Dataset Information

Video discharge instructions for pediatric gastroenteritis in an emergency department: a randomized, controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: The aim was to evaluate if the addition of video discharge instructions (VDIs) to usual verbal information improved the comprehension of information provided to caregivers of patients who consult for acute gastroenteritis (AGE). We conducted an open-label, parallel, randomized trial, enrolling patients who consulted for AGE at a tertiary hospital. First, caregivers answered a written test concerning AGE characteristics and management. They were randomly allocated to a control group, which received the usual verbal instructions, or to an intervention group, which additionally received VDI. After discharge, caregivers were contacted by telephone and answered the same test, satisfaction questions, and follow-up information. From September 2019 to March 2020, 139 patients were randomized, 118 completed follow-up. The mean score was 3.13 (SD 1.07) over 5 points in the initial test and 3.96 (SD 0.96) in the follow-up test. Patients in the intervention group had a greater improvement (1.17 points, SD 1.11) than those in the control group (0.47 points, SD 0.94, p?

SUBMITTER: Jove-Blanco A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7541201 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Video discharge instructions for pediatric gastroenteritis in an emergency department: a randomized, controlled trial.

Jové-Blanco A A Solís-García G G Torres-Soblechero L L Escobar-Castellanos M M Mora-Capín A A Rivas-García A A Castro-Rodríguez C C Marañón R R

European journal of pediatrics 20201008 2

The aim was to evaluate if the addition of video discharge instructions (VDIs) to usual verbal information improved the comprehension of information provided to caregivers of patients who consult for acute gastroenteritis (AGE). We conducted an open-label, parallel, randomized trial, enrolling patients who consulted for AGE at a tertiary hospital. First, caregivers answered a written test concerning AGE characteristics and management. They were randomly allocated to a control group, which receiv ...[more]

PMID: 33029683

Similar Datasets

Project description:The burden of acute gastroenteritis on children and their families continues to be enormous. Probiotics, defined as viable microbial preparations that have a beneficial effect on the health of the host, represent a rapidly expanding field. Although clinical trials in children with gastroenteritis have been performed, most have significant flaws, and guidelines do not consistently endorse their use.PROGUT is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, five-center, Canadian, emergency department trial. Children aged 3 months to 48 months who present between November 2013 and June 2017 with <72 hours of gastroenteritis symptoms will be assessed for eligibility. A total of 886 children will be randomized (1:1 allocation via an internet based, third party, randomization service) to receive 5 days of a combination probiotic agent (Lactobacillus rhamnosus and L. helveticus) or placebo. All participants, caregivers, and outcome assessors will be blinded to group assignment. The study includes three key outcomes: 1) clinical - the development of moderate to severe disease following an emergency department (ED) evaluation that employs a validated clinical score (Modified Vesikari Scale); 2) safety - side effect; and 3) mechanism - fecal secretory immunoglobulin A levels.Definitive data are lacking to guide the clinical use of probiotics in children with acute gastroenteritis. Hence, probiotics are rarely prescribed by North American physicians. However, the following current trends obligate an urgent assessment: 1) probiotics are sold as food supplements, and manufacturers can encourage their use while their relevance has yet to be established; 2) North American and European government agencies remain concerned about their value and safety; 3) some institutions are now recommending the routine use of probiotics; and 4) parents of affected children are often providing probiotics. With probiotic consumption increasing in the absence of solid evidence, there is a need to conduct this definitive trial to overcome the limitations of prior work in this field.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01853124; first registered 9 May 2013.

Project description:Patients who use an emergency department (ED) for acute migraine headaches have higher migraine disability scores, lower socioeconomic status, and are unlikely to have used a migraine-specific medication prior to presentation to the ED. The objective was to determine if a comprehensive migraine intervention, delivered just prior to ED discharge, could improve migraine impact scores 1?month after the ED visit.? This was a randomized controlled trial of a comprehensive migraine intervention versus typical care among patients who presented to an ED for management of acute migraine. At the time of discharge, for patients randomized to comprehensive care, the research team reinforced their diagnosis, shared a migraine education presentation from the National Library of Medicine, provided them with six tablets of sumatriptan 100?mg and 14 tablets of naproxen 500?mg, and if they wished, provided them with an expedited free appointment to the institution's headache clinic. Patients randomized to typical care received the care their attending emergency physicians (EPs) felt was appropriate. The primary outcome was a between-group comparison of the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) score, a validated headache assessment instrument, 1?month after ED discharge. Secondary outcomes included an assessment of satisfaction with headache care and use of migraine-specific medication within that 1-month period.? Over a 19-month period, 50 migraine patients were enrolled. One-month follow-up was successfully obtained in 92% of patients. Baseline characteristics were comparable. One-month HIT-6 scores in the two groups were nearly identical (59 vs. 56, 95% confidence interval [CI] for difference of 3?=?-5 to 11), as was dissatisfaction with overall headache care (17% vs. 18%, 95% CI for difference of 1%?=?-22% to 24%). Patients randomized to the comprehensive intervention were more likely to be using triptans or migraine-specific therapy (43% vs. 0%, 95% CI for difference of 43%?=?20 to 63%) 1?month later.A comprehensive migraine intervention, when compared to typical care, did not improve HIT-6 scores (a validated measure of the effect of migraine on one's daily life) 1?month after ED discharge. Future work is needed to define a migraine intervention that is practical and useful in an ED, where many underserved patients, of necessity, present for care.

Project description:BackgroundEmergency department discharge instructions are variably understood by patients, and in the setting of emergency department crowding, innovations are needed to counteract shortened interaction times with the physician. We evaluated the effect of viewing an online video of diagnosis-specific discharge instructions on patient comprehension and recall of instructions.MethodsIn this prospective, single-center, randomized controlled trial conducted between November 2011 and January 2012, we randomized emergency department patients who were discharged with one of 38 diagnoses to either view (after they left the emergency department) a vetted online video of diagnosis-specific discharge instructions, or to usual care. Patients were subsequently contacted by telephone and asked three standardized questions about their discharge instructions; one point was awarded for each correct answer. Using an intention-to-treat analysis, differences between groups were assessed using univariate testing, and with logistic regression that accounted for clustering on managing physician. A secondary outcome measure was patient satisfaction with the videos, on a 10-point scale.ResultsAmong 133 patients enrolled, mean age was 46.1 (s.d.D. 21.5) and 55% were female. Patients in the video group had 19% higher mean scores (2.5, s.d. 0.7) than patients in the control group (2.1, s.d. 0.8) (p=0.002). After adjustment for patient age, sex, first language, triage acuity score, and clustering, the odds of achieving a fully correct score (3 out of 3) were 3.5 (95% CI, 1.7 to 7.2) times higher in the video group, compared to the control group. Among those who viewed the videos, median rating of the videos was 10 (IQR 8 to 10).ConclusionsIn this single-center trial, patients who viewed an online video of their discharge instructions scored higher on their understanding of key concepts around their diagnosis and subsequent care. Those who viewed the videos found them to be a helpful addition to standard care.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01361932 http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01361932?term=nct01361932&rank=1.

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.

Dataset Information

Video discharge instructions for pediatric gastroenteritis in an emergency department: a randomized, controlled trial.

Publications

Video discharge instructions for pediatric gastroenteritis in an emergency department: a randomized, controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets