Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
2.
Pediatr. aten. prim ; 19(73): 83-85, ene.-mar. 2017.
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-161865

ABSTRACT

Los autores de esta revisión sistemática concluyen que la introducción precoz del huevo o el cacahuete en la dieta infantil se asocia a una disminución del riesgo de alergia a dichos alimentos, aunque se deben tener en cuenta las limitaciones de los estudios primarios. Respecto a otros alimentos estudiados (pescado, leche de vaca, gluten) no se encontró evidencia de ningún efecto. Probablemente no haya justificación para retrasar la introducción de algunos alimentos como el huevo y el cacahuete con el fin de prevenir la alergia a los mismos e incluso esta recomendación sea perjudicial. Falta evidencia para hacer una recomendación sobre el momento más adecuado de introducirlos (AU)


The authors of this systematic review conclude that the early introduction of egg or peanut in the infant diet was associated with lower risk of developing egg or peanut allergy, although these findings should be considered in the context of limitations in the primary studies. Regarding other foods studied (fish, cow’s milk, gluten), no evidence of any effect was found. There is probably no justification for the delay in the introduction of some foods such as eggs and peanuts to prevent allergy to them. This recommendation can even be harmful. There is no evidence to make a recommendation on the most appropriate time to introduce them (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Evidence-Based Medicine/methods , Food Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Food Hypersensitivity/prevention & control , Milk Hypersensitivity/complications , Milk Hypersensitivity/prevention & control , Peanut Hypersensitivity/prevention & control , Celiac Disease/prevention & control , Diet, Gluten-Free , Autoimmune Diseases/epidemiology , Autoimmune Diseases/prevention & control , Confidence Intervals
3.
Pediatr. aten. prim ; 18(71): 275-278, jul.-sept. 2016.
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-156619

ABSTRACT

Conclusiones de los autores del estudio: el uso selectivo del electrocardiograma (ECG) en los exámenes previos a la participación de atletas jóvenes proporciona una alta tasa de detección de cardiopatías. Se debe demostrar que la implantación del ECG como cribado tiene una mayor eficiencia para la prevención de la muerte súbita que su uso selectivo, antes de valorar su implantación generalizada. Comentario de los revisores: las deficiencias metodológicas de este estudio hacen que sus resultados no condicionen ningún cambio en las actuales directrices respecto a los exámenes preparticipación de atletas jóvenes. Las directrices europeas y españolas en estos momentos aconsejan el uso de ECG como cribado en las evaluaciones preparticipación (AU)


Athors´ conclusions: due to the methodological shortcomings of this study, the results don’t make any change to current guidelines regarding preparticipation athletic evaluations among youths. Current European and Spanish guidelines advise using ECG screening in preparticipation athletic evaluations. Reviewers´ commentary: selective ECG use for preparticipation athletic evaluations has a high rate of identification of cardiac disease. Adoption of a mass ECG screening program would need to prove to be more efficient at identifying diseases associated with sudden cardiac death than a selective approach (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Child , Sudden Infant Death/epidemiology , Sudden Infant Death/prevention & control , Death, Sudden/epidemiology , Death, Sudden/prevention & control , Evidence-Based Medicine/instrumentation , Evidence-Based Medicine/methods , Evidence-Based Practice/methods , Mass Screening/methods , Electrocardiography/instrumentation , Electrocardiography/methods , Sports/physiology , Retrospective Studies
6.
Pediatr. aten. prim ; 13(52): 629-640, oct.-dic. 2011.
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-97061

ABSTRACT

Los autores de los estudios revisados en este artículo no encontraron diferencias en el riesgo de muerte o eventos cardiacos agudos graves entre pacientes con medicación psicoestimulante y sin ella. En conjunto, no consideran adecuada la realización de un electrocardiograma (ECG) o remitir al cardiólogo de forma rutinaria a pacientes con trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad (TDAH) antes de iniciar tratamiento con medicación psicoestimulante. Consideran que la derivación debe basarse en factores de riesgo cardiovasculares detectados a través de la historia clínica o la exploración física. Comentario de los revisores: con los resultados disponibles no hay evidencia suficiente que justifique la realización de un ECG a todos los niños con TDAH antes del inicio del tratamiento con psicoestimulantes. En estos pacientes, lo prudente sería realizar una historia clínica y una exploración física (incluidas la tensión arterial y la frecuencia cardiaca) y derivar al cardiólogo solo los casos que presenten factores de riesgo cardiovascular o síntomas de enfermedad cardiaca(AU)


The authors didn't find differences on the rate of cardiovascular events or death between children exposed and unexposed to stimulant medication. They don't find appropriate to perform an electrocardiogram (EKG) or referral to cardiology of all children with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) before starting stimulant medication. Cardiology referral should be considered only if cardiac risk factors are detected. Reviewer's commentary: at present there isn't enough evidence to justify the performance of an EKG as screening previous to initiate medical stimulant medication in children with ADHD. It seems reasonable to perform a careful history and physical examination (blood pressure and cardiac frequency included) and referral to cardiology only when cardiac risk factors or cardiac diseases are detected(AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Child , Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity/diagnosis , Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity/therapy , Attention Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders/diagnosis , Attention Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders/therapy , Central Nervous System Stimulants/therapeutic use , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity/psychology , Attention Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders/physiopathology , Attention Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders/psychology
7.
Pediatr. aten. prim ; 12(supl.18): s9-s72, mar. 2010. tab, ilus
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-82172

ABSTRACT

Introducción: existe controversia sobre el tipo de profesional más adecuado –pediatras (PED) o médicos de familia/generales (MF/MG)– para prestar atención sanitaria a niños y adolescentes en Atención Primaria (AP). No existen revisiones sistemáticas previas que hayan estudiado este aspecto. El objetivo de este estudio es comparar la atención sanitaria proporcionada por PED y MF/MG en los siguientes aspectos de la práctica clínica: la prescripción de antibióticos (ATB), la indicación de pruebas diagnósticas, el manejo de la otitis media (OMA), del asma, del síndrome febril y de diversas alteraciones psicopatológicas, así como la realización de actividades preventivas. Material y métodos: diseño de estudio: revisión sistemática. Fuente de los datos: hasta diciembre de 2008 se revisaron las bases de datos MEDLINE y CENTRAL, el metabuscador TRIP Database y el buscador Google Académico para recuperar artículos originales y revisiones sistemáticas que compararan la práctica clínica de ambos tipos de profesionales. No se efectuó restricción por idioma. Selección de estudios: se incluyeron estudios de cualquier tipo de diseño (transversal, cohortes, casos y controles, experimentales) que compararan la práctica clínica del PED y el MF/MG. Se excluyeron todas las referencias que no contuvieran investigación original (cartas al director o editoriales). Asimismo, se evaluó la calidad metodológica de cada estudio con el instrumento “OSTEBA; Fichas de lectura crítica”. Dicha calidad era valorada de forma independiente por dos revisores, que llegaban a un consenso en caso de discrepancia. La extracción de datos fue realizada por siete parejas de revisores de forma independiente. Las discrepancias se resolvieron mediante consenso. Resultados: como promedio, los MF/MG prescribieron más ATB que los PED en infecciones del tracto respiratorio superior de probable etiología vírica –odds ratio (OR): 1,4; intervalo de confianza del 95% (IC 95%): 1,1-1,8–. Los PED tuvieron más probabilidades de adherirse a las recomendaciones de guías de práctica clínica sobre el manejo del síndrome febril (OR: 9; IC 95%: 3-25) y del trastorno por déficit de atención con/sin hiperactividad (OR: 5; IC 95%: 3-11), y una mayor capacidad de resolución para otras enfermedades de elevada prevalencia durante la infancia y la adolescencia (como asma y OMA). Los PED presentaban porcentajes de vacunación superiores a los de los MF/MG en todos los estudios que evaluaron este resultado. Conclusión: en vista de los resultados expuestos, parece recomendable mantener la figura del PED en los equipos de AP y reforzar su función específica como primer punto de contacto del niño con el sistema sanitario (AU)


