scholarly journals Clinical profile, intensive care needs and predictors of outcome in children with drowning: A developing country perspective

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (7) ◽  
pp. 64
Author(s):  
Ashish Agarwal ◽  
Karthi Nallasamy ◽  
Jayashree Muralidharan ◽  
Arun Baranwal ◽  
Arun Bansal ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Muralidharan Jayashree ◽  
Manisha Patil ◽  
Govindappa Benakatti ◽  
Manoj K. Rohit ◽  
Sunit Singhi ◽  
...  

AbstractAcute myocarditis in children is associated with high morbidity and mortality, with limited data on intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) treatment and outcome. Our goal was to describe clinical, treatment profile, and predictors of outcome in children with acute fulminant myocarditis (AFM) receiving intensive care. Case records of 120 children with clinical diagnosis of acute myocarditis from January 2008 to December 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. AFM was seen in 89 (74.2%) children of which nearly two-thirds (54 [60.7%]) were hypotensive at admission. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) ejection fraction on echocardiography was 25 (18.5–36%). Eighty-two children (68.3%) received IVIG. Intensive care needs were mechanical ventilation (n = 71; 59.2%) and inotrope support (n = 89; 74.2%); median inotrope score being 30 (IQR: 20–55). Twenty-one children died (17.5%). Fever (p = 0.004), arrhythmia (p = 0.03), shock (p = 0.015), higher inotrope score (p = 0.0001), need for ventilation (p = 0.025), acidosis (p = 0.013), AKI (p = 0.0001), transaminitis (p = 0.0001), and multiorgan dysfunction (p = 0.0001) were associated with mortality. The mortality was significantly less in IVIG treated group (12.1 vs. 28.9%; p = 0.02). On multiple logistic regression, MODS (p = 0.002) was independent predictor of mortality while IVIG treatment (p = 0.004) was favorably associated with survival. AFM complicated by multiorgan dysfunction carried a poor prognosis. IVIG was associated with survival benefit.


2004 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sunit C. Singhi ◽  
Rajan Khetarpal ◽  
Arun K. Baranwal ◽  
Pratibha D. Singhi

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e0160752 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanita Noronha ◽  
Anant Ramaswamy ◽  
Vijay M Patil ◽  
Amit Joshi ◽  
Anuradha Chougule ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 395-395
Author(s):  
Arun Bansal ◽  
Vijai Williams ◽  
Javed Ismail ◽  
Jayashree Muralidharan ◽  
Arun Baranwal ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 679-691 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Brownsword

It is axiomatic that the first responsibility of researchers, whether they are working in the developed or the developing world, is to (strive to) do no harm to those who participate in their studies or trials. However, on neither side of the Atlantic is there any such settled view with regard to the responsibility of researchers to attend to the ancillary-care needs of their participants – that is, a responsibility to advise or assist participants who have medical condition X in circumstances where the research concerns medical condition Y, and the research did not contribute to the presence of condition X in participants, nor did the having of condition X contribute to the research. Consider, for example, the following hypothetical posed by Leah Belsky and Henry Richardson:Researchers testing a new treatment for tuberculosis in a developing country discover some patients have HIV infection. Do they have a responsibility to provide antiretroviral drugs?


Seizure ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 36 ◽  
pp. 31-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lokesh Lingappa ◽  
Ramesh Konanki ◽  
Ravi Patel ◽  
Sudhindra Vooturi ◽  
Sita Jayalakshmi

Author(s):  
Ricardo Diaz Milian

End of life discussions frequently take place in surgical intensive care units, as a significant number of patients die while admitted to the hospital, and surgery is common during the last month of life. Multiple barriers exist to the initiation of these conversations, including: miscommunication between clinicians and surrogates, a paternalistic approach to surgical patients, and perhaps, conflicts of interest as an unwanted consequence of surgical quality reporting. Goal discordant care refers to the care that is provided to a patient that is incapacitated and that is not concordant to his/her wishes. This is a largely unrecognized medical error with devastating consequences, including inappropriate prolongation of life and non-beneficial therapy utilization. Importantly, hospice and palliative care needs to be recognized as quality care in order to deter the incentives that might persuade clinicians from offering these services.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document