Search

Our multi-institutional university consortium implemented a gastroschisis pathway in 2015 to standardize and improve care by promoting avoidance of routine intubation and paralysis during silo placement, expeditious abdominal wall closure, discontinuation of antibiotics/narcotics within 48 h of closure, and early initiation/advancement of feeds.Adherence to the gastroschisis pathway was prospectively monitored. Outcomes for the contemporary cohort (2015-2018) were compared with a historical cohort (2007-2012).Good adherence to the pathway was observed for 70 cases of inborn uncomplicated gastroschisis. The contemporary cohort had significantly lower median mechanical ventilator days (2 versus 5; p 0.01) and antibiotic days (5.5 versus 9; p 0.01) as well as earlier days to initiation of feeds (12 versus 15; p 0.01). However, no differences were observed in length of stay (28 versus 29 days; p = 0.70). A skin closure technique was performed in 66% of the patients, of which 46% were performed at bedside without intubation, the assistance of an operating-room team, or general anesthesia.In this study, adherence to a clinical pathway for gastroschisis across different facilities was feasible and led to reduction in exposure to mechanical ventilation and antibiotics. The adoption of a bedside skin closure technique appears to facilitate compliance with the pathway.Level II/III TYPE OF STUDY: Prospective comparative study with historical cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a multicenter study to assess growth failure in hospitalized infants with gastroschisis. STUDY DESIGN: This study included neonates with gastroschisis within sites in the University of California Fetal Consortium (UCFC). The study’s primary outcome was growth failure at hospital discharge, defined as a weight or length z-score decrease > 0.8 from birth. Regression analysis was performed to assess changes in z-scores over time. RESULTS: Among 125 infants with gastroschisis, the median gestational age was 37 weeks (IQR 35–37). Length of stay was 32 days (23–60); 55% developed weight or length growth failure at discharge (28% had weight growth failure, 42% had length growth failure, and 15% had both weight and length growth failure). Weight and length z-scores at 14 d, 30 d, and discharge were less than birth (p

statement The mission of the Cochrane Nursing Care Field (CNCF) is to improve health outcomes through increasing the use of the Cochrane Library and supporting Cochrane's role by providing an evidence base for nurses and healthcare professionals who deliver, lead or research nursing care. The CNCF produces Cochrane Corner columns, summaries of recent nursing-care-relevant Cochrane Reviews that are regularly published in collaborating nursing-related journals. Information on the processes CNCF has developed can be accessed at: cncf.cochrane.org/evidence-transfer-program-review-summaries. This is a Cochrane review summary of: Stevens B, Yamada J, Ohlsson A et al ( 2016 ) Sucrose for analgesia in newborn infants undergoing painful procedures. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Issue 7. CD001069. doi: 10.1002/14651858. CD001069.pub5.