Introduction: There is controversy about which health professional is the most adequate –pediatricians (PED) or family practitioners/general physicians (FP/GP)– to provide health care services to children and adolescents in Primary Care (PC). There are not previous systematic reviews approaching this subject in the previously published literature. The objective of this study is to compare health care provided between PED and FP/GP in the following aspects of the clinical practice: antibiotic (ATB) prescription; diagnostic test indication; acute otitis media (AOM), asthma, febrile syndrome and several psychopathological conditions’ management; and preventive measures accomplishment. Material and methods: study design: systematic review. Data sources: MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases, TRIP Database and Google Scholar, were searched until December 2008 to retrieve original papers and systematic reviews comparing the clinical practice of both kinds of health professionals. No language restriction was made. Studies’ selection: studies of any kind of design were included (cross-sectional, cohorts, case-controls and experimental) comparing the clinical practice of PED and FP/GP. The references without original research were excluded (letters to the editor, editorials). The methodological quality of each study was assessed with the tool “OSTEBA; Critical Appraisal Cards”. Two reviewers assessed the quality of the studies independently, achieving consensus in case of discrepancy. Seven pairs of reviewers made the data extraction independently. Discrepancies were achieved by consensus. Results: On average, FP/GP prescribed more ATB than PED in upper respiratory tract infections of probable viral etiology –odds ratio (OR): 1.4; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.1-1.8–; PED were more likely to adhere to clinical guidelines recommendations on febrile syndrome management (OR: 9; 95% CI: 3-25) and on attention deficit disorder with/without hyperactivity (OR: 5; 95% CI: 3-11), and showed more resolution capacity on other highly prevalent conditions in children and adolescents (such as asthma and AOM). PED showed higher vaccination coverage than FP/GP in all the studies assessing this result. Conclusion: based on the presented results, it seems reasonable to recommend maintaining the PED figure in PC health centers and reinforcing its specific task as the first point of contact of the child with the health care system (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Child , Primary Health Care/methods , Primary Health Care/trends , Pediatrics , Pediatrics/organization & administration , Otitis Media/diagnosis , Otitis Media/therapy , Immunization , Primary Health Care , Cross-Sectional Studies , Cohort Studies , Family Practice/methods , 28599 , Case-Control Studies , Asthma/diagnosis , Asthma/therapy , Primary Prevention/methods , Primary Prevention/trends
8.
Pediatr. aten. prim ; 11(42): 289-298, abr.-jun. 2009.
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-73122

ABSTRACT

Conclusiones de los autores: en la revisión sistemática concluyen que no existe suficienteevidencia para aconsejar o desaconsejar la profilaxis antibiótica (PAB) de forma generalizadaa los niños con reflujo vesicoureteral (RVU). La guía de práctica clínica, con un nivel de evidenciaC, no recomienda usar de forma generalizada PAB en niños con reflujo I-III. El ensayoclínico aleatorio demuestra que la PAB en niños de hasta 30 meses con RVU grados I a IV notiene ventajas sobre no tratar.Conclusiones de los revisores: en vista de la evidencia disponible, no sería necesario administrarPBA a niños menores de 30 meses con RVU grados I a IV. Aunque no está claro elpapel de las infecciones urinarias sobre la progresión del daño renal en niños con RVU parecerazonable mantener una actitud de vigilancia ante posibles síntomas de infección urinariapara realizar un cultivo e iniciar de forma precoz el tratamiento antibiótico adecuado(AU)


Author’s conclusions: the systematic review concludes that there is not enough evidenceto recommend or not the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in children with vesicoureteral reflux.The guideline practice, with a C evidence level, does not recommend antibiotic prophylaxisfor children with I-III grade vesicoureteral reflux. Finally the randomized controlled trialshows that antibiotic prophylaxis in children 1-30 months with vesicoureteral reflux grade IIVis not effective in reducing the rate of infection or the incidence of renal damage or progression.Reviewers’ commentary: evidence shows that antibiotic prophylaxis in children 1-30months old with vesicoureteral reflux grade I-IV is not effective in preventing urinary tract infections.Even though it is not clear the role of urinary infections in the progressive damage ofrenal parenchyma in children with vesicoureteral reflux, it seems acceptable that an earlyand correct diagnosis and prompt treatment remain the basis of the management of thesechildren(AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Child , Evidence-Based Medicine/methods , Evidence-Based Medicine/trends , Urinary Tract Infections/complications , Urinary Tract Infections/diagnosis , Urinary Tract Infections/epidemiology , Urinary Tract Infections/prevention & control
10.
An Esp Pediatr ; 36(3): 189-92, 1992 Mar.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-1580427

ABSTRACT

We have reviewed the success of tuberculosis chemoprophylaxis in 369 children. These children ranged from 4 months to 14 years of age and had been prescribed chemoprophylaxis with Isoniazide at 10 mg/kg/day. Out of these, 258 (69.91%) finished the prophylaxis and 111 (30.08%) did not. Taking into account the reason for the consultation, of those who sought assistance due to contact with a patient with tuberculosis, 70.33% performed the treatment and 29.60% did not. For those in which the reason was a positive Mantoux, the data were 68.1% and 30.8%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups. We feel that the relatively high rate of noncompliance in our patients is a matter of concern. At the present time, chemoprophylaxis with Isoniazide is the best method available for the prevention of tuberculosis. We emphasize the need for its proper performance. We report several measures, such as the determination of Isoniazide metabolites in urine, which may be beneficial for better control and follow-up of these patients.


Subject(s)
Isoniazid/administration & dosage , Tuberculosis/prevention & control , Adolescent , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Patient Compliance , Spain
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...