Antiemetics for reducing vomiting related to acute gastroenteritis in children and adolescents

Advances in the Acute and Preventive Treatment of Pediatric Migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Headaches are common in children and adolescents. Treatments for debilitating migraine are often not FDA approved or lack evidence of efficacy for children. This narrative review looks at the evidence for acute and preventative pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment of pediatric migraine, as well as reviewing any recent or ongoing clinical trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies have been published on pharmacological treatments for headache, as well as non-pharmacological treatments. Recent findings in pediatric migraine using onabotulinumtoxinA, calcitonin gene related peptide antagonists, interventional procedures, and devices are reviewed. Pharmacologic as well as non-pharmacologic approaches for the prevention and treatment of migraine show safety and efficacy data that is promising. These treatments should be incorporated in a multi-modal approach to the management of pediatric migraine. Continued studies, prospective and randomized, are needed to further assess these newer treatments for migraine in the pediatric setting.

Ondansetron-induced pseudoallergy with non-ischemic myocardial injury: A rare case report of Kounis syndrome

Ondansetron is an FDA-approved selective serotonin 5-HT3 receptor commonly indicated as an anti-emetic agent for nausea and vomiting. It is rare to observe fatal reactions from ondansetron despite having no allergies or previous exposure. We report a case of anaphylactoid reaction with spontaneous coronary vasospasms in response to intravenous ondansetron.

Low Osmolarity Oral Rehydration Salt Solution (LORS) in Management of Dehydration in Children

Justification

The IAP last published the guidelines “Comprehensive Management of Diarrhea” in 2006 and a review in 2016. The WHO in 2002 and the Government of India in 2004 recommended low osmolarity rehydration solution (LORS) as the universal rehydration solution for all ages and all forms of dehydration. However, the use of LORS in India continues to be unacceptably low at 51%, although awareness about ORS has increased from a mere 14% in 2005 to 69% in 2015. Availability of different compositions of ORS and brands in market added to the confusion.

Process

The Indian Academy of Pediatrics constituted a panel of experts from the fields of pediatrics, pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition to update on management of dehydration in children with particular reference to LORS and issue a current practice guideline. The committee met twice at CIAP HQ to review all published literature on the aspect. Brief presentations were made, followed by discussions. The draft paper was circulated by email. All relevant inputs and suggestions were incorporated to arrive at a consensus on this practice guideline.

Objectives

To summarize latest literature on ORT and empower pediatricians, particularly those practicing in rural areas, on management of dehydration by augmenting LORS use.

Recommendations

It was stressed that advantages of LORS far out-weigh its limitations. Increased use of LORS can only be achieved by promoting better awareness among public and health-care providers across all systems of medicine. LORS can also be useful in managing dehydration in non-diarrheal illness. More research is required to modify ORS further to make it safe and effective in neonates, severe acute malnutrition, renal failure, cardiac and other co-morbidities. There is an urgent need to discourage production and marketing all forms of ORS not in conformity with WHO approved LORS, under a slogan “One India, one ORS”.

Low Osmolarity Oral Rehydration Salt Solution (LORS) in Management of Dehydration in Children

JUSTIFICATION

The IAP last published the guidelines "Comprehensive Management of Diarrhea" in 2006 and a review in 2016. The WHO in 2002 and the Government of India in 2004 recommended low osmolarity rehydration solution (LORS) as the universal rehydration solution for all ages and all forms of dehydration. However, the use of LORS in India continues to be unacceptably low at 51%, although awareness about ORS has increased from a mere 14% in 2005 to 69% in 2015. Availability of different compositions of ORS and brands in market added to the confusion.

PROCESS

The Indian Academy of Pediatrics constituted a panel of experts from the fields of pediatrics, pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition to update on management of dehydration in children with particular reference to LORS and issue a current practice guideline. The committee met twice at CIAP HQ to review all published literature on the aspect. Brief presentations were made, followed by discussions. The draft paper was circulated by email. All relevant inputs and suggestions were incorporated to arrive at a consensus on this practice guideline.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize latest literature on ORT and empower pediatricians, particularly those practicing in rural areas, on management of dehydration by augmenting LORS use.

RECOMMENDATIONS

It was stressed that advantages of LORS far out-weigh its limitations. Increased use of LORS can only be achieved by promoting better awareness among public and health-care providers across all systems of medicine. LORS can also be useful in managing dehydration in non-diarrheal illness. More research is required to modify ORS further to make it safe and effective in neonates, severe acute malnutrition, renal failure, cardiac and other co-morbidities. There is an urgent need to discourage production and marketing all forms of ORS not in conformity with WHO approved LORS, under a slogan "One India, one ORS".

