Riesgo de contagio por COVID-19 en función del tipo de contacto y de la renta familiar / Risk of contagion by COVID-19 depending on the type of contact and family income

Introducción: tras una segunda oleada de la pandemia COVID-19 en Zaragoza, se estudian los contactos estrechos con pacientes con COVID-19, con la finalidad de valorar el riesgo de infección tras exposición en función del paciente índice, adulto o niño, y la renta familiar. Material y métodos: se realiza un estudio descriptivo de todos los pacientes pediátricos que han tenido contacto con pacientes con COVID-19 en el centro de salud de Delicias Sur de Zaragoza entre los meses de julio y agosto de 2020 y se valora la aparición de síntomas, consultas en servicio de urgencias, realización de pruebas complementarias, contacto estrecho con adulto o con niño y la renta familiar. Resultados: un total de 292 pacientes fueron contacto estrecho con pacientes con COVID-19, de los cuales 128 fueron positivos para la PCR de SARS-CoV-2. Al analizar el tipo de contacto, se encontró que un 10,94% había mantenido contacto estrecho con un niño y un 89,06% con un adulto. El riesgo de contagio tras sufrir contacto con un niño positivo fue del 34,15%, mientras que, tras contacto con un adulto positivo, el riesgo fue del 45,78%. Asimismo, el riesgo de contagio entre las rentas inferiores a 18 000 € fue de 47,9 frente al 27,6% de aquellos pacientes con rentas superiores a 18 000 €. Conclusiones: el riesgo de contagio de COVID-19 es mayor cuando el contacto estrecho es con un adulto y cuando el nivel de renta familiar es inferior (AU)

Purpose: during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Zaragoza, we studied the paediatric contacts of COVID-19-positive patients to estimate the risk of infection after exposure to a positive child or adult and the risk of infection based on household income.Methods: we conducted a descriptive study of all paediatric patients that were close contacts of individuals with COVID-19 in the Delicias Sur Primary Care Centre (Zaragoza, Spain) between July and August 2020. We also analysed the most frequent symptoms, visits to the emergency department, diagnostic tests, contact with a child versus an adult with COVID-19 and household income.Results: a total of 292 patients had had close contact with individuals with COVID-19; 218 of them had positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results. When we analysed the close contacts, we found that 10.94% of patients that tested positive had been in close contact with a child with COVID-19 and 89.06% with an adult with COVID-19. The estimated risk of infection after exposure was 29.8% in the case of close contact with a child with COVID-19 compared to 46.53% when it came to close contact with an adult case. The risk of infection was higher in patients with an annual household income of less than €18000 (47.9%) compared to patients with a higher annual household income (27.6%).Conclusion: the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection was higher in patients that had close contact with adult cases and with lower household incomes. (AU)

Eosinofilia en el niño inmigrante, a propósito de un caso / Eosinophilia in immigrant children, a case report

La asistencia a niños inmigrantes que llegan por primera vez a España continúa siendo una práctica diaria en Pediatría. En la práctica totalidad de centros de salud existen protocolos que contemplan la atención inicial de estos pacientes a su llegada. En la atención inicial a estos niños es básica la anamnesis, una exploración completa y la solicitud de pruebas complementarias específicas. Pese a que la mayoría de estos niños están asintomáticos, la aplicación de estos protocolos puede poner de manifiesto enfermedades como la malnutrición, parasitosis o anemias de diversas etiologías, que de otra forma podrían pasar desapercibidas. Se presenta un caso de un niño de diez años asintomático, procedente de Guinea Ecuatorial, que consulta por primera vez en el centro de salud tras su llegada a España (AU)

Assistance to immigrant children arriving for the first time in Spain continues to be a daily practice in Pediatrics. In nearly all Health Care Centers there are protocols that contemplate the initial care of these patients upon arrival. Anamnesis, a complet examination and the request for specific complementary tests are basic for the initial care of these children. Although most of these children are asymptomatic, the application of these protocols may reveal diseases such as malnutrition, parasitosis or anemias of different etiologies, which could otherwise go unnoticed. We present a case of an asymptomatic ten-year-old boy from Equatorial Guinea, who consulted for the first time at the Health Care Center after his arrival in Spain (AU)

Vacunación frente a la gripe estacional en la infancia y la adolescencia. Recomendaciones del Comité Asesor de Vacunas de la Asociación Española de Pediatría (CAV-AEP) para la campaña antigripal 2016-2017 / Seasonal influenza vaccination in children and adolescents. Recommendations of the Vaccine Advisory Committee of the Spanish Society of Paediatrics for the 2016-2017 campaign