Background Type 1 diabetes is a common childhood pediatric disease characterized by autoimmune destruction of insulin producing βeta-cells in the pancreas.1 Effective measurement and control of blood glucose levels is critical for the health and wellbeing of adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Adolescents using continuous subcutaneous insulin pumps are able to perform continuous glucose monitoring. However, evidence is unclear if this improves effectiveness when compared to self-glucose monitoring alone. This review aims to establish the optimal care of an adolescent with type 1 diabetes mellitus to maintain glycemic control and to avoid hypoglycemia. Objectives The review question is: are metabolic outcomes improved in outpatient adolescents with type 1 diabetes on a continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion pump when continuous glucose monitoring is used, compared to self-glucose monitoring alone? Inclusion criteria Types of participants This review included studies of adolescent patients, aged 12 to 18 years, in the outpatient setting with type 1 diabetes mellitus utilizing a continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion pump. Type of intervention This review included studies which evaluated continuous glucose monitoring, as compared to self-glucose monitoring alone, in adolescents utilizing a continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion pump. Types of outcomes This review included studies examining the following outcome measures: number of hypoglycemic episodes (glucose < 70mg/dL) and hemoglobin A1C level. Types of studies This review included randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies were considered only in the absence of randomized controlled trials. Search strategy The search strategy included studies published between 2002 and 2012 in, or translated into, English. Methodological quality Papers selected for retrieval were assessed by two independent reviewers for methodological validity utilizing standardized critical appraisal instrument from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Data extraction Data was extracted from papers included in the review using the standardized data extraction tool from Joanna Briggs Institute Meta Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument (JBI-MAStARI). Data synthesis Quantitative papers were pooled by statistical meta-analysis using JBI-MAStARI. A fixed effect model for continuous data was utilized to express weighted mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Heterogeneity was assessed statistically using the standard Chi-square. Results There is no statistical or clinically significant difference in levels of hemoglobin A1C in adolescents on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion pumps utilizing continuous glucose monitoring devices as compared to those utilizing self-glucose monitoring alone. Conclusions From the findings of this review, the utilization of a continuous glucose-monitoring device in conjunction with an insulin pump does not improve hemoglobin A1C levels when compared with self-glucose monitoring in adolescent patients with type 1 diabetes.

The review question is: Are metabolic outcomes improved in outpatient adolescents (aged 13 to 19 years) with type 1 diabetes on a Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion (CSII) when continuous glucose monitoring is used, compared to self-glucose monitoring alone?Type 1 diabetes is the most common childhood paediatric disease, characterised by impairment of insulin producing βeta-cells in the pancreas. Internationally, there is variation in the incidence of type 1 diabetes in paediatric patients. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study Group, the overall incidence rate of this autoimmune disease is 24.3/100,000 in those 19 years of age . Annually, more than 15,000 children and adolescents are diagnosed in the United States (US) . From 1990 to 1999, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched the Multinational Project for Childhood Diabetes (DIAMOND), which was tasked with assessing type 1 diabetes in those 14 years or younger worldwide . Finland was discovered to have the highest age-adjusted incidence at 40.9 cases per 100,000/year. The lowest age-adjusted incidence is in China and Venezuela at 0.1 cases per 100,000/year. Globally, the largest increase in incidence is in those aged 10 to 14 years . This systematic review will focus on adolescent patients with type 1 diabetes, aged 13 to 19 years who manage their diabetes with an insulin pump.Patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus typically present with a history of polydipsia, polyuria, polyphagia, and weight loss . Initial findings include hyperglycemia, glycosuria, and ketones in the blood or urine . In 2009, the International Expert Committee deemed a haemoglobin A1C (glycosylated haemoglobin) of 6.5% or higher to be the standard for diagnosis . The American Diabetes Association (ADA) as well as the International Diabetes Federation and the European Association Study of Diabetes (EASD) accept this measure as the diagnostic tool for diabetes. Haemoglobin A1C is the most commonly used measurement for patients with type 1 diabetes . It refers to the measurement of the amount of glucose bound to haemoglobin. It is an average of blood glucose levels for the last 120 days, which is consistent with the average life span of a red blood cell (RBC).Compensation for the lack of insulin-secreting βeta-cells is accomplished through administration of insulin. For adolescents, insulin dosing is based on pubescent status, age, weight, activity level, and amount of carbohydrates consumed . Insulin administration, carbohydrate