Probiotics for treating acute infectious diarrhoea

BACKGROUND

Probiotics may be effective in reducing the duration of acute infectious diarrhoea.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of probiotics in proven or presumed acute infectious diarrhoea.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the trials register of the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group, MEDLINE, and Embase from inception to 17 December 2019, as well as the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 12, 2019), in the Cochrane Library, and reference lists from studies and reviews. We included additional studies identified during external review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing a specified probiotic agent with a placebo or no probiotic in people with acute diarrhoea that is proven or presumed to be caused by an infectious agent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently applied inclusion criteria, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. Primary outcomes were measures of diarrhoea duration (diarrhoea lasting ≥ 48 hours; duration of diarrhoea). Secondary outcomes were number of people hospitalized in community studies, duration of hospitalization in inpatient studies, diarrhoea lasting ≥ 14 days, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 82 studies with a total of 12,127 participants. These studies included 11,526 children (age < 18 years) and 412 adults (three studies recruited 189 adults and children but did not specify numbers in each age group). No cluster-randomized trials were included. Studies varied in the definitions used for "acute diarrhoea" and "end of the diarrhoeal illness" and in the probiotic(s) tested. A total of 53 trials were undertaken in countries where both child and adult mortality was low or very low, and 26 where either child or adult mortality was high. Risk of bias was high or unclear in many studies, and there was marked statistical heterogeneity when findings for the primary outcomes were pooled in meta-analysis. Effect size was similar in the sensitivity analysis and marked heterogeneity persisted. Publication bias was demonstrated from funnel plots for the main outcomes. In our main analysis of the primary outcomes in studies at low risk for all indices of risk of bias, no difference was detected between probiotic and control groups for the risk of diarrhoea lasting ≥ 48 hours (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 1.09; 2 trials, 1770 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); or for duration of diarrhoea (mean difference (MD) 8.64 hours shorter, 95% CI 29.4 hours shorter to 12.1 hours longer; 6 trials, 3058 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Effect size was similar and marked heterogeneity persisted in pre-specified subgroup analyses of the primary outcomes that included all studies. These included analyses limited to the probiotics Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Saccharomyces boulardii. In six trials (433 participants) of Lactobacillus reuteri, there was consistency amongst findings (I² = 0%), but risk of bias was present in all included studies. Heterogeneity also was not explained by types of participants (age, nutritional/socioeconomic status captured by mortality stratum, region of the world where studies were undertaken), diarrhoea in children caused by rotavirus, exposure to antibiotics, and the few studies of children who were also treated with zinc. In addition, there were no clear differences in effect size for the primary outcomes in post hoc analyses according to decade of publication of studies and whether or not trials had been registered. For other outcomes, the duration of hospitalization in inpatient studies on average was shorter in probiotic groups than in control groups but there was marked heterogeneity between studies (I² = 96%; MD -18.03 hours, 95% CI -27.28 to -8.78, random-effects model: 24 trials, 4056 participants). No differences were detected between probiotic and control groups in the number of people with diarrhoea lasting ≥ 14 days (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.53; 9 studies, 2928 participants) or in risk of hospitalization in community studies (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.89; 6 studies, 2283 participants). No serious adverse events were attributed to probiotics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Probiotics probably make little or no difference to the number of people who have diarrhoea lasting 48 hours or longer, and we are uncertain whether probiotics reduce the duration of diarrhoea. This analysis is based on large trials with low risk of bias.

Trends and Variation in Care and Outcomes for Children Hospitalized With Acute Gastroenteritis

OBJECTIVES

Assess trends in inpatient acute gastroenteritis (AGE) management across children's hospitals and identify elements of AGE management associated with resource use.

METHODS

We examined inpatient stays for children 6 months to 18 years hospitalized with AGE from 2009 to 2018 using the Pediatric Health Information System database. We characterized demographics, hospital-level resource use (ie, medications, laboratories, and imaging), and outcomes (ie, cost per case, 14-day revisit rates, and length of stay [LOS]). We compared demographic characteristics and resource use between 2009 to 2013 and 2014 to 2018 using χ2 and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. We grouped hospitals on the basis of 2009 use of each resource and trended use over time using logistic regression. Annual change in mean cost and LOS were estimated by using models of log-transformed data.

RESULTS

Across 32 354 hospitalizations at 38 hospitals, there was a high use of electrolyte testing (85.4%) and intravenous fluids (84.1%) without substantial changes over time. There were significant reductions in the majority of laboratory, medication, and imaging resources across hospitals over the study period. The most notable reductions were for rotavirus and stool testing. Many hospitals saw a decrease in LOS, with only 3 noting an increased revisit rate. Reductions in cost per case over time were most associated with decreases in imaging, laboratory testing, and LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant variation in resource use for children hospitalized with AGE coupled with high use of resources discouraged in AGE guidelines highlights potential opportunities to improve resource use that may be addressed in future AGE guidelines and quality improvement initiatives.

Antiemetic drugs: what to prescribe and when

Nausea and vomiting are common symptoms with many possible causes, including the adverse effects of drugs. If a drug is indicated, the cause guides the choice of antiemetic drug The main antiemetic classes include antagonists of the serotonin, dopamine, histamine, muscarinic and neurokinin systems, corticosteroids and benzodiazepines. Some antiemetics appear more effective for specific indications Serotonin and neurokinin antagonists, such as ondansetron and aprepitant, are highly effective in treating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Metoclopramide and antihistamines are first-line options for nausea and vomiting in pregnancy Serotonin antagonists and some dopamine antagonists, such as metoclopramide, can prolong the QT interval on the ECG. Dopamine antagonists can cause extrapyramidal adverse effects, particularly in children

Ondansetron Prescription for Home Use in a Pediatric Emergency Department

OBJECTIVES

Ondansetron has been shown to decrease admission rate and the need for intravenous fluids among pediatric emergency department (ED) patients with acute gastroenteritis, but there is limited evidence regarding its use after ED discharge. This study describes prescribing patterns for ondansetron and assesses the effects of ondansetron home prescription on rate of return.