El Comité Asesor de Vacunas de la Asociación Española de Pediatría (CAV-AEP) emite todos los años sus recomendaciones sobre la vacunación frente a este virus en la infancia y la adolescencia. La vacunación de la gripe es una actuación especialmente beneficiosa cuando va dirigida a personas (niños y adultos) que se incluyen en los grupos de población considerados de riesgo. Sin embargo, muchos niños y adolescentes pertenecientes a estos grupos de riesgo, y sus convivientes, continúan sin recibir, por distintas razones, dicha vacunación anual. Asimismo, se insiste en la recomendación de la vacunación de los profesionales sanitarios. En el presente documento se presentan las recomendaciones para la vacunación antigripal en la temporada 2016-2017, y se explican los fundamentos y limitaciones de las mismas. Es necesaria una mayor implicación de los profesionales, las autoridades sanitarias y todos los agentes sociales para transmitir cada año a la población, y de forma especial a los padres de niños y adolescentes pertenecientes a los grupos de riesgo, las recomendaciones de vacunación frente a la gripe estacional (AU)

The Advisory Committee on Immunization of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics issues its recommendations about vaccination against influenza virus in children and adolescents every year before the onset of the flu season. Influenza vaccination is particularly beneficial when aimed at individuals, both children and adults, who are included in the population groups considered at risk. However, for various reasons, many children and adolescents with underlying conditions and their contacts are still not given this vaccination annually. There is a need for a greater involvement of health professionals, health authorities and all social agents to inform the population, especially to the parents of children and adolescents in those risk groups, on the recommendations for seasonal influenza vaccination. In this document, current recommendations for influenza vaccination for the 2016-2017 season are presented, and reasons and limitations are explained. The recommendation for influenza vaccination is emphasized for health professionals (AU)

Calendario de vacunaciones de la Asociación Española de Pediatría (CAV-AEP): recomendaciones 2016 / Immunisation schedule of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics: 2016 recommendations

No disponible

[Immunisation schedule of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics: 2016 recommendations]. / Calendario de vacunaciones de la Asociación Española de Pediatría (CAV-AEP): recomendaciones 2016.

The Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics (CAV-AEP) annually publishes the immunisation schedule which, in our opinion, estimates optimal for children resident in Spain, considering available evidence on current vaccines. We acknowledge the effort of the Ministry of Health during the last year in order to optimize the funded unified Spanish vaccination schedule, with the recent inclusion of pneumococcal and varicella vaccination in early infancy. Regarding the funded vaccines included in the official unified immunization schedule, taking into account available data, CAV-AEP recommends 2+1 strategy (2, 4 and 12 months) with hexavalent (DTPa-IPV-Hib-HB) vaccines and 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. Administration of Tdap and poliomyelitis booster dose at the age of 6 is recommended, as well as Tdap vaccine for adolescents and pregnant women, between 27-36 weeks gestation. The two-dose scheme should be used for MMR (12 months and 2-4 years) and varicella (15 months and 2-4 years). Coverage of human papillomavirus vaccination in girls aged 11-12 with a two dose scheme (0, 6 months) should be improved. Information for male adolescents about potential beneficial effects of this immunisation should be provided as well. Regarding recommended unfunded immunisations, CAV-AEP recommends the administration of meningococcal B vaccine, due to the current availability in Spanish communitary pharmacies, with a 3+1 scheme (3, 5, 7 and 13-15 months). CAV-AEP requests the incorporation of this vaccine in the funded unified schedule. Vaccination against rotavirus is recommended in all infants. Annual influenza immunisation and vaccination against hepatitis A are indicated in population groups considered at risk.

Alivio del dolor y el estrés al vacunar. Síntesis de la evidencia. Recomendaciones del Comité Asesor de Vacunas de la AEP / Relief of pain and distress during immunizations. Synthesis of evidence. Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics

