Tuberculin Testing in the Pediatric Office and Clinic

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1979 ◽  
Vol 64 (6) ◽  
pp. 965-966
Author(s):  
Edwin L. Kendig
Keyword(s):  
American Academy ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
School Children ◽  
Tuberculin Test ◽  
Pediatric Clinic ◽  
American Academy Of Pediatrics ◽  
Tuberculin Testing ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Low Rate

Another article in this issue of Pediatrics, "Assessment of Tuberculin Screening in an Urban Pediatric Clinic," (p 856) again focuses attention on a weighty question: Is routine use of the tuberculin test important? The authors have pointed out the difference in philosophy of the Center for Disease Control, and the American Academy of Pediatrics. The Center for Disease Control recommends that routine tuberculin testing for school children and other similar programs be abandoned if the yield of positive tuberculin reactions is less than 1%1; this recommendation is based on the assumption that discovery of cases at this low rate will not have epidemiologic impact (italics added).

Frequency of tuberculin testing

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1975 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-161
Author(s):  
Alex J. Steigman ◽  
Edwin L. Kendig
Keyword(s):  
American Academy ◽  
Personal Experience ◽  
Tuberculin Test ◽  
First Year ◽  
Test Results ◽  
American Academy Of Pediatrics ◽  
Tuberculin Testing ◽  
First Year Of Life

In a statement from the Section on Diseases of the Chest of the American Academy of Pediatrics entitled "The Tuberculin Test,"1 the second paragraph of a comprehensive article begins as follows: "A routine tuberculin test should be performed sometime during the first year of life and annually or biennially thereafter." This recommendation for the frequency of routine tuberculin testing differs from that currently proposed by others. The same issue of Pediatrics contains an article by Dr. Phyllis Q. Edwards entitled "Tuberculin Testing of Children."2 The Summary of the article states "The pediatrician should review and analyze tuberculin test results based on his personal experience.

Health Supervision Visits: Should the Immunization Schedule Drive the System?

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 79 (4) ◽  
pp. 581-582
Author(s):  
ROBERT J. HAGGERTY
Keyword(s):  
American Academy ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Immunization Schedule ◽  
Health Supervision ◽  
American Academy Of Pediatrics ◽  
Centers For Disease Control ◽  
Well Child Visit ◽  
Child Visit

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recently recommended that the vaccines usually given at the 15- and 18-month visits could be given simultaneously at 15 months, thereby omitting the 18-month well-child visit. There is little doubt that measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) immunization, now recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics to be given at 15 months of age, and the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) and oral polio booster immunizations, now recommended to be given at 18 months of age, could be given together with no problem at 15 months. But this is not a good enough reason to abandon the 18-month well-child visit. Although I will not argue that we have solid evidence for the effectiveness of any well-child procedures other than immunizations, I believe that the 18-month visit is one of the more important ones and should not be discontinued for all children.

Special ReportFROM THE COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL HEALTH AND THE COMMITTEE ON RHEUMATIC FEVER

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1948 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 321-323
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Disease ◽  
American Academy ◽  
Rheumatic Fever ◽  
Rheumatic Heart Disease ◽  
School Children ◽  
School Health ◽  
Medical Attention ◽  
Health Examination ◽  
American Academy Of Pediatrics ◽  
Rheumatic Heart

This joint report of the Committees on School Health and Rheumatic Fever of the American Academy of Pediatrics has been prepared as a guide to school authorities in determining what can be done about this disease through the schools. The school occupies a unique position in relation to rheumatic fever control. Rheumatic fever causes more deaths than any other disease in children of school age. A first attack usually occurs in children at the age when they are in the first or second grade and recurrences are most common up to the age when children are leaving high school. The insidious onset of so many cases during the school years suggests that teachers and others in daily contact with school children should be aware of early signs and symptoms which may mean acute rheumatic fever. The periodic school health examination when done hastily without removal of clothing may miss children with rheumatic heart disease. On the other hand, children may be labeled with the diagnosis of a rheumatic heart because a heart murmur Was wrongly interpreted. This serves to emphasize the opportunities as well as the difficulties of discovering rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease in school children. Improvement of School Medical Procedures The American Academy of Pediatrics believes the problem of what to do about rheumatic fever through the schools is an integral part of what should be done about the health of all school children. The following recommendations, while pointed towards case-finding and health supervision of the rheumatic child, will, if applied, lead to better health service for all school children. The periodic school medical examination should be improved: 1. By obtaining a health history of the child from the parent and the teacher, if possible, at the time of the child's examination. 2. By being performed without haste and with the child disrobed. 3. By the employment of physicians trained in pediatrics, if possible. Where this is not feasible, arrangements should be made for giving physicians who make school medical examinations additional clinical training in normal child growth and development as well as in children's medical problems including rheumatic fever and heart disease. 4. By allowing time for the physicians to plan with the nurse and parent for medical attention. The examination is then more likely to be of greater aid in getting medical care for school children who need it.

Prophylaxis and Treatment of Neonatal Gonococcal Infections

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 65 (5) ◽  
pp. 1047-1048
Author(s):  
Sydney Segal ◽  
Walter B. Anyan ◽  
Reba M. Hill ◽  
Ralph E. Kauffman ◽  
Howard Mofenson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
American Academy ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Silver Nitrate ◽  
Nitrate Solution ◽  
Newborn Infants ◽  
Silver Nitrate Solution ◽  
Gonococcal Infection ◽  
Ophthalmic Ointment ◽  
American Academy Of Pediatrics ◽  
Primary Agent

The Center for Disease Control (CDC), after consultation with a panel of experts, has revised its recommendations for prevention of gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum. These recommendations now state, "ophthalmic ointment or drops containing tetracycline or erythromycin or a 1% silver nitrate solution" are effective and acceptable.1-3 This is a change from previous recommendations which highlighted silver nitrate as the primary agent for prophylaxis.4 The American Academy of Pediatrics' committees support these recommendations. The prevalence of largely asymptomatic genital gonococcal infection in pregnant women and the occurrence of gonococcal ophthalmia in untreated infants (estimated at 28%)5 born to infected women indicate the need for continued prophylaxis for all newborn infants.

AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS, INC. PROCEEDINGS AND REPORTS

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1955 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-230
Author(s):  
C. Henry Kempe
Keyword(s):  
American Academy ◽  
Daily Practice ◽  
Polymyxin B ◽  
Sulfa Drugs ◽  
Antimicrobial Drugs ◽  
Gram Negative ◽  
American Academy Of Pediatrics ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Related Compounds ◽  
Antibacterial Spectrum

THE SCOPE of the topic is such that one must present many simplifications in a positive manner. As an aid to memory in classifying the ever-increasing number of antibiotics and their antibacterial spectra and dosages, 2 charts have been prepared which are self-explanatory (Tables I and II). In all types of oversimplification one may quarrel with 1 or more points, but the material presented can be of practical value in daily practice. CHOICE AND DOSAGE OF COMMON ANTIBIOTICS Antimicrobial drugs are classified as bacteriocidal (those which kill bacterial organisms) or bacteriostatic (those which primarily inhibit bacterial multiplication which, however, resumes upon the removal of the bacteriostatic drug). Bacteriocidal agents actually differ from bacteriostatic agents only in the fact that their action is irreversible. The difference between bacteriostatic and bacteriocidal action appears to be a quantitative rather than qualitative one. Agents may be bacteriostatic at a given concentration and for a given exposure, while increasing concentration or exposure may cause a progressive shift toward bacteriocidal action. Primarily bacteriocidal agents in current use are penicillin, streptomycin, polymyxin B, bacitracin, and neomycin. Primarily bacteriostatic agents are tetracycline and all related compounds, chloramphenicol, erythromycin, and all sulfa drugs. The dosages of these drugs are given in Table I. A simple way to recall the antibacterial spectrum of antibiotics: pathogens are divided into rods (most of which are gram negative) and cocci (most of which are gram positive). Bacteriocidal agents which kill rods only are streptomycin and polymyxin B; bacteriocidal agents killing cocci only are penicillin and bacitracin; neomycin is bacteriocidal for a wide variety of rods and cocci.

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

1993 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 154-154
Keyword(s):  
American Academy ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Medical Record ◽  
Meningococcal Disease ◽  
Index Case ◽  
Nasal Carriage ◽  
Index Patient ◽  
American Academy Of Pediatrics ◽  
Record Review ◽  
Middle Column

In the Addendum on page 18 of the January 1993 issue, the page reference should be 354, not 394. In the Medical Record Review on page 67 of the February 1993 issue, the reference to the sample form in the last paragraph of the middle column should have noted that the form was on page 69. Two abstracts regarding rifampin prophylaxis (September 1992, page 354 and October 1992, page 370) differ about whether the index patient should receive rifampin treatment. Dr. Shelov responds: It was stated in the October abstract that the index case of meningococcal disease should receive rifampin prophylaxis, but this is not the recommendation of the REDBOOK Committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics. Rather, this opinion is the consensus of other experts, including those from the Centers for Disease Control. Many children who have meningococcal disease now are treated with ceftriaxone. Because this antibiotic eradicates nasal carriage of the bacteria, rifampin use is not justified for the index case treated with ceftriaxone. I hope this clarifies further the directions for rifampin prophylaxis in meningococal disease.

scholarly journals Impact of the 2017 American Academy of Pediatrics Guideline on Hypertension Prevalence Compared With the Fourth Report in an International Cohort

Hypertension ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 74 (6) ◽  
pp. 1343-1348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liu Yang ◽  
Roya Kelishadi ◽  
Young Mi Hong ◽  
Anuradha Khadilkar ◽  
Tadeusz Nawarycz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Risk ◽  
American Academy ◽  
Pediatric Population ◽  
Fasting Blood Glucose ◽  
Laboratory Data ◽  
American Academy Of Pediatrics ◽  
Fourth Report ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Stage 1 ◽  
Control Study

In 2017, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) updated the clinical practice guideline for high blood pressure (BP) in the pediatric population. In this study, we compared the difference in prevalence of elevated and hypertensive BP values defined by the 2017 AAP guideline and the 2004 Fourth Report and estimated the cardiovascular risk associated with the reclassification of BP status defined by the AAP guideline. A total of 47 200 children and adolescents aged 6 to 17 years from 6 countries (China, India, Iran, Korea, Poland, and Tunisia) were included in this study. Elevated BP and hypertension were defined according to 2 guidelines. In addition, 1606 children from China, Iran, and Korea who were reclassified upward by the AAP guideline compared with the Fourth Report and for whom laboratory data were available were 1:1 matched with children from the same countries who were normotensive by both guidelines. Compared with the Fourth Report, the prevalence of elevated BP defined by the AAP guideline was lower (14.9% versus 8.6%), whereas the prevalence of stages 1 and 2 hypertension was higher (stage 1, 6.6% versus 14.5%; stage 2, 0.4% versus 1.7%). Additionally, comparison of laboratory data in the case-control study showed that children who were reclassified upward were more likely to have adverse lipid profiles and high fasting blood glucose compared with normotensive children. In conclusion, the prevalence of elevated BP and hypertension varied significantly between both guidelines. Applying the new AAP guideline could identify more children with hypertension who are at increased cardiovascular risk.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document