, trying to avoid ambiguities and trying to adapt the evidence to our environment. This text summarizes the main conclusions of this work and reflects the positioning of that group.
ABSTRACT
Since 2009, the use of off-label and unlicensed drugs has been regulated in Spain. In pediatrics, this exceptional use is more common than in other medical specialties. It varies from 10% to 90% of all prescriptions in children. This variability is due to differences in methodology, classification and sources of information used, and also to the different pediatrics subspecialties. In addition, the knowledge of several pediatricians on this issue is limited and more than half do not comply with the law, in many cases due to ignorance. However, the use of off-label and unlicensed drugs is legal and necessary. The Medicines Committee of the Spanish Association of Pediatrics (CM-AEP) considers that it is necessary to improve the existing information on medicines in the pediatric population. Therefore, the CM-AEP works out a document where suggestions and actions are proposed to achieve it, because children's health deserves it.
Subject(s)
Off-Label Use , Pediatrics , Child , Humans , Off-Label Use/statistics & numerical data , Pediatricians , Prescriptions , SpainABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The use of certain Complementary and Alternative Medicines (CAM) in children has been documented in Spain. The main aim of this study is to estimate the knowledge, recommendations, and use of CAM by Spanish paediatricians. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A national study was conducted from June to July 2020 using an online questionnaire. Two e-mails were sent to paediatricians who were members of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics (AEP). RESULTS: Out of 1,414 responses received, acupuncture was considered as a science by 31.8%. Homeopathy was recommended to parents by 28.1%. CAM was used by 21.3% of physicians, at least once, to improve their own health. Only 3.8% had ever replaced a conventional treatment with CAM. The following variables were associated with a greater disposition to prescribe homeopathy: female, age over 45 years old, paediatricians working in Primary Care, and paediatricians working in private healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: This AEP Committee on Medicines questionnaire provides new data that should be considered alarming and should ask for a serious thinking on the use of CAM in Spain. Some paediatricians are recommending parents to give treatments not supported by scientific evidence to their children. This practice could be potentially harmful, especially when conventional treatment is being replaced.
ABSTRACT
Aims: This study is aimed to investigate the effectiveness of an oral stimulation protocol in preterm infants compared to usual care, to reduce the time for achieving safe full oral feeding.Methods: 47 preterm infants (25- 30 weeks of gestational age) were randomized into two groups. Babies of the EG (n = 24) received a 10-minute oral stimulation protocol while the CG (n = 23) received the standard care. The primary outcome were the days from the initiation of the intervention until the achievement of full oral feeding. Secondary outcomes were: days from the first day the intervention started until achieving a first oral intake of 30% in the first 5 minutes, days from the first day the intervention started until achieving a first oral intake of 100%, and days of hospitalization. A parametric survival model with Gaussian distribution was used.Results: The EG achieved full oral feeding 8.3 days before the CG (p = 0.013). EG also achieved the first oral intake of 30% in the first five minutes, 6.03 days before (p = 0.019) and of 100%, 5.88 days before (p = 0.040). EG also spent 6.9 days less hospitalized than CG (p = 0.028).Conclusion: Oral stimulation in preterm infants significantly shortens the time to achieve full oral feeding and reduces the length of hospitalization.
Subject(s)
Bottle Feeding , Physical Stimulation/methods , Sucking Behavior , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infant, Premature , Length of Stay , MaleABSTRACT
No disponible
Subject(s)
Humans , Child , Complementary Therapies/methods , Medicine, Traditional/methods , Pediatrics/methods , Spain , Terminology as TopicABSTRACT
Currently, there are some therapies that are being practiced without adjusting to the available scientific evidence. The terminology is confusing, encompassing terms such as "alternative medicine", "natural medicine", "complementary medicine", "pseudoscience" or "pseudo-therapies". The Medicines Committee of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics considers that no health professional should recommend treatments not supported by scientific evidence. Also, diagnostic and therapeutic actions should be always based on protocols and clinical practice guidelines. Health authorities and judicial system should regulate and regularize the use of alternative medicines in children, warning parents and prescribers of possible sanctions in those cases in which the clinical evolution is not satisfactory, as well responsibilities are required for the practice of traditional medicine, for health professionals who act without complying with the "lex artis ad hoc", and for the parents who do not fulfill their duties of custody and protection. In addition, it considers that, as already has happened, Professional Associations should also sanction, or at least reprobate or correct, those health professionals who, under a scientific recognition obtained by a university degree, promote the use of therapies far from the scientific method and current evidence, especially in those cases in which it is recommended to replace conventional treatment with pseudo-therapy, and in any case if said substitution leads to a clinical worsening that could have been avoided.