Introducción: en niños y adolescentes sanos, las vacunaciones son con frecuencia fuente de dolor y sufrimiento. Padres, niños, adolescentes y profesionales sanitarios muestran preocupación sobre ello. El Comité Asesor de Vacunas de la Asociación Española de Pediatría (CAV-AEP) cree que abordar el dolor y el sufrimiento al vacunar es necesario, siguiendo la metodología de la medicina basada en la evidencia. El objetivo del presente trabajo es elaborar recomendaciones basadas en el conocimiento científico. Material y métodos: se dividió la materia de estudio en cuatro áreas: amamantamiento y soluciones azucaradas, anestésicos tópicos, métodos para la administración de vacunas y otras intervenciones (distracción). Se realizó una síntesis de la evidencia, asumiendo las recomendaciones de la Guía de práctica clínica de Anna Taddio (2010) e incorporando la evidencia de revisiones sistemáticas y ensayos clínicos posteriores a los incorporados en dicha guía. Resultados: las medidas que se han mostrado efectivas en la disminución del dolor han sido las siguientes: en lactantes, amamantar antes, durante y después de la inyección; las soluciones azucaradas son una alternativa si la lactancia materna no fuera posible; los anestésicos tópicos son eficaces para todas las edades, pero requieren un tiempo para mostrar su efecto y tienen un coste; no aspirar en la inyección intramuscular y hacerlo lo más rápido posible; administrar las vacunas de forma que la más dolorosa sea la última; cuando sea posible, es preferible inyectar simultáneamente más de una vacuna que hacerlo de forma secuencial; sostener al niño en brazos; y utilizar maniobras de distracción para niños de 2-14 años. Conclusiones: realizada una exhaustiva revisión del tema, hay pruebas suficientes para afirmar que los profesionales que administran vacunas infantiles deberían poner en práctica medidas para atenuar el dolor que indudablemente acompaña al procedimiento de la vacunación. Se trata además, en general, de medidas técnicamente sencillas y fáciles de incorporar a la práctica (AU)

Background: in healthy children and adolescents, immunizations that require a needle related procedure are the most common source of pain and distress. Parents, children, adolescents and health-care providers are concerned about this. The Advisory Committee on Immunization of the Spanish Association of Pediatrics (CAV-AEP) believes that address pain and distress at the time of vaccination is necessary following recommendations that have to be based on rigor and science. Methods: we divided the subject in four areas: Breastfeeding and oral sucrose solutions, topical anaesthetics, vaccination administration methods and other interventions (distraction). Synthesis of evidence was made. Assuming the recommendations of The Clinical Guideline of Anne Taddio (2010) and adding the evidence of clinical trial published after the Guide. Results: methods that showed effectiveness in diminishing pain were: for infants, breastfeeding before, during and after the puncture is effective in manage pain. Oral sucrose solutions could be an alternative if breastfeeding is not possible. Topical anaesthetics are effective for all ages but a time to produce effect is required and need financial resources. No aspiration for intramuscular injection, put the injection as quickly as possible, give the vaccines so that the most painful the last. If more than one vaccine injection are required in the same visit, and it is possible, it is preferable to inject simultaneously more than one vaccine than sequentially. Hold the infant. For children 2 to 14 years use distraction techniques. Conclusions: as a thorough revision of the topic was made, there are enough evidence to recommend that in any setting where children immunization is given, techniques to mitigate pain at the time of vaccination should be implemented, moreover these strategies are simple and easy to assimilate in clinical practice (AU)

Documento de consenso sobre la actitud ante un niño con una reacción alérgica tras la vacunación o alergia a componentes vacunales / Consensus position document on the child with an allergic reaction after vaccination or an allergy to vaccine components

Las vacunaciones constituyen una de las principales herramientas de salud pública para el control de las enfermedades inmunoprevenibles. Si un niño es etiquetado de haber presentado una reacción alérgica a una vacuna es probable que se suspendan las siguientes inmunizaciones, con los riesgos que ello conlleva. La tasa de reacciones alérgicas graves es muy baja, oscilando entre 0,5 y 1/100.000 dosis. Las proteínas causantes de las reacciones alérgicas, más que los propios antígenos vacunales, son frecuentemente componentes residuales del proceso de fabricación, como son la gelatina y el huevo, y más raramente las levaduras o el látex. La mayoría de las reacciones son leves y localizadas en el lugar de la inyección, aunque en algunos casos pueden producirse reacciones anafilácticas graves. Si se sospecha que se ha producido una reacción alérgica inmediata a la vacuna, o si debemos vacunar a un niño con alergia a alguno de sus componentes, se deberá realizar un correcto diagnóstico de la posible alergia y conocer los componentes habituales de cada vacuna con el fin de determinar si la vacunación puede continuarse de forma segura