METHODS

Data were gathered from the electronic health record on 2 separate but overlapping groups of patients seen in a pediatric ED from 2012 to 2014. The Gastroenteritis Group included all patients with a discharge diagnosis of gastroenteritis by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, code. The All Ondansetron Group included any child prescribed ondansetron at discharge. Patterns of ondansetron use and 3- and 7-day ED return rate were assessed for both groups. Discharge diagnosis was evaluated for the All Ondansetron Group.

RESULTS

A total of 996 patients with acute gastroenteritis were identified during the study period. Of these, 76% received ondansetron in the ED, and 71% were discharged with prescriptions for ondansetron. Seven-day ED return rates were similar between groups (6% with prescription, 5% without, P = 0.66). A total of 2287 patients received home prescriptions for ondansetron. Fifty-four percent of these patients' discharge diagnoses were classed as gastrointestinal complaints, 14% other infectious conditions, 9% respiratory, and 4% injuries. Their return rate was 6%. There was wide variation in the number of doses prescribed.

CONCLUSIONS

Home-use ondansetron is widely prescribed in this urban academic pediatric ED for a variety of indications, without effect on 3- or 7-day ED return. Further prospective studies are necessary to determine the efficacy of this practice.

Acute Infectious Diarrhea and Gastroenteritis in Children

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aimed to summarize the most current evidence on the main aspects of the diarrheal diseases in children. The following key elements were addressed: definitions, etiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, dietary management, pharmacological treatments, and prevention. We covered the following questions: What are the most important clinical and laboratory features of the disease? What are the best approaches for the dietary management? What is the best way to classify the hydration status, and to prevent and treat the dehydration? What are the most effective and safe interventions for reducing the diarrhea and vomiting?

RECENT FINDINGS

Diarrheal diseases are one of the most common diseases in childhood. The most common cause is rotavirus. A key element in the approach of a child with diarrhea is determining their hydration status, which determines the fluid management. Laboratory tests are nor routinely required, as most of the cases, they do not affect the management and it should be indicated only in selected cases. Several treatments have been studied to reduce the duration of the diarrhea. Only symbiotics and zinc have shown to be effective and safe with high certainty on the evidence. Rest of the interventions although seem to be effective have low to very low quality of the evidence. The only effective and safe antiemetic for controlling vomiting is ondansetron. A list of antimicrobials indications according to the identified microorganisms is provided. We summarized the most current evidence on diagnosis, management, and prevention of diarrhea in children. More research is needed in some areas such as dehydration scales, rehydration management, antidiarrheals, and antibiotic treatments.

Bimodal Release Ondansetron for Acute Gastroenteritis Among Adolescents and Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Vomiting resulting from acute gastroenteritis is commonly treated with intravenous antiemetics in acute care settings. If oral treatment were beneficial, patients might not need intravenous administered hydration or medication. Furthermore, a long-acting treatment could provide sustained relief from nausea and vomiting.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether an experimental long-acting bimodal release ondansetron tablet decreases gastroenteritis-related vomiting and eliminates the need for intravenous therapy for 24 hours after administration.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized clinical trial included patients from 19 emergency departments and 2 urgent care centers in the United States from December 8, 2014, to February 17, 2017. Patients 12 years and older with at least 2 vomiting episodes from presumed gastroenteritis in the previous 4 hours and symptoms with less than 36 hours' duration were randomized using a 3:2 active to placebo ratio. Analyses were performed on an intent-to-treat basis and conducted from June 1, 2017, to November 1, 2017.

INTERVENTION

Bimodal release ondansetron tablet containing 6 mg of immediate release ondansetron and 18 mg of a 24-hour release matrix for a total of 24 mg of ondansetron.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Treatment success was defined as no further vomiting, no need for rescue medication, and no intravenous hydration for 24 hours after bimodal release ondansetron administration.

RESULTS

Analysis included 321 patients (mean [SD] age, 29.0 [11.1] years; 195 [60.7%] women), with 192 patients in the bimodal release ondansetron group and 129 patients in the placebo group. Treatment successes were observed in 126 patients in the bimodal release ondansetron group (65.6%) compared with 70 patients in the placebo group (54.3%), with an 11.4% (95% CI, 0.3%-22.4%) absolute probability difference. The proportion of treatment success was 21% higher among patients who received bimodal release ondansetron compared with those who received a placebo (relative risk, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.00-1.46; P = .04). In an analysis including only patients with a discharge diagnosis of acute gastroenteritis and no major protocol violations, there were 123 treatment successes (69.5%) in the bimodal release ondansetron group compared with 67 treatment successes (54.9%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.05-1.53; P = .01). Adverse effects were infrequent and similar to the known safety profile of ondansetron.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This randomized clinical trial found that a long-acting bimodal release oral ondansetron tablet was an effective antiemetic among adolescents and adults with moderate to severe vomiting from acute gastroenteritis. The drug benefits extended to 24 hours after administration. Bimodal release ondansetron may decrease the need for intravenous access and emergency department care to manage acute gastroenteritis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02246439.

Management of Acute Gastroenteritis in Children: A Survey among Members of the Korean Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition

PURPOSE

No national survey has yet described the guidelines followed by Korean pediatricians to treat acute gastroenteritis (AGE). An online survey was performed to investigate the management of AGE followed by members of The Korean Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, and the results were compared between pediatric gastroenterologists (PG) and general pediatricians (GP).

