Retention cuff pressure study of 3 indwelling stool management systems: randomized study of 10 healthy subjects.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare retention cuff pressures of 3 indwelling stool management systems while subjects assumed different body positions and while cuffs were inflated to different volumes. METHODS: Retention cuff pressure study of 3 indwelling stool management systems was a randomized, crossover, open-label pilot study of 10 healthy adult volunteers in 3 body positions (supine, right side, and left side), 3 head-of-bed elevations (20°, 30°, and 40°), and 3 cuff overfill volumes (5, 10, and 15 mL). The devices were DigniCare Stool Management System (device A; Bard Medical Division, C. R. Bard, Inc, Covington, Georgia), Flexi-Seal Fecal Management System (device B; ConvaTec, a division of E. R. Squibb & Sons, LLC, Princeton, New Jersey), and ActiFlo Indwelling Bowel Catheter System (device C; Hollister, Inc, Libertyville, Illinois). We assessed cuff pressure by manometry and rectal mucosa by digital examination and small-diameter, flexible endoscopy. RESULTS: Cuffs were appropriately seated in the rectal vault for all 3 devices in all body positions and overfill volumes. Rectal mucosal abnormalities were observed in 4 of 10 subjects (40%) after removal of device A, 1 of 5 (20%) after removal of device B, and 3 of 5 (60%) after removal of device C. Retention cuff pressure was at least 2-fold lower for device A than for device B or C in all body positions, head-of-bed elevations, and device overfill volumes. For example, mean pressure while subjects were on their left sides was 25.0 mm Hg for device A, 79.2 mm Hg for device B, and 67.2 mm Hg for device C. Corresponding pressures at 15 mL of overfill were 52.5, 102.0, and 94.0 mm Hg. Subject comfort scores were comparable for all 3 devices. CONCLUSION: All devices appeared to seat well within the rectal vault, but device A was associated with cuff pressure measurements that were consistently lower than those of devices B and C. More studies are needed to elucidate the clinical relevance of these findings and whether they translate to differences in patient safety or comfort.

Nonoperative management of pediatric burn injuries.

There are an estimated 1.2 million burn injuries per year in the United States, one third of which occur in children. Most of these injuries will be treated nonoperatively, frequently in an outpatient setting. This article aims to provide the practitioner with a understanding of the pathophysiology of burn injuries, a guide to the initial assessment of the patient, and management recommendations for nonoperative treatment of the burned pediatric patient.

Critical care and monitoring of the pediatric burn patient.

Burn injuries continue to be a significant cause of pediatric morbidity in the United States, with approximately 20,000 admissions per year to centers specializing in the treatment of burn injuries. In this article, we aim to provide the practitioner with a guideline to the unique challenges, advances and current expectations, and treatment in this patient population.