Vaccinations are one of the main public health tools for the control of vaccine-preventable diseases. If a child is labeled to have had an allergic reaction to a vaccine, the next immunizations will probably be suspended in that child, with the risks involved in this decision. The rate of severe allergic reactions is very low, ranging between 0.5-1/100,000 doses. The causes of allergic reactions to vaccines, more than the vaccine itself, are often due to residual protein components in the manufacturing process, such as gelatin or egg, and rarely to yeast or latex. Most of vaccine reactions are mild, localized at the site of injection, but in some circumstances, severe anaphylactic reactions can occur. If an immediate-type allergic reaction is suspected when vaccinating, or a child allergic to some of the vaccine components has to be vaccinated, a correct diagnosis of the possible allergy has to be made. The usual components of each vaccine should be known, in order to determine if vaccination can be performed safely on the child

Vacunación frente al meningococo B. Posicionamiento del Comité Asesor de Vacunas de la Asociación Española de Pediatría / Vaccination against meningococcal B disease. Public statement of the Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics (CAV-AEP)

La enfermedad meningocócica invasora, con sus 2 formas de presentación principales (sepsis y meningitis), es una patología grave y potencialmente mortal, causada por distintos serogrupos de Neisseria meningitidis, entre los cuales, actualmente, predomina el serogrupo B en Europa. La mayoría de los casos se producen en la edad pediátrica, con una mortalidad aproximada del 10% y un riesgo de secuelas permanentes del 20-30% entre los supervivientes. Presenta mayor incidencia y letalidad en niños sanos menores de 2-3 años, seguidos de los adolescentes, aunque puede ocurrir a cualquier edad. Hasta ahora no se contaba con ningún arma inmunopreventiva contra el meningococo B. Así, con la llegada a España de la única vacuna actualmente disponible, el Comité Asesor de Vacunas de la Asociación Española de Pediatría (CAV-AEP) ha analizado detalladamente tanto el potencial preventivo de dicha vacuna, como la situación peculiar administrativa de la misma en España. El objetivo de este documento es informar del posicionamiento del CAV-AEP en relación con la vacuna frente al meningococo B y el acceso a la misma por parte de la población infantil española, teniendo en cuenta que ha sido autorizada exclusivamente para el uso hospitalario en personas de riesgo. En Europa, la vacuna sí está disponible en farmacias, incluso incluida en calendarios oficiales de algunos países o regiones. Este comité considera que Bexsero(R) presenta un perfil de vacuna a incluir en todos los calendarios españoles y que debería estar disponible libremente en farmacias para su administración en todos los niños mayores de 2 meses

Meningococcal invasive disease, including the main clinical presentation forms (sepsis and meningitis), is a severe and potentially lethal infection caused by different serogroups of Neisseria meningitidis. Meningococcal serogroup B is the most prevalent in Europe. Most cases occur in children, with a mortality rate of 10% and a risk of permanent sequelae of 20-30% among survivors. The highest incidence and case fatality rates are observed in healthy children under 2-3 years old, followed by adolescents, although it can occur at any age. With the arrival in Spain of the only available vaccine against meningococcus B, the Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics has analysed its preventive potential in detail, as well as its peculiar administrative situation in Spain. The purpose of this document is to publish the statement of the Committee as regards this vaccination and the access to it by the Spanish population, taking into account that it has been only authorized for people at risk. The vaccine is available free in the rest of Europe for those who want to acquire it, and in some countries and regions it has been introduced into the systematic immunisation schedules. The Committee considers that Bexsero(R) has a profile of a vaccine to be included in the official schedules of all the Spanish autonomous communities and insists on the need for it to be available in pharmacies for its administration in all children older than 2 months

[Consensus position document on the child with an allergic reaction after vaccination or an allergy to vaccine components]. / Documento de consenso sobre la actitud ante un niño con una reacción alérgica tras la vacunación o alergia a componentes vacunales.

Vaccinations are one of the main public health tools for the control of vaccine-preventable diseases. If a child is labeled to have had an allergic reaction to a vaccine, the next immunizations will probably be suspended in that child, with the risks involved in this decision. The rate of severe allergic reactions is very low, ranging between 0.5-1/100,000 doses. The causes of allergic reactions to vaccines, more than the vaccine itself, are often due to residual protein components in the manufacturing process, such as gelatin or egg, and rarely to yeast or latex. Most of vaccine reactions are mild, localized at the site of injection, but in some circumstances, severe anaphylactic reactions can occur. If an immediate-type allergic reaction is suspected when vaccinating, or a child allergic to some of the vaccine components has to be vaccinated, a correct diagnosis of the possible allergy has to be made. The usual components of each vaccine should be known, in order to determine if vaccination can be performed safely on the child.

[Immunisation schedule of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics: 2015 recommendations]. / Calendario de vacunaciones de la Asociación Española de Pediatría: recomendaciones 2015.

The Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics updates the immunisation schedule every year, taking into account epidemiological data as well as evidence on the safety, effectiveness and efficiency of current vaccines, including levels of recommendation. In our opinion, this is the optimal vaccination calendar for all children resident in Spain. Regarding the vaccines included in the official unified immunization schedule, the Committee emphasizes the administration of the first dose of hepatitis B either at birth or at 2 months of life; the recommendation of the first dose of MMR and varicella vaccine at the age of 12 months, with the second dose at the age of 2-3 years; DTaP or Tdap vaccine at the age of 6 years, followed by another Tdap booster dose at 11-12 years old; Tdap strategies for pregnant women and household contacts of the newborn, and immunization against human papillomavirus in girls aged 11-12 years old with a 2 dose scheme (0, 6 months). The Committee reasserts its recommendation to include vaccination against pneumococcal disease in the routine immunisation schedule, the same as it is being conducted in Western European countries. The recently authorised meningococcal B vaccine, currently blocked in Spain, exhibits the profile of a universal vaccine. The Committe insists on the need of having the vaccine available in communitary pharmacies. It has also proposed the free availability of varicella vaccines. Their efectiveness and safety have been confirmed when they are administred from the second year of life. Vaccination against rotavirus is recommended in all infants. The Committee stresses the need to vaccinate population groups considered at risk against influenza and hepatitis A.

[Vaccination against meningococcal B disease. Public statement of the Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics (CAV-AEP)]. / Vacunación frente al meningococo B. Posicionamiento del Comité Asesor de Vacunas de la Asociación Española de Pediatría.

Meningococcal invasive disease, including the main clinical presentation forms (sepsis and meningitis), is a severe and potentially lethal infection caused by different serogroups of Neisseria meningitidis. Meningococcal serogroup B is the most prevalent in Europe. Most cases occur in children, with a mortality rate of 10% and a risk of permanent sequelae of 20-30% among survivors. The highest incidence and case fatality rates are observed in healthy children under 2-3 years old, followed by adolescents, although it can occur at any age. With the arrival in Spain of the only available vaccine against meningococcus B, the Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics has analysed its preventive potential in detail, as well as its peculiar administrative situation in Spain. The purpose of this document is to publish the statement of the Committee as regards this vaccination and the access to it by the Spanish population, taking into account that it has been only authorized for people at risk. The vaccine is available free in the rest of Europe for those who want to acquire it, and in some countries and regions it has been introduced into the systematic immunisation schedules. The Committee considers that Bexsero® has a profile of a vaccine to be included in the official schedules of all the Spanish autonomous communities and insists on the need for it to be available in pharmacies for its administration in all children older than 2 months.

[Immunisation schedule of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics: 2014 recommendations]. / Calendario de vacunaciones de la Asociación Española de Pediatría: recomendaciones 2014.

The Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics (CAV-AEP) updates the immunisation schedule every year, taking into account epidemiological data as well as evidence on safety, effectiveness and efficiency of vaccines. The present schedule includes levels of recommendation. We have graded, as routine vaccinations, those that the CAV-AEP consider all children should receive; as recommended those that fit the profile for universal childhood immunisation and would ideally be given to all children, but that can be prioritised according to the resources available for their public funding; and as risk group vaccinations those that specifically target individuals in special situations. Immunisation schedules tend to be dynamic and adaptable to ongoing epidemiological changes. Based on the latest epidemiological trends, CAV-AEP recommends the administration of the first dose of MMR and varicella vaccines at age 12 months, with the second dose at age 2-3 years; the administration of DTaP or Tdap vaccine at age 4-6 years, always followed by another Tdap dose at 11-12 years; and the three meningococcal C scheme at 2 months, 12 months and 12 years of age. It reasserts its recommendation to include vaccination against pneumococcal disease in the routine immunisation schedule. The CAV-AEP believes that the coverage of vaccination against human papillomavirus in girls aged 11-12 years must be increased. Universal vaccination against varicella in the second year of life is an effective strategy, and the immediate public availability of the vaccine is requested in order to guarantee the right of healthy children to be vaccinated. Vaccination against rotavirus is recommended in all infants due to the morbidity and elevated healthcare burden of the virus. The Committee stresses the need to vaccinate population groups considered at risk against influenza and hepatitis A. The recently authorised meningococcal B vaccine has opened a chapter of hope in the prevention of this disease. In anticipation of upcoming national and international studies, the Committee recommends the vaccine for the control of disease outbreaks, and insists on the need to be available in pharmacies. Finally, it emphasises the need to bring incomplete vaccinations up to date following the catch-up immunisation schedule.