METHODS

Questionnaires were sent to pediatricians between June 2 and 4, 2018 regarding the type of hospital, indications for admission, antiemetic and antidiarrheal drugs and antibiotics prescribed, and dietary changes advised.

RESULTS

Among the 400 pediatricians approached, 141 pediatricians (35.3%) responded to the survey. PG comprised 39% of the respondents and 72.7% worked at a tertiary hospital. Both PG and GP considered diarrhea or vomiting to be the primary symptom. The most common indication for hospitalization was severe dehydration (98.8%). Most pediatricians managed dehydration with intravenous fluid infusions (PG 98.2%, GP 92.9%). Antiemetics were prescribed by 87.3% of PG and 96.6% of GP. Probiotics to manage diarrhea were prescribed by 89.1% of PG and 100.0% of GP. Antibiotics were used in children with blood in diarrheal stool or high fever. Dietary changes were more commonly recommended by GP (59.3%) than by PG (27.3%) (p<0.05). Tests to identify etiological agents were performed primarily in hospitalized children.

CONCLUSION

This survey assessing the management of pediatric AGE showed that the indications for admission and rehydration were similar between GP and PG. Drug prescriptions for diarrhea and dietary changes were slightly commonly recommended by GP than by PG.

Practice guideline update summary: Acute treatment of migraine in children and adolescents

Objective

To provide evidence-based recommendations for the acute symptomatic treatment of children and adolescents with migraine.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of the literature and rated risk of bias of included studies according to the American Academy of Neurology classification of evidence criteria. A multidisciplinary panel developed practice recommendations, integrating findings from the systematic review and following an Institute of Medicine–compliant process to ensure transparency and patient engagement. Recommendations were supported by structured rationales, integrating evidence from the systematic review, related evidence, principles of care, and inferences from evidence.

Results

There is evidence to support the efficacy of the use of ibuprofen, acetaminophen (in children and adolescents), and triptans (mainly in adolescents) for the relief of migraine pain, although confidence in the evidence varies between agents. There is high confidence that adolescents receiving oral sumatriptan/naproxen and zolmitriptan nasal spray are more likely to be headache-free at 2 hours than those receiving placebo. No acute treatments were effective for migraine-related nausea or vomiting; some triptans were effective for migraine-related phonophobia and photophobia.

Recommendations

Recommendations for the treatment of acute migraine in children and adolescents focus on the importance of early treatment, choosing the route of administration best suited to the characteristics of the individual migraine attack, and providing counseling on lifestyle factors that can exacerbate migraine, including trigger avoidance and medication overuse.

Oral Ondansetron Administration to Nondehydrated Children With Diarrhea and Associated Vomiting in Emergency Departments in Pakistan: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Study objective

We determine whether single-dose oral ondansetron administration to children with vomiting as a result of acute gastroenteritis without dehydration reduces administration of intravenous fluid rehydration.

Methods

In this 2-hospital, double-blind, placebo-controlled, emergency department–based, randomized trial conducted in Karachi Pakistan, we recruited children aged 0.5 to 5.0 years, without dehydration, who had diarrhea and greater than or equal to 1 episode of vomiting within 4 hours of arrival. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), through an Internet-based randomization service using a stratified variable-block randomization scheme, to single-dose oral ondansetron or placebo. The primary endpoint was intravenous rehydration (administration of ≥20 mL/kg of an isotonic fluid during 4 hours) within 72 hours of randomization.

Results

Participant median age was 15 months (interquartile range 10 to 26) and 59.4% (372/626) were male patients. Intravenous rehydration use was 12.1% (38/314) and 11.9% (37/312) in the placebo and ondansetron groups, respectively (odds ratio 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60 to 1.61; difference 0.2%; 95% CI of the difference –4.9% to 5.4%). Bolus fluid administration occurred within 72 hours of randomization in 10.8% (34/314) and 10.3% (27/312) of children administered placebo and ondansetron, respectively (odds ratio 0.95; 95% CI 0.56 to 1.59). A multivariable regression model fitted with treatment group and adjusted for antiemetic administration, antibiotics, zinc prerandomization, and vomiting frequency prerandomization yielded similar results (odds ratio 0.91; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.53). There was no interaction between treatment group and age, greater than or equal to 3 stools in the preceding 24 hours, or greater than or equal to 3 vomiting episodes in the preceding 24 hours.

Conclusion

Oral administration of a single dose of ondansetron did not result in a reduction in intravenous rehydration use. In children without dehydration, ondansetron does not improve clinical outcomes.

Universal Recommendations for the Management of Acute Diarrhea in Nonmalnourished Children

OBJECTIVE

Despite a substantial consistency in recommendations for the management of children with acute gastroenteritis (AGE), a high variability in clinical practice and a high rate of inappropriate medical interventions persist in both developing and developed countries.The aim of this study was to develop a set of clinical recommendations for the management of nonseverely malnourished children with AGE to be applied worldwide.

METHODS

The Federation of International Societies of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition (FISPGHAN) Working Group (WG) selected care protocols on the management of acute diarrhea in infants and children aged between 1 month and 18 years. The WG used a 3-step approach consisting of: systematic review and comparison of published guidelines, agreement on draft recommendations using Delphi methodology, and external peer-review and validation of recommendations.

