Trial reportInternational health2018
Caregiver oral rehydration solution fluid monitoring charts versus standard care for the management of some dehydration among Kenyan children: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in International health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Diarrhoea is a major cause of child mortality. Although oral rehydration solution (ORS) is an efficacious intervention for correcting dehydration, inadequate monitoring may limit its effectiveness in routine settings. We evaluated the effect of using a caregiver-administered chart to monitor oral fluid therapy on hydration status among children with some dehydration. Methods: An open-label randomized controlled trial was conducted among children 2-59 months of age. ORS fluid monitoring charts were given to caregivers in the intervention arm to record the hourly intake of ORS. ORS was administered without charting in the control arm. The primary outcome was dehydration defined by the presence of clinical signs of some dehydration, severe dehydration or shock assessed 4 h after initiation of treatment. We also assessed the acceptability of the charts among caregivers. Results: We evaluated 252 patients for the primary endpoint. Among those who received the intervention, 7/122 (5.7%) were still dehydrated following 4 h of ORS administration vs 20/130 (15.4%) in the control group (risk ratio 0.37 [95% confidence interval 0.16-0.85]). Caregivers in the intervention arm reported positive experiences using the fluid charts. Conclusions: The use of fluid monitoring charts reduced the frequency of dehydration and was well accepted by caregivers, representing a promising innovation for the management of diarrhoea and dehydration in resource-limited settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.