Calendario de vacunaciones de la Asociación Española de Pediatría: recomendaciones 2014 / Immunisation schedule of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics: 2014 recommendations

El Comité Asesor de Vacunas de la Asociación Española de Pediatría (CAV-AEP) actualiza anualmente el calendario de vacunaciones teniendo en cuenta tanto aspectos epidemiológicos como de seguridad, efectividad y eficiencia de las vacunas. El presente calendario incluye grados de recomendación. Se consideran vacunas sistemáticas aquellas que el CAV-AEP estima que todos los niños deberían recibir; recomendadas, las que presentan un perfil de vacuna sistemática en la edad pediátrica y que es deseable que los niños reciban, pero que pueden ser priorizadas en función de los recursos para su financiación pública; y dirigidas a grupos de riesgo, aquellas con indicación preferente para personas en ciertas situaciones especiales. Los calendarios de vacunaciones tienen que ser dinámicos y adaptarse a los cambios epidemiológicos que vayan surgiendo. Teniendo en cuenta los últimos cambios en la epidemiología de las enfermedades, el CAV-AEP recomienda la administración de la 1.a dosis de las vacunas triple vírica y varicela a los 12 meses y la 2.a dosis a los 2-3 años; la administración de la vacuna DTPa o Tdpa a los 4-6 años, siempre acompañada de otra dosis de Tdpa a los 11-12 años; y el paso a un esquema 2 meses, 12 meses y 12 años de la vacunación frente al meningococo C. Se reafirma en la recomendación de incluir la vacunación frente al neumococo en el calendario de vacunación sistemático. El CAV-AEP estima que deben incrementarse las coberturas de vacunación frente al papiloma virus humano en las niñas a los 11-12 años. La vacunación universal frente a la varicela iniciada en el segundo año de vida es una estrategia efectiva, y se solicita la inmediata disponibilidad pública de la vacuna, reclamando el derecho a la prescripción y el derecho de los niños sanos a poder ser vacunados. La vacunación frente al rotavirus, dadas la morbilidad y la elevada carga sanitaria, es recomendable en todos los lactantes. Se insiste en la necesidad de vacunar frente a la gripe y a la hepatitis A a todos los que presenten factores de riesgo para dichas enfermedades. La vacuna frente al meningococo B, recientemente autorizada, abre un capítulo de esperanza en la prevención de esta enfermedad. En espera de próximos estudios nacionales e internacionales se recomienda, por el momento, para el control de brotes epidémicos y se insiste en el deseo de que sea comercializada libremente en las oficinas de farmacia. Por último, se insiste en la necesidad de actualizar las vacunaciones incompletas con las pautas de vacunación acelerada

The Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Spanish Association of Paediatrics (CAVAEP) updates the immunisation schedule every year, taking into account epidemiological data as well as evidence on safety, effectiveness and efficiency of vaccines. The present schedule includes levels of recommendation. We have graded, as routine vaccinations, those that the CAV-AEP consider all children should receive; as recommended those that fit the profile for universal childhood immunisation and would ideally be given to all children, but that can be prioritised according to the resources available for their public funding; and as risk group vaccinations those that specifically target individuals in special situations. Immunisation schedules tend to be dynamic and adaptable to ongoing epidemiological changes. Based on the latest epidemiological trends, CAV-AEP recommends the administration of the first dose of MMR and varicella vaccines at age 12 months, with the second dose at age 2-3years; the administration of DTaP or Tdap vaccine at age 4-6 years, always followed by another Tdap dose at 11-12 years; and the three meningococcal C scheme at 2 months, 12 months and 12 years of age. It reasserts its recommendation to include vaccination against pneumococcal disease in the routine immunisation schedule. The CAV-AEP believes that the coverage of vaccination against human papilloma virus in girls aged 11-12 years must be increased. Universal vaccination against varicella in the second year of life is an effective strategy, and the immediate public availability of the vaccine is requested in order to guarantee the right of healthy children to be vaccinated. Vaccination against rotavirus is recommended in all infants due to the morbidity and elevated healthcare burden of the virus. The Committee stresses the need to vaccinate population groups considered at risk against influenza and hepatitis A. The recently authorised meningococcal B vaccine has opened a chapter of hope in the prevention of this disease. In anticipation of upcoming national and international studies, the Committee recommends the vaccine for the control of disease outbreaks, and insists on the need to be available in pharmacies. Finally, it emphasises the need to bring incomplete vaccinations up to date following the catch-up immunisation schedule

Adolescente con obesidad: ¿presenta síndrome metabólico? / Obese adolescents: do they have metabolic syndrome?

