Finnish
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Journal of Medical Toxicology 2010-Jun

Effects on a Poison Center's (PC) triage and follow-up after implementing the no Ipecac use policy.

Vain rekisteröityneet käyttäjät voivat kääntää artikkeleita
Kirjaudu sisään Rekisteröidy
Linkki tallennetaan leikepöydälle
Robert M Lapus
Ann P Slattery
William D King

Avainsanat

Abstrakti

For years, The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) had supported home use of syrup of Ipecac. However, due to mounting evidence that Ipecac use did not improve outcome nor reduce Emergency Department (ED) referrals, the AAP in November of 2003 issued a statement that Ipecac not be used for the home management of poison ingestion. To determine if the cessation of the use of Ipecac for home ingestions is associated with an increased number of follow-up calls, an increased time of observation at home and an increase in the number of ED referrals for care by poison center staff were administered. Fifty randomly selected pediatric (<6 years) cases that received Ipecac ("Ipecac" group) from January 1, 2003 to October 31, 2003 were selected for study. Up to two controls ("no Ipecac" group) were matched by age, amount ingested, and by toxin. Controls were selected from the 2004-2006 time period (Ipecac no longer in use). Fifty "Ipecac" cases and 84 "no Ipecac" controls were analyzed. The groups had no significant differences with respect to percent symptomatic, median time post-ingestion, mean age, and distribution of toxin categories (e.g., antidepressants, beta blockers, etc.). The "no Ipecac" group had nearly ten times the odds of ED referral compared to the "Ipecac" group, (OR = 9.9, 95%CI 3.3-32.2). The mean total hours of follow-up was not significantly different between the groups (diff = -1.1, t = -1.8, p = 0.07). The mean number of follow-up calls was significantly less in the "no Ipecac" group (diff = -1.4 calls, t = -6.8, p < 0.001). Toxicology consults were greater in the "no Ipecac" group (chi (2 )= 4.05, p = 0.04); however, consults were not associated with ED referral. For the time period from 2004 to 2006, the "no Ipecac" policy resulted in an increase in ED referrals at our center. While prior studies have shown that not using Ipecac did not affect clinical outcome, our research suggested that it may have initially influenced triaging outcome. Since the use of Ipecac by centers was once a commonly used home remedy for some ingestions (albeit without rigorously established efficacy), poison center personnel had to transition to the "no Ipecac" policy. Although our referrals increased during a transitional period of time, referral rates have since stabilized and returned to baseline.

Liity facebook-sivullemme

Täydellisin lääketieteellinen tietokanta tieteen tukemana

  • Toimii 55 kielellä
  • Yrttilääkkeet tieteen tukemana
  • Yrttien tunnistaminen kuvan perusteella
  • Interaktiivinen GPS-kartta - merkitse yrtit sijaintiin (tulossa pian)
  • Lue hakuusi liittyviä tieteellisiä julkaisuja
  • Hae lääkekasveja niiden vaikutusten perusteella
  • Järjestä kiinnostuksesi ja pysy ajan tasalla uutisista, kliinisistä tutkimuksista ja patenteista

Kirjoita oire tai sairaus ja lue yrtteistä, jotka saattavat auttaa, kirjoita yrtti ja näe taudit ja oireet, joita vastaan sitä käytetään.
* Kaikki tiedot perustuvat julkaistuun tieteelliseen tutkimukseen

Google Play badgeApp Store badge