RESULTS

A core of recommendations including definition, diagnosis, nutritional management, and active treatment of AGE was developed with an overall agreement of 91% (range 80%-96%). A total of 28 world experts in pediatric gastroenterology and emergency medicine successively validated the set of 23 recommendations with an agreement of 87% (range 83%-95%). Recommendations on the use of antidiarrheal drugs and antiemetics received the lowest level of agreement and need to be tailored at local level. Oral rehydration and probiotics were the only treatments recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal recommendations to assist health care practitioners in managing children with AGE may improve practitioners' compliance with guidelines, reduce inappropriate interventions, and significantly impact clinical outcome and health care-associated costs.

Clinical Practice: Nausea and vomiting in acute gastroenteritis: physiopathology and management

Currently recommended management of acute gastroenteritis is supportive. Although the affected children habitually have vomiting, recommendations do not focus on the correction of this symptom. In this condition, elevated ketone bodies and stimuli initiated by gut mucosa damage produced by the enteral pathogen likely underlay nausea and vomiting. As compared to 0.9% saline, intravenous administration of a dextrose-containing bolus of 0.9% saline is associated with a greater reduction of circulating ketones and a shorter duration of nausea and vomiting. Nonetheless, this treatment strategy is not followed by a lower rate of hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

Well-designed investigations suggest that antagonists of the type 3 serotonin receptor, most frequently oral ondansetron, reduce the rate of vomiting, improve the tolerance of oral rehydration, and reduce the need for intravenous rehydration. What is Known: • Although children with gastroenteritis habitually have vomiting, current recommendations do not focus on the correction of this symptom. What is New: • Recently acquired evidence supports the prescription of ondansetron, an antagonist of the type 3 serotonin receptor, to increase the success rate of oral rehydration therapy.

Management of Diarrhoeal Dehydration in Childhood: A Review for Clinicians in Developing Countries

The survival of a child with severe volume depletion at the emergency department depends on the competency of the first responder to recognize and promptly treat hypovolemic shock. Although the basic principles on fluid and electrolytes therapy have been investigated for decades, the topic remains a challenge, as consensus on clinical management protocol is difficult to reach, and more adverse events are reported from fluid administration than for any other drug. While the old principles proposed by Holliday and Segar, and Finberg have stood the test of time, recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses have highlighted the risk of hyponatraemia, and hyponatraemic encephalopathy in some children treated with hypotonic fluids. In the midst of conflicting literature on fluid and electrolytes therapy, it would appear that isotonic fluids are best suitable for the correction of hypotonic, isonatraemic, and hypernatraemic dehydration. Although oral rehydration therapy is adequate to correct mild to moderate isonatraemic dehydration, parenteral fluid therapy is safer for the child with severe dehydration and those with changes in serum sodium. The article reviews the pathophysiology of water and sodium metabolism and, it uses the clinical case examples to illustrate the bed-side approach to the management of three different types of dehydration using a pre-mixed isotonic fluid solution (with 20 or 40 mmol/L of potassium chloride added depending on the absence or presence of hypokalemia, respectively). When 3% sodium chloride is unavailable to treat hyponatraemic encephalopathy, 0.9% sodium chloride becomes inevitable, albeit, a closer monitoring of serum sodium is required. The importance of a keen and regular clinical and laboratory monitoring of a child being rehydrated is emphasized. The article would be valuable to clinicians in less-developed countries, who must use pre-mixed fluids, and who often cannot get some suitable rehydrating solutions.

2017 Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Infectious Diarrhea

These guidelines are intended for use by healthcare professionals who care for children and adults with suspected or confirmed infectious diarrhea. They are not intended to replace physician judgement regarding specific patients or clinical or public health situations. This document does not provide detailed recommendations on infection prevention and control aspects related to infectious diarrhea.

Methotrexate-induced nausea in the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate is the most commonly used disease modifying antirheumatic drug in the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis and can be effective in controlling disease in many patients.

MAIN BODY

A significant proportion of patients experience nausea and vomiting induced by methotrexate therapy, which can lead to decreased quality of life and discontinuation of treatment with methotrexate. Many strategies have been employed in attempts to reduce methotrexate-induced nausea, including folate supplementation, switching from oral to subcutaneous methotrexate, anti-emetic therapy, behavioral therapy, and others. Anticipatory nausea can be difficult to treat, making primary prevention of nausea with anti-emetics an attractive approach.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the prevalence and impact of methotrexate-induced nausea, as well as potentially effective interventions, may help maximize the therapeutic benefits of methotrexate.

PURLs: A more palatable alternative to oral rehydration therapy for kids

Parents no longer need to struggle to get their kids to drink electrolyte solutions during episodes of mild gastroenteritis; apple juice works just as well.

Risk of Ventricular Arrhythmias and Association with Ondansetron

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the use of ondansetron in a tertiary care pediatric health system, assess the incidence of ventricular tachyarrhythmia within 24 hours of ondansetron, and identify the characteristics of children experiencing a ventricular tachyarrhythmia after ondansetron, to identify potential risk factors.

STUDY DESIGN

This retrospective chart review identified children ≤18 years of age who received ondansetron within 24 hours prior to a ventricular tachyarrhythmia. Those identified were evaluated for other diagnoses, concomitant medication use, electrolyte abnormalities, or underlying conduction abnormalities that may have contributed to the arrhythmia.