counting, and correction of hyperglycemia are necessary for maintaining glycemic control. Insulin can be administered through multiple daily injections (MDI) of rapid, intermediate and long-acting insulin .Another form of insulin delivery is the Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion (CSII), also known as an insulin pump, which is designed to meet physiological requirements through programmable basal rates and bolus doses . CSII's utilise rapid-acting insulin and establish a basal rate, which replaces the need for long-acting insulin. Bolus dosing is accomplished through adjusting the pump and is utilised to account for nutritional intake as well as hyperglycemia correction. Adjustments are also made for physical activity and exercise, as this can affect glucose levels . All patients considered in this systematic review will be utilising insulin pumps.In 2006, the United States had more than 35,000 patients, under the age of 21 years, receiving insulin therapy through an insulin pump . In Europe, the percentage of people with type 1 diabetes utilising a CSII is lower, potentially due to variation in health care coverage . There are various forms of insulin pumps, all with similar capabilities including a dose calculator for high blood glucose correction and carbohydrate ratios, programming software, and several other features . Software and programming is specific to each manufacturer. Basal rate abilities vary in each model from 0.05 units/hour to 30 units/hour . Information from the pump can be uploaded to online registries allowing providers to review trends and usage. It is imperative the information is reviewed concurrently with glucose monitoring results in order to ensure appropriate dosing and treatment .The intervention considered in this systematic review is the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in conjunction with a CSII. CGM utilises a sensor placed in the interstitial subcutaneous tissue, which then measures glucose levels. This is accomplished with "electrochemical sensors that use glucose oxidase and measure an electric current generated when glucose reacts with oxygen. The sensors are coated with a specialised membrane to make them biocompatible" . The CGM has programmable high and low levels to alert the user when the limit is being reached. Information regarding continuous glucose levels can then be downloaded and reviewed. Based on the report, providers, patients, and caregivers may assess trends and consider changing basal rates or bolus doses .CGM sensors currently do not offer a closed-loop solution. The user must enter insulin dosing information into the pump, taking into account the present glucose level and duration of action of the insulin. Currently, CGMs are regarded as a supplemental method for assessing the effectiveness of glucose control. Existing studies are underway to improve accuracy and communication between the sensor and insulin pump with the goal to develop an artificial pancreas . Currently, CGM sensors must be calibrated with a glucometer, as specified by the manufacturer .The comparison for this review is the standard of care, self-glucose monitoring (SGM), in patients with insulin pumps . SGM is accomplished with a glucometer and blood sample typically obtained from a finger prick. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) demonstrated frequency of monitoring improves glycemic control and decreases the risk of comorbidity . Data from this significant study continues to contribute to current diabetes management. According to the ADA, children and adolescents should monitor their blood glucose at least three or more times per day. Blood glucose data is utilised to calculate appropriate insulin doses. Similar to the CGM, information from the glucometers can be downloaded for assessment of results and trends. However, the result is dependent on the action of the patient to obtain the sample and only represents a specific moment in time whereas the CGM sensor continuously tracks the blood glucose level. Depending on the model, CGM can provide glucose levels every one to ten minutes. The sensor may last for up to 72 hours and results are available in real time .This systematic review will address two metabolic outcomes: a decrease in the number of hypoglycemic episodes and a haemoglobin A1C level7.5%. These outcomes were chosen due to their significance as indicators in the management of type 1 diabetes. Glucose levels should be between 90 mg/dL and 130 mg/dL (5.0mmol/l and 7.2mmol/l) before meals and between 90 mg/dL and 150 mg/dL at night (5.0mmmol/l and 8.3mmol/l) . Optimal care of an adolescent with type 1 diabetes mellitus is to safely maintain glycemic control and avoid hypoglycemia.Haemoglobin A1C is an indicator of how well the disease is being managed and should be evaluated every three months. McCulloch recommends the haemoglobin A1C level should be compared to approximately 50 recent blood glucose readings to ensure the accuracy of patient SGM . The reliability and validity of this test is based on the evidence discovered by the DCCT demonstrating those with lower haemoglobin A1C levels have fewer complications . The target A1C for adolescents, aged 13 to 19 years of age, is7.5% . This is consistent with the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) and diabetes management guidelines of the Australasian Paediatric Endocrine Group for the Department of Health and Ageing .An initial search for a systematic review regarding insulin pumps in adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus and concurrent use of CGM was conducted in the Joanna Briggs Institute Library of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and PubMed. No systematic reviews were found.