La obesidad es una condición cada vez más presente en niños y jóvenes, en especial en países industrializados. El problema de la obesidad infantil es su alta probabilidad de persistir en la vida adulta y la posibilidad de acompañarse de comorbilidad, siendo lo más destacable el aumento del riesgo cardiovascular y otras complicaciones metabólicas, como es el síndrome metabólico (AU)

Obesity is a growing condition in children and adolescents, especially in industrialized countries. It has a high probability of persisting in adulthood and of becoming a comorbid condition, most frequently with a higher cardiovascular risk and other metabolic complications, such as metabolic syndrome (AU)

Estudio de la epidemia de gripe A nH1N1 de 2009-2010. Síntomas guía en Atención Primaria. Comparación clínica con los casos hospitalarios / Study of pandemic A nH1N1 influenza (2009-2010). Guiding signs in primary care and comparison with hospitalized cases

Objetivos: analizar la capacidad de predicción clínica respecto al diagnóstico de gripe A nH1N1 de los síntomas que presentan los pacientes ambulatorios registrados en la base de datos de la Red Centinela de Aragón (RCA). Comparar la casuística ambulatoria con los pacientes ingresados durante la epidemia de gripe A nH1N1 (2009-2010). Pacientes y métodos: estudio descriptivo retrospectivo de los pacientes que cumplían los criterios epidemiológicos de definición de caso, en los que de manera aleatoria se les realizó reacción en cadena de la polimerasa en tiempo real (PCR-RT) de gripe A nH1N1, así como de los pacientes ingresados en el hospital de tercer nivel de referencia. Comparación de las características epidemiológicas y clínicas entre los pacientes ambulatorios y hospitalarios. Resultados: de los pacientes registrados por la RCA no se encontraron diferencias clínicas entre los niños con frotis (PCR-RT) positivo o negativo para el virus gripal nH1N1, por lo que no se ha podido encontrar un conjunto de síntomas que sean predictores de tener un frotis positivo con la PCR-RT. Los pacientes hospitalizados tenían menor edad que los de la RCA, así como mayor porcentaje de patología de base y comorbilidad asociada. Conclusión: según los datos analizados, la epidemia de gripe A se comportó como una enfermedad benigna, de sintomatología similar a la gripe estacional. Tan solo el hecho de encontrar clínica gripal en una semana epidemiológica de alta incidencia (semanas 43-48) resultaron moderadamente predictores de infección por gripe A(AU)

Objectives: to analyze the prediction's capacity of clinical symptoms to diagnose nH1N1 Influenza in outpatients who were chosen by Aragon's Sentinel surveillance Network. To compare outpatients with hospitalized cases during influenza A virus pandemic (2009-2010). Methods: retrospective study of a randomized group of patients with symptoms of influenza who had laboratory-confirmation by PCR-RT and of all patients admitted to the reference hospital of Aragon. Comparison of epidemiological and clinical characteristics in outpatients and between outpatients and hospital cases. Results: there were no clinical differences between the laboratory-confirmed by PCR-RT cases and the other outpatients, so it was not possible to find defining symptoms of infection. Hospitalized patients were younger, with higher percentage of underlying disease and comorbidity. Conclusions: the epidemic of influenza A behaved as a benign disease, symptoms were similar to seasonal influenza. The clinical finding of having influenza symptoms in a high incidence week (weeks 43-48) was moderately predictive of influenza A infection(AU)

Prevención del tabaquismo activo y pasivo en la infancia / Prevention of active and passive smoking in childhood

El tabaquismo es un problema de salud pública de primer orden. En los últimos años, las autoridades sanitarias de muchos países occidentales, entre ellos España, están haciendo serios esfuerzos para controlar este grave problema. No obstante, se percibe que el consumo de tabaco sigue siendo muy importante, alrededor del 20% en la población escolar de 14 a 16 años son fumadores. Además, alrededor del 50% de los menores de 14 años viven en hogares donde se fuma. El consumo del tabaco durante el embarazo es una importante causa de morbimortalidad, tanto neonatal como a largo plazo. No existen estudios de suficiente calidad que evalúen la eficacia del consejo individual antitabaco en adolescentes. Los programas escolares y comunitarios tienen una eficacia reducida. Se recomienda realizar consejo antitabaco en padres y madres que asisten a la consulta de Pediatría. Es especialmente importante el consejo antitabaco en embarazadas. El consejo antitabaco en adolescentes debe ajustarse a su nivel de desarrollo y comprensión. Se debe insistir en las consecuencias a corto plazo y sobre aquellos aspectos más motivadores para los adolescentes. Se propone un folleto para administrar el consejo en adolescentes (AU)