RESULTS

A total of 199 773 doses of ondansetron were administered to 37 794 patients over 58 009 visits. Average dose was 0.13 mg/kg/dose (range 0.005-0.86 mg/kg/dose). Seven patients received ondansetron within 24 hours prior to a ventricular arrhythmia. All 7 patients had underlying congenital cardiac conduction abnormalities (n = 3) or other major cardiac diagnoses (n = 4). In clinical review, torsades de pointes was found in only 1 of the 7 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective study found the risk of ventricular arrhythmia within 24 hours after ondansetron administration was 3 in 100 000 patients treated annually (0.003%). Children with major cardiac conditions could be considered for electrocardiogram screening and continuous cardiac monitoring while receiving ondansetron. Our findings do not support recommendations for electrocardiogram screening or continuous monitoring of other pediatric populations receiving ondansetron.

Oral Ondansetron versus Domperidone for Acute Gastroenteritis in Pediatric Emergency Departments: Multicenter Double Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

The use of antiemetics for vomiting in acute gastroenteritis in children is still a matter of debate. We conducted a double-blind randomized trial to evaluate whether a single oral dose of ondansetron vs domperidone or placebo improves outcomes in children with gastroenteritis. After failure of initial oral rehydration administration, children aged 1–6 years admitted for gastroenteritis to the pediatric emergency departments of 15 hospitals in Italy were randomized to receive one oral dose of ondansetron (0.15 mg/kg) or domperidone (0.5 mg/kg) or placebo. The primary outcome was the percentage of children receiving nasogastric or intravenous rehydration. A p value of 0.014 was used to indicate statistical significance (and 98.6% CI were calculated) as a result of having carried out two interim analyses. 1,313 children were eligible for the first attempt with oral rehydration solution, which was successful for 832 (63.4%); 356 underwent randomization (the parents of 125 children did not give consent): 118 to placebo, 119 to domperidone, and 119 to ondansetron. Fourteen (11.8%) needed intravenous rehydration in the ondansetron group vs 30 (25.2%) and 34 (28.8%) in the domperidone and placebo groups, respectively. Ondansetron reduced the risk of intravenous rehydration by over 50%, both vs placebo (RR 0.41, 98.6% CI 0.20–0.83) and domperidone (RR 0.47, 98.6% CI 0.23–0.97). No differences for adverse events were seen among groups. In a context of emergency care, 6 out of 10 children aged 1–6 years with vomiting due to gastroenteritis and without severe dehydration can be managed effectively with administration of oral rehydration solution alone. In children who fail oral rehydration, a single oral dose of ondansetron reduces the need for intravenous rehydration and the percentage of children who continue to vomit, thereby facilitating the success of oral rehydration. Domperidone was not effective for the symptomatic treatment of vomiting during acute gastroenteritis.

Drugs for the treatment of nausea and vomiting in adults in the emergency department setting

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting is a common and distressing presenting complaint in emergency departments (ED). The aetiology of nausea and vomiting in EDs is diverse and drugs are commonly prescribed. There is currently no consensus as to the optimum drug treatment of nausea and vomiting in the adult ED setting.

OBJECTIVES

To provide evidence of the efficacy and safety of antiemetic medications in the management of nausea and vomiting in the adult ED setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 8), MEDLINE (OvidSP) (January 1966 to August 2014), EMBASE (OvidSP) (January 1980 to August 2014) and ISI Web of Science (January 1955 to August 2014). We also searched relevant clinical trial registries and conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of any drug in the treatment of nausea and vomiting in the treatment of adults in the ED. Study eligibility was not restricted by language or publication status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias in included studies. We contacted authors of studies to obtain missing information if required.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight trials, involving 952 participants, of which 64% were women. Included trials were generally of adequate quality, with six trials at low risk of bias, and two trials at high risk of bias. Three trials with 518 participants compared five different drugs with placebo; all reported the primary outcome as mean change in visual analogue scale (VAS) (0 to 100) for nausea severity from baseline to 30 minutes. Trials did not routinely report other primary outcomes of the change in nausea VAS at 60 minutes or number of vomiting episodes. Differences in mean VAS change from baseline to 30 minutes between placebo and the drugs evaluated were: metoclopramide (three trials, 301 participants; mean difference (MD) -5.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) -11.33 to 0.80), ondansetron (two trials, 250 participants; MD -4.32, 95% CI -11.20 to 2.56), prochlorperazine (one trial, 50 participants; MD -1.80, 95% CI -14.40 to 10.80), promethazine (one trial, 82 participants; MD -8.47, 95% CI -19.79 to 2.85) and droperidol (one trial, 48 participants; MD -15.8, 95% CI -26.98 to -4.62). The only statistically significant change in baseline VAS to 30 minutes was for droperidol, in a single trial of 48 participants. No other drug was statistically significantly superior to placebo. Other included trials evaluated a drug compared to "active controls" (alternative antiemetic). There was no convincing evidence of superiority of any particular drug compared to active control. All trials included in this review reported adverse events, but they were variably reported precluding meaningful pooling of results. Adverse events were generally mild, there were no reported serious adverse events. Overall, the quality of the evidence was low, mainly because there were not enough data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In an ED population, there is no definite evidence to support the superiority of any one drug over any other drug, or the superiority of any drug over placebo. Participants receiving placebo often reported clinically significant improvement in nausea, implying general supportive treatment such as intravenous fluids may be sufficient for the majority of people. If a drug is considered necessary, choice of drug may be dictated by other considerations such as a person's preference, adverse-effect profile and cost. The review was limited by the paucity of clinical trials in this setting. Future research should include the use of placebo and consider focusing on specific diagnostic groups and controlling for factors such as intravenous fluid administered.

