ArticleIntestinal Failure (New York, N.Y.)
Surveillance practices of pediatric intestinal failure patients by North American intestinal rehabilitation programs.
Article in Intestinal Failure (New York, N.Y.). 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Advancements in the survival of pediatric intestinal failure (IF) has resulted in a larger population of children requiring long-term parenteral nutrition (PN). Monitoring to prevent or address complications is vital in IF management, but currently there is no consensus on what to monitor or frequency. Our objective was to determine surveillance practices in North American (Canada and the United States) intestinal rehabilitation programs (IRPs). Material and Methods: A cross-sectional survey was completed using a questionnaire developed by our center. Surveys were emailed to centers identified from the American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition IF working group. Data collected included program demographics and surveillance of liver and renal function, venous patency, bone health, macro- and micronutrients, growth, neurocognitive development, and quality of life (QoL). Descriptive analysis was performed on pooled responses with programs stratified into those with greater and lesser than 50 patients on home PN. Results: Twenty-five of 49 programs (51 %) responded with a total representation of 2995 patients including 971 patients on PN. Twenty IRPs (79.2 %) perform routine abdominal ultrasounds, however only 2 programs report evaluation of renal function. Eighteen IRPs (72 %) monitor venous patency and 56 % have schedule to evaluate bone health. Five programs (20 %) report formal neurocognitive follow up and 25 % monitor child and family QoL. Conclusion: There is wide variation in surveillance practices among Canada and US based pediatric IRPs. Data to support surveillance practices is needed. A consensus surveillance schedule could ensure early recognition and mitigation of complications to help improve outcome in this population.
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.