Smoking is one of the main Public Health problems. In many western countries, Spain among them. In the last few years in particular, Health authorities are working hard in order to get this important problem under control. In spite of this, it can be seen that tobacco use is still significant, thus in secondary school children, over 20 % of adolescents aged 14-16 years are smokers. Moreover, around 50 % of children younger than 14, have domestic exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Smoking during pregnancy causes significant morbidity and mortality, not only in neonatal age but also throughout life. There are not enough studies of sufficient quality that evaluate the effectiveness of individual advice in adolescents. School and community programs have a limited efficacy. Anti-smoking counselling to parents in a Paediatric Primary Care setting is recommended. This is of especial importance in pregnant women. We must advise adolescents to stop smoking in a way that is adapted to their development and understanding capacity. We should stress the short-term consequences and the most important motivating aspects for teenagers. A special leaflet for adolescents giving anti-smoking counselling is suggested (AU)

Cobertura de vacuna antigripal en niños de riesgo durante 2007-2008 en un centro de Atención Primaria en España / No disponible

Introducción: los niños con enfermedades crónicas (EC) tienen más riesgo de presentarcomplicaciones importantes debidas a la gripe. Aunque la vacunación rutinaria anual convacuna trivalente inactivada está indicada en estos niños, son muy pocos los que cumplenesta recomendación. El objetivo de nuestro estudio es comprobar la cobertura de vacunaantigripal en niños con alto riesgo de complicaciones (ARC) en un centro de salud urbanoen España.Pacientes y métodos: durante el otoño e invierno 2007-2008 se revisó la base de datos delas historias clínicas de los niños de 0-14 años de edad, en un centro de salud. De un total de3.479 niños, 232 presentaban ARC. Se comprobó si habían recibido la vacuna antigripal en eseaño, examinando cada historia clínica informatizada.Resultados: la cobertura global de vacuna antigripal en niños con ARC fue 43,1%. El 98%de los niños vacunados recibió una vacunación completa. Según las patologías subyacentes encontradas,la cobertura vacunal fue del 44% en caso de asma, 35% en cardiopatía congénita y42,85% en diabetes mellitus. La cobertura de vacuna antigripal fue menor en niños de familiasinmigrantes con ARC que en españoles, 35,6% frente al 45,7%.Conclusiones: la cobertura de vacuna antigripal en nuestros niños con ARC es mayor que lacomunicada en la bibliografía médica (10-23%). A pesar de estos buenos resultados, se necesitaaumentar la vacunación antigripal en todos los niños con EC. Los profesionales de la saluddeberían diseñar estrategias para conseguir una cobertura de un 75% como un objetivo muchomejor(AU)

Introduction: children with chronic medical conditions (CMC) are at high-risk of sufferingfrom serious complications due to influenza. Although routine annual influenza immunizationwith trivalent inactivated vaccine is recommended in these children, few of them fulfil the recommendation.The aim of our study is to assess the rate of influenza vaccine coverage amongchildren with CMC in a Primary Care Setting in a metropolitan area in Spain.Patients and methods: in the 2007-2008 influenza season, the computerized database ofall children aged 0-14 years in a Primary Care Setting was checked. Over 3,479 children, 232were indentified as high-risk. The administration of influenza vaccine in these children that yearwas assessed checking every computerized medical record.Results: the global influenza vaccine coverage among children with CMC was 43.1%. Fullimmunization was received in 98% of them. Depending on the underlying medical condition,the coverage was 44% in children with Asthma, 35% in Congenital Heart Diseases and 42.8%in Diabetes Mellitus. Children with CMC living in immigrant families had lower rate of influenzavaccination than those in Spanish families, 35.6% versus 45.7%.Conclusions: the rate of vaccine coverage among children with CMC in our setting is higherthan the one reported in medical reviews (range: 10-23%). Despite these good results, to increasethe rates of vaccination among children with CMC is needed. Health care professionalsshould design strategies to achieve a 75% rate of influenza vaccine coverage in high-risk childrenas a much better goal(AU)