The Impact of E-Learning on Adherence to Guidelines for Acute Gastroenteritis: A Single-Arm Intervention Study

Objective

E-learning is a candidate tool for clinical practice guidelines (CPG) implementation due to its versatility, universal access and low costs. We aimed to assess the impact of a five-module e-learning course about CPG for acute gastroenteritis (AGE) on physicians’ knowledge and clinical practice.

Study design

This work was conceived as a pre/post single-arm intervention study. Physicians from 11 European countries registered for the online course. Personal data, pre- and post-course questionnaires and clinical data about 3 to 5 children with AGE managed by each physician before and after the course were collected. Primary outcome measures included the proportion of participants fully adherent to CPG and number of patients managed with full adherence.

Results

Among the 149 physicians who signed up for the e-learning course, 59 took the course and reported on their case management of 519 children <5 years of age who were referred to their practice because of AGE (281 and 264 children seen before and after the course, respectively). The course improved knowledge scores (pre-course 8.6 ± 2.7 versus post-course 12.8 ± 2.1, P < 0.001), average adherence (from 87.0 ± 7.7% to 90.6 ± 7.1%, P = 0.001) and the number of patients managed in full adherence with the guidelines (from 33.6 ± 31.7% to 43.9 ± 36.1%, P = 0.037).

Conclusions

E-learning is effective in increasing knowledge and improving clinical practice in paediatric AGE and is an effective tool for implementing clinical practice guidelines.

Treatment of acute gastroenteritis in children: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions commonly used in developed countries

BACKGROUND

Acute gastroenteritis (AGE) is an extremely common paediatric condition, which results in significant morbidity in children and is a financial burden to the society.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this overview is to critically evaluate the evidence currently available in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) regarding the efficacy and safety of commonly considered treatment options in children with AGE.

METHODS

All Cochrane reviews evaluating the following treatments in children with AGE were eligible for inclusion: oral rehydration therapy, anti-emetics and probiotics. We excluded those focusing on the treatment of antibiotic associated or nosocomial diarrhoea, persistent (chronic) diarrhoea and the prevention of gastroenteritis. We focused on the following outcomes that were selected a priori as clinically important: rate of admission to the hospital; length of stay in hospital; rate of return visits; administration of intravenous (IV) therapy owing to failure of oral rehydration therapy; adverse events and dysnatremia.

MAIN RESULTS

Children who received oral rehydration therapy had a shorter length of stay in hospital compared with children who received IV therapy [mean difference, MD = -1.20 days (-2.38, -0.02)]; however, the result was no longer significant when an outlying study was removed. Children who received IV therapy were at increased risk of developing phlebitis [risk difference, RD= - 0.02 (-0.04, -0.01)], while paralytic ileus was more common in children receiving ORT [RD = 0.03 (confidence interval, CI 0.01-0.05)]. Children who received oral ondansetron had lower hospital admission rates to the emergency department (ED) and lower rates of IV rehydration during their ED stay compared with children receiving placebo [risk ration, RR = 0.40 (CI 0.19-0.83) and RR = 0.41 (CI 0.29-0.59), respectively]. Children receiving IV ondansetron had lower hospital admission rates to the ED than patients receiving placebo [RR = 0.21 (0.05, 0.93)]. Probiotic use amongst children hospitalized following AGE reduced the mean duration of hospitalization by 1.12 days (CI -1.16, -0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

Given that oral rehydration is less invasive than IV rehydration with no evidence of important clinical differences, it is the first choice for rehydration in children with AGE and mild-to-moderate dehydration. As the vast majority of children with AGE do not require IV rehydration, oral ondansetron administration to children with significant vomiting should be performed to reduce the use of IV rehydration and the need for hospital admission. In children deemed too unwell to receive oral rehydration therapy, IV ondansetron administration is an option, as its use is associated with lower hospital admission rates. Although probiotics appear to be an effective option for the treatment of AGE amongst hospitalized children, outpatient data is lacking and more studies are urgently needed to determine the optimal organism, dosing and duration of treatment.

Management strategies in the treatment of neonatal and pediatric gastroenteritis

Acute gastroenteritis, characterized by the onset of diarrhea with or without vomiting, continues to be a major cause of morbidity and mortality in children in mostly resource-constrained nations. Although generally a mild and self-limiting disease, gastroenteritis is one of the most common causes of hospitalization and is associated with a substantial disease burden. Worldwide, up to 40% of children aged less than 5 years with diarrhea are hospitalized with rotavirus. Also, some microorganisms have been found predominantly in resource-constrained nations, including Shigella spp, Vibrio cholerae, and the protozoan infections. Prevention remains essential, and the rotavirus vaccines have demonstrated good safety and efficacy profiles in large clinical trials. Because dehydration is the major complication associated with gastroenteritis, appropriate fluid management (oral or intravenous) is an effective and safe strategy for rehydration. Continuation of breastfeeding is strongly recommended. New treatments such as antiemetics (ondansetron), some antidiarrheal agents (racecadotril), and chemotherapeutic agents are often proposed, but not yet universally recommended. Probiotics, also known as "food supplement," seem to improve intestinal microbial balance, reducing the duration and the severity of acute infectious diarrhea. The European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition and the European Society of Paediatric Infectious Diseases guidelines make a stronger recommendation for the use of probiotics for the management of acute gastroenteritis, particularly those with documented efficacy such as Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, Lactobacillus reuteri, and Saccharomyces boulardii. To date, the management of acute gastroenteritis has been based on the option of "doing the least": oral rehydration-solution administration, early refeeding, no testing, no unnecessary drugs.

