Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT: 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.

SUBMITTER: Freedman SB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6390170 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

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

Freedman Stephen B SB Soofi Sajid B SB Willan Andrew R AR Williamson-Urquhart Sarah S Ali Noshad N Xie Jianling J Dawoud Fady F Bhutta Zulfiqar A ZA

Annals of emergency medicine 20181102 3

<h4>Study objective</h4>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.<h4>Methods</h4>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 v ...[more]

PMID: 30392735

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe use of antiemetics for children with vomiting is one of the most controversial decisions in the treatment of gastroenteritis in developed countries. Ondansetron, a selective serotonin receptor antagonist, has been found to be effective in improving the success of oral rehydration therapy. However, North American and European clinical practice guidelines continue to recommend against its use, stating that evidence of cost savings would be required to support ondansetron administration. Thus, an economic analysis of the emergency department administration of ondansetron was conducted. The primary objective was to conduct a cost analysis of the routine administration of ondansetron in both the United States and Canada.Methods and findingsA cost analysis evaluated oral ondansetron administration to children presenting to emergency departments with vomiting and dehydration secondary to gastroenteritis from a societal and health care payer's perspective in both the US and Canada. A decision tree was developed that incorporated the frequency of vomiting, intravenous insertion, hospitalization, and emergency department revisits. Estimates of the monetary costs associated with ondansetron use, intravenous rehydration, and hospitalization were derived from administrative databases or emergency department use. The economic burden in children administered ondansetron plus oral rehydration therapy was compared to those not administered ondansetron employing deterministic and probabilistic simulations. We estimated the costs or savings to society and health care payers associated with the routine administration of ondansetron. Sensitivity analyses considered variations in costs, treatment effects, and exchange rates. In the US the administration of ondansetron to eligible children would prevent approximately 29,246 intravenous insertions and 7,220 hospitalizations annually. At the current average wholesale price, its routine administration to eligible children would annually save society US$65.6 million (US$49.1-US$81.1) and health care payers US$61.1 million (US$46.2-US$76.3). In Canada the administration of ondansetron to eligible children would prevent 4,065 intravenous insertions and 1,003 hospitalizations annually. Its routine administration would annually save society CDN$1.72 million (CDN$1.15-CDN$1.89) and the health care system CDN$1.18 million (CDN$0.88-CDN$1.41).ConclusionsIn countries where intravenous rehydration is often employed, the emergency department administration of oral ondansetron to children with dehydration and vomiting secondary to gastroenteritis results in significant monetary savings compared to a no-ondansetron policy. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Project description: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.

Project description:BackgroundVomiting in children with acute gastroenteritis (AG) is not only a direct cause of fluid loss but it is also a major factor of failure of oral rehydration therapy (ORT). Physicians who provide care to paediatric patients in the emergency department (ED) usually prescribe intravenous fluid therapy (IVT) for mild or moderate dehydration when vomiting is the major symptom. Thus, effective symptomatic treatment of vomiting would lead to an important reduction in the use of IVT and, consequently, of the duration of hospital stay and of frequency of hospital admission. Available evidence on symptomatic treatment of vomiting shows the efficacy of the most recently registered molecule (ondansetron) but a proper evaluation of antiemetics drugs largely used in clinical practice, such as domperidone, is lacking.ObjectivesTo compare the efficacy of ondansetron and domperidone for the symptomatic treatment of vomiting in children with AG who have failed ORT.Methods/designMulticentre, double-blind randomized controlled trial conducted in paediatric EDs. Children aged from 1 to 6 years who vomiting, with a presumptive clinical diagnosis of AG, and without severe dehydration will be included. After the failure of a initial ORS administration in ED, eligible children will be randomized to receive: 1) ondansetron syrup (0,15 mg/Kg of body weight); 2) domperidone syrup (0,5 mg/Kg of body weight); 3) placebo. The main study outcome will be the percentage of patients needing nasogastric or IVT after symptomatic oral treatment failure, defined as vomiting or fluid refusal after a second attempt of ORT. Data relative to study outcomes will be collected at 30 minute intervals for a minimum of 6 hours. A telephone follow up call will be made 48 hours after discharge. A total number of 540 children (i.e. 180 patients in each arm) will be enrolled.DiscussionThe trial results would provide evidence on the efficacy of domperidone, which is largely used in clinical practice despite the lack of proper evaluation and a controversial safety profile, as compared to ondansetron, which is not yet authorized in Italy despite evidence supporting its efficacy in treating vomiting. The trial results would contribute to a reduction in the use of IVT and, consequently, in hospital admissions in children with AG. The design of this RCT, which closely reflect current clinical practice in EDs, will allow immediate transferability of results.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01257672.

