RESUMO
Introduction: Foreign body (FB) ingestion is a common paediatric emergency. While guidelines exist for urgent intervention, less is known of the natural progress of FBs passing through the gastrointestinal tract (GIT). We reviewed these FB transit times in an outpatient cohort. Methods: A retrospective review was performed on all children (≤18 years) treated for radiopaque FB ingestion at two major tertiary paediatric centres from 2015 to 2016. Demographic data, FB types, outcomes and hospital visits (emergency department [ED] and outpatient) were recorded. All cases discharged from the ED with outpatient follow-up were included. We excluded those who were not given follow-up appointments and those admitted to inpatient wards. We categorised the outcomes into confirmed passage (ascertained via abdominal X-ray or reported direct stool visualisation by patients/caregivers) and assumed passage (if patients did not attend follow-up appointments). Results: Of the 2,122 ED visits for FB ingestion, 350 patients who were given outpatient follow-up appointments were reviewed (median age 4.35 years [range: 0.5-14.7], 196 [56%] male). The largest proportion (16%) was aged 1-2 years. Coins were the most common ingested FB, followed by toys. High-risk FB (magnets or batteries) formed 9% of cases (n=33). The 50th centile for FB retention was 8, 4 and 7 days for coins, batteries and other radiopaque FBs, respectively; all confirmed passages occurred at 37, 7 and 23 days, respectively. Overall, 197 (68%) patients defaulted on their last given follow-up. Conclusion: This study provides insight into the transit times of FB ingested by children, which helps medical professionals to decide on the optimal time for follow-up visits and provide appropriate counsel to caregivers.
RESUMO
Studies show that conservative management in acute uncomplicated appendicitis (AUA) is an alternative to surgery. This study aims to determine factors affecting parental preference in management of AUA and their decision for research participation. We conducted surveys on parents whose children were admitted with suspicion of appendicitis but later confirmed not to have appendicitis. Information on appendicectomy versus conservative treatment with antibiotics was provided using a fixed script and standard information leaflet. Questionnaires covered factors influencing decisions, opinions regarding research, treatment preference and demographic data. We excluded parents not fluent in English. Of 113 respondents, 71(62.8%) chose antibiotics, 39(34.5%) chose appendicectomy, and 3(2.7%) had no preference. Reasons given for choosing antibiotics were fear of surgical risks and preferring less invasive treatment. Those choosing appendicectomy expressed preference for definitive treatment and fear of recurrence. Majority were against randomisation (n = 89, 78.8%) and blinding (n = 90, 79.7%). Over half found difficulty involving their child in research (n = 65, 57.5%). Most thought that research is important (66.4%) and beneficial to others (59.3%). Parents who perceived their child as healthy found research riskier (p = 0.039). Educated parents were more likely to find research beneficial to others (p = 0.012) but less accepting of randomisation (p = 0.001).Conclusion: More parents appear to prefer conservative treatment for acute uncomplicated appendicitis. Researchers must consider parental concerns regarding randomisation and blinding.What is Known:⢠Conservative management of acute uncomplicated appendicitis in paediatric patients is safe and effective, sparing the child the need for an operation; however, neither conservative nor surgical management is proven to be superior.⢠Randomised controlled trials provide the highest level of evidence, but it is challenging to recruit paediatric patients as participants in such clinical trials.What is New:⢠More parents prefer conservative management of uncomplicated appendicitis over surgical management for their children due to fear of surgical risks and complications⢠Randomisation in trial design is significantly associated with a parent's decision to reject their child's participation in a clinical trial.