The effect of antiemetics in childhood gastroenteritis

Introduction

Diarrheal diseases are the second leading cause of childhood morbidity and mortality in developing countries and an important cause of malnutrition. An estimated 0.75 million children below 5 years of age die from diarrhea. Vomiting associated with acute gastroenteritis (AGE) is a distressing symptom and limits the success of oral rehydration in AGE leading to an increased use of intravenous rehydration, prolonged emergency department stay and hospitalization. In this review we estimate the effect of antiemetics in gastroenteritis in children.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of all the efficacy and effectiveness studies. We used a standardized abstraction and grading format and performed meta-analyses for all outcomes with more than two studies. The estimated effect of antiemetics was determined by applying the standard Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group (CHERG) rules.

Results

We included seven studies in the review. Antiemetics significantly reduced the incidence of vomiting and hospitalization by 54%. Antiemetics also significantly reduced the intravenous fluid requirements by 60%, while it had a non-significant effect on the ORT tolerance and revisit rates.

Conclusion

Antiemetics are effective for the management of gastroenteritis in children and have the potential to decrease morbidity and mortality burden due to diarrhea, when introduced and scaled up.

Best strategies to implement clinical pathways in an emergency department setting: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The clinical pathway is a tool that operationalizes best evidence recommendations and clinical practice guidelines in an accessible format for 'point of care' management by multidisciplinary health teams in hospital settings. While high-quality, expert-developed clinical pathways have many potential benefits, their impact has been limited by variable implementation strategies and suboptimal research designs. Best strategies for implementing pathways into hospital settings remain unknown. This study will seek to develop and comprehensively evaluate best strategies for effective local implementation of externally developed expert clinical pathways.

DESIGN/METHODS

We will develop a theory-based and knowledge user-informed intervention strategy to implement two pediatric clinical pathways: asthma and gastroenteritis. Using a balanced incomplete block design, we will randomize 16 community emergency departments to receive the intervention for one clinical pathway and serve as control for the alternate clinical pathway, thus conducting two cluster randomized controlled trials to evaluate this implementation intervention. A minimization procedure will be used to randomize sites. Intervention sites will receive a tailored strategy to support full clinical pathway implementation. We will evaluate implementation strategy effectiveness through measurement of relevant process and clinical outcomes. The primary process outcome will be the presence of an appropriately completed clinical pathway on the chart for relevant patients. Primary clinical outcomes for each clinical pathway include the following: Asthma--the proportion of asthmatic patients treated appropriately with corticosteroids in the emergency department and at discharge; and Gastroenteritis--the proportion of relevant patients appropriately treated with oral rehydration therapy. Data sources include chart audits, administrative databases, environmental scans, and qualitative interviews. We will also conduct an overall process evaluation to assess the implementation strategy and an economic analysis to evaluate implementation costs and benefits.

DISCUSSION

This study will contribute to the body of evidence supporting effective strategies for clinical pathway implementation, and ultimately reducing the research to practice gaps by operationalizing best evidence care recommendations through effective use of clinical pathways.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01815710.

Antiemetic treatment for acute gastroenteritis in children: an updated Cochrane systematic review with meta-analysis and mixed treatment comparison in a Bayesian framework

OBJECTIVE

To assess the evidence for the safety and effectiveness of antiemetics on gastroenteritis-induced vomiting in children and adolescents.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and EMBASE searched from 1980 to March 2012.

METHODS

Methods included comprehensive searches, data synthesis, meta-analysis and mixed treatment comparisons (MTC).

REVIEW METHODS

Reference lists were checked, and missing or inconsistent data were sought from trial investigators. Randomised controlled trials comparing antiemetics in participants younger than 18 years and who were vomiting due to acute gastroenteritis. Four meta-analyses and three MTC were carried out.

RESULTS

10 trials (1479 participants) and five treatments were included: dexamethasone, dimenhydrinate, granisetron, metoclopramide and ondansetron. There was clear evidence that ondansetron (oral or intravenous) compared with placebo increased the proportion of patients with cessation of vomiting (orally administered) (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.61), reduced the immediate hospital admission rate (orally administered) (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.83) and the need for intravenous rehydration therapy (orally administered) (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.59). No significant difference was noted in the revisit rates, but ondansetron was associated with an increase in episodes of diarrhoea. There was no evidence for the use of dexamethasone or metoclopramide and limited evidence that dimenhydrinate or granisetron increased the cessation of vomiting. The MTC analysis suggested that ondansetron was the most likely treatment to stop the child vomiting. Nine studies were carried out in secondary care and one in primary care.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review used a method novel to this clinical area and found clear evidence that ondansetron was the most likely treatment to allow oral rehydration therapy to commence. Given the significance of these results, the authors urge healthcare policy makers to consider the wider use of ondansetron in secondary care. Furthermore, randomised controlled trials are needed to investigate the effectiveness of antiemetic treatment in primary care (including ambulatory care interventions).