Project description:The study aimed to explore the use of diagnostics for febrile children presenting to European emergency departments (EDs), the determinants of inter-hospital variation, and the association between test use and hospitalization. We performed a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional observational study involving 28 paediatric EDs from 11 countries. A total of 4560 children < 16 years were included, with fever as reason for consultation. We excluded neonates and children with relevant comorbidities. Our primary outcome was the proportion of children receiving testing after primary evaluation, by country and by focus of infection. Variability between hospitals and effects of blood testing on patient disposition were explored by multilevel regression analyses, adjusting for patient characteristics (age group, triage level, appearance, fever duration, focus of infection) and hospital type (academic, teaching, other). The use of routine diagnostics varied widely, mostly in the use of blood tests, ranging from 3 to 75% overall across hospitals. Age < 3 months, high-acuity triage level, ill appearance, and suspicion of urinary tract infection displayed the strongest association with blood testing (odds ratios (OR) of 8.71 (95% CI 5.23-14.53), 19.46 (3.66-103.60), 3.13 (2.29-4.26), 10.84 (6.35-18.50), respectively). Blood testing remained highly variable across hospitals (median OR of the final model 2.36, 1.98-3.54). A positive association was observed between blood testing and hospitalization (OR 13.62, 9.00-20.61).Conclusionthe use of diagnostics for febrile children was highly variable across European EDs, yet patient and hospital characteristics could only partly explain inter-hospital variability. Focus groups of participating sites should help define reasons for unexpected variation.What is known• Although previous research has shown variation in the emergency department (ED) management of febrile children, there is limited information on the use of diagnostics in European EDs. • A deeper knowledge of variability and its determinants can steer optimization of care.What is new• The use of diagnostics for febrile children was highly variable across European EDs, yet patient and hospital characteristics could only partly explain inter-hospital variability. • Data on between-centre comparison offer opportunities to further explore factors influencing unwarranted variation.

Project description:Introduction:We assess trends in opioid administration and prescribing from 2005-2015 in older adults in United States (U.S.) emergency departments (ED). Methods:We analyzed data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) survey from 2005 to 2015. ED visits for painful conditions were selected and stratified by age (18-64, 65-74, 75-84, ? 85 years). We analyzed trends in opioid administration in the ED and prescribing at discharge to encounters ? 65 and assessed predictors of use using survey-weighted chi-square tests and logistic regression. Trends in the use of five commonly prescribed opioids were also explored. Results:Opioid administration in the ED and prescribing at discharge for encounters with patients ? 65 years fell overall, but not significantly. By contrast, opioid administration in the ED and prescribing at discharge significantly declined for adult encounters 18-64 by 20% and 32%, respectively. A similar proportion of adult encounters ? 65 were administered opioids in the ED as 18-64, but adult encounters ? 85 had the lowest rates of administration. A smaller proportion of adult encounters ? 65 years with painful conditions were prescribed opioids at discharge compared to <65. However, this age-related disparity in prescribing narrowed over the study period. There were shifts in the specific types of opioids administered and prescribed in adult encounters ? 65 years over the study period, with the most notable being a 76% increase in hydromorphone administration comparing 2005-06 to 2014-15. Conclusion:From 2005-15, 1 in 4 to 1 in 10 ED patients with painful conditions were administered or prescribed an opioid in U.S. EDs. Opioids prescribing increased from 2005-11 and then declined from 2012-15, more so among visits in the 18-64 age group compared to ? 65 years. Opioid administrating demonstrated a gradual rise and decline in all adult age groups. Age consistently appears to be an important consideration, where opioid prescribing declines with advancing age. Given the nationwide opioid crisis, ED providers should remain vigilant in limiting opioids, particularly in older adults who are at higher risk for adverse effects.

Project description:BackgroundThere are limited treatment options that clinicians can provide to children presenting to emergency departments with vomiting secondary to acute gastroenteritis. Based on evidence of effectiveness and safety, clinicians now routinely administer ondansetron in the emergency department to promote oral rehydration therapy success. However, clinicians are also increasingly providing multiple doses of ondansetron for home use, creating unquantified cost and health system resource use implications without any evidence to support this expanding practice.Methods/designDOSE-AGE is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, six-center, pragmatic clinical trial being conducted in six Canadian pediatric emergency departments (EDs). In September 2019 the study began recruiting children aged 6 months to 18 years with a minimum of three episodes of vomiting in the 24 h preceding enrollment, <72 h of gastroenteritis symptoms and who were administered a dose of ondansetron during their ED visit. We are recruiting 1030 children (1:1 allocation via an internet-based, third-party, randomization service) to receive a 48-h supply (i.e., six doses) of ondansetron oral solution or placebo, administered on an as-needed basis. All participants, caregivers and outcome assessors will be blinded to group assignment. Outcome data will be collected by surveys administered to caregivers 24, 48 and 168 h following enrollment. The primary outcome is the development of moderate-to-severe gastroenteritis in the 7 days following the ED visit as measured by a validated clinical score (the Modified Vesikari Scale). Secondary outcomes include duration and frequency of vomiting and diarrhea, proportions of children experiencing unscheduled health care visits and intravenous rehydration, caregiver satisfaction with treatment and safety. A preplanned economic evaluation will be conducted alongside the trial.DiscussionDefinitive data are lacking to guide the clinical use of post-ED visit multidose ondansetron in children with acute gastroenteritis. Usage is increasing, despite the absence of supportive evidence. The incumbent additional costs associated with use, and potential side effects such as diarrhea and repeat visits, create an urgent need to evaluate the effect and safety of multiple doses of ondansetron in children focusing on post-emergency department visit and patient-centered outcomes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03851835. Registered on 22 February 2019.

Dataset Information

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

Publications

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets