All posts by admin

Colic = Cry-Fuss Behaviour

Common, General paediatrics, Nutrition, OPD

Cry-fuss behaviour (=colic etc), mean is just short of 2hrs per day for first 6 weeks, reduces to 72 minutes by 10-12 weeks.

“Colic” suggests that there is a bowel issue, usually suspected due to drawing legs up, passing wind – but these could be considered normal for crying and distress, of any cause.  Reflux (GORD) is often blamed, yet international consensus states there is no evidence to support an empiric trial of acid suppression as a diagnostic test in infants and young children, even though symptoms tend to be less specific [Vandenplas, J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2009 Oct;49(4):498-547. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0b013e3181b7f563]!

Cause

Mums with an anxiety disorder prior to pregnancy are at higher risk of having a child with excessive crying at 2, 4 or 16 months postpartum compared with mothers without an anxiety disorder.  Risk increased further for mothers who developed an anxiety disorder during pregnancy.

So does maternal anxiety lead to “intrusive” parenting, in turn increasing infant crying ?[Arch Dis Child 2014;99:800–6]. Else fetal programming?  Genetics?

What’s the influence of fathers!?

Surprisingly, maternal depressive disorders, cf anxiety, experienced before or during pregnancy, did not predict maternal report of excessive infant crying.  Is the difference withdrawal, rather than intrusiveness?

Reflux

Consider 2 week trial of anti-secretory eg ranitidine (but NOT PPI – increase risk of infection esp respiratory and GI, associated with parietal cell hyperplasia, and possibly food allergy!).  But don’t assume improvement due to response!  Or investigate with pH monitoring.  Or stick to supporting parents!   Even if arching and refusing to feed, no evidence of effectiveness.

Infection

5% have UTI retrospectively, but in absence of other signs, investigations not routinely required.

Associations

Crying that lasts more than 3 h per day, for more than 3 days per week and for more than 3 weeks in a row—is associated with child abuse and maternal depression!  Higher scores on PND scale persists at 6/12 even if crying resolves…

6% of parents retrospectively admit physically abusive behaviours towards baby when crying.

Predicts shorter duration of breast feeding.

Persistent problems with cry-fuss behaviour at 5/12 associated with later behavioural problems (metanalysis, but confounded by psychosocial risk factors).

Management

Reassure the parents/carers that infantile colic is a common problem that should resolve by 6 months of age.

RCTs of behavioural sleep intervention under 3/12 did not decrease crying.  So encourage parent-infant reciprocity (ie responding to crying) until old enough to suit Gina Ford type regimented sleep regimes.

Encourage the parents to try relaxed cue based care, sleeping in the same room as the baby (not the same bed – beware SUDI) , offering physical contact esp skin to skin contact, and ensuring the baby gets lots of rich sensory experiences during the day.  This,  combined with average 10 hours of physical contact per 24hr (even if asleep), associated with 50% less crying and fussing. Only 37% of 3/12 babies sleep 8hrs straight at night.

Night waking is associated with co-sleeping and breast feeding, but breast feeding does not equate with less total sleep for parents over the whole 24hr period (quality, however, may be inferior).

Over sensitive babies may benefit from OT/Physio, but beware removing sensory stimulus as associated with neurodevelopmental problems.  Massage, wrapping may help, little evidence for chiropractic, craniosacral, nutritional.  Offer diverse sensory stimulation (through parents’ own social life and activities).

If symptoms are severe (subjective, of course) or persist after 4 months, consider an alternative underlying cause for symptoms.

NICE says seek specialist advice from a paediatrician if infant is not thriving, or symptoms are not starting to improve or are worsening after 4 months of age.

Caveat for GPs is “Seek specialist advice if Parents/carers feel unable to cope with the infant’s symptoms despite reassurance and advice in primary care.”

 

Feeding

Feed refusal is often linked, often impaired mutual regulation of feeding that result in entrenched patterns of difficult feeding esp breast feeding issues.

The following suggest a feeding problem –

  • 4 heavy disposable nappies per day minimum
  • 3-4 yellow curdy stools if breast fed minimum
  • Nipple/breast pain, attachment problems
  • falling asleep within 10 minutes, feeding longer than 30 minutes (active feeding ie not including dozing, interacting) regularly
  • clicking sound, gurgly sounds, absence of swallowing sounds
  • Increased resp effort

Expect 125g per week growth average in first 3 months.  Tongue tie only really relevant to breast feeding babies.

Babies who have infrequent large feeds are not necessarily abnormal, and cue based feeding rather than scheduled 3-4hrly feeds often works better.

So offer feed calmly, unless already full blown crying, in which case calm holding eg skin to skin until more settled.  Cochrane review concluded that pacifier use does not interfere with breast feeding in mothers who are motivated.

Some evidence for trial of hydrolysed formula. RCT of 107 breast fed babies with colic excluded dairy, soy, wheat, nuts, fish and shortened duration of crying, but only CMPI really substantiated.  Probiotic has helped in RCT but roles of feed management, lactose overload etc need to be elucidated first?

Functional lactose overload? – as feed progresses, fat level usually increases so transit time slows.  If insufficient fat, rapid transit leads to lactose fermentation in colon (lower cholecystokinin levels seen).

Parent Support

The self-help support group Cry-sis for families with excessively crying or sleepless children, has a website and runs a national telephone helpline (0845 122 8669).

There’s also parent info including a video at http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Colic/Pages/Introduction.aspx

 

[https://cks.nice.org.uk/colic-infantile#!scenario]

[Clinical review BMJ 2011;343:d7772  doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d7772]

Capillary refill time (CRT)

Clinical, General paediatrics

In children over 7 days of age, the upper limit of normal CRT is approximately 2 s when measured on a finger, and 4 s when measured on the chest or foot, irrespective of whether the child is feverish or not. Longer pressing times and ambient temperature outside 20°C–25°C are associated with longer CRT.

Evidence suggests that the use of stopwatches reduces variability between observers.

Recommend following standardised CRT method: press on the finger for 5 s using moderate pressure at an ambient temperature of 20°C–25°C. A capillary refill time of 3 s or more should be considered abnormal.  Other timings apply to other sites.

[Systematic review – 21 studies on 1915 children.  Arch Dis Child doi:10.1136/archdischild-2014-307079]

Uncertainty

Generic

“Medicine inhabits an inexact territory with terrifying hazards, and the best way to avoid them is to demand honesty from everyone.  The first truth that we must accept is that human beings are not perfect…  We must lose the fear that we’ll be blamed if [our patients] find fault” (Margaret Mccartney, BMJ)

The discipline of medicine concerns the manipulation of knowledge under uncertainty (Siddharta Mukherjee).

Blood Culture

Clinical, General paediatrics, Infectious disease

Essential investigation in sepsis, particularly where unusual organisms or deep seated infection eg endocarditis.

The volume of the sample is important. Small volumes have higher false negative rate, and are slower to become positive – 6ml superior to 2ml [j Peds 1996].

Traditionally, thought to be most effective when done at time of pyrexia, but there is little evidence for this.  In a study of 1,436 adult patients with bacteremia and fungemia, the likelihood of documenting bloodstream infections was not significantly enhanced by collecting blood specimens for culture at the time that patients experienced temperature spikes. Nor was there any benefit for any subgroup eg patient age, gender, white blood cell count and specific cause of bacteremia. [J Clin Microbiol. 2008 Apr; 46(4): 1381–1385.  doi:  10.1128/JCM.02033-07]

Also traditionally, considered negative at 48 hours. Canadian study of 98 positive blood cultures in babies up to 90 days of age found 96% of true pathogenic cultures were positive at 24 hours, with 100% positive at 36 hours. Mean time to positivity was 14.4 hours in pathogenic bacteria and 23.2 hours in contaminants.  [DOI: 10.1093/jpids/piv078]

US study of 256 non-critically ill babies up to 60 days of age found median time to positive blood cultures of 16.6 hours for pathogens cf 25.1 for contaminants, for CSF cultures 14 hours for pathogens cf 40 for contaminants. 82% of pathogens positive within 24hrs for both blood and CSF [can’t see figures for 36/48hrs yet, full text embargoed?][Hosp Peds 2020]

Another US study of 392 cases (outside of PICU) found 96% of pathogens positive by 36hrs (95% CI 95-98), and 99% at 48hrs. But not clear how many of these would have been well enough to go home at 36 hours.  Estimated that observation >36hrs would identify 1 bacteraemic infant for 1250-2778 infants [Biondi, JAMAped2014]. Note that there were significant differences between organisms (E coli faster, staph slower), and between sites (sample volumes? time to inoculation?). No correlation with degree of fever, interestingly.

Current Western Australian guideline, FeBRILe3, appears to be safe.

Canadians have published a new position statement too.

In a tertiary neonatal unit, 72 hours was considered necessary. [ADC Fetal & Neonatal 2001]

Plagiocephaly

Clinical, Common, General paediatrics, OPD

Differential

The clinical criteria for a unilateral lambdoid synostosis consist of an ipsilateral occipital flattening, a depressed ipsilateral ear lobe (inferior movement) and a parallelogram-like shape in the posterior view. All three of these signs were present in the eight synostotic infants. Furthermore, all children had developed a compensatory contralateral parietooccipital bulging that led to a slanted tree top-like shape of the head at follow-up. Normal posterior view (ie ears level) and anterior movement of the ear excludes LS [but photo looks like ipsi anterior movement in LS – is it contralat in PP??? No mention of anterior bossing, not obvious in photo].

German study – all LS cases obvious clinically. Where positional plagiocephaly was doubted, USS demonstrated patent sutures.

[Arch Dis Child 2015;100:152-157 doi:10.1136/archdischild-2014-305944]

Monitoring

Measure the oblique diameter left (ODL) and oblique diameter right (ODR) lines are drawn from points located 40° either side of the antero-posterior (AP) line. 40° is typically where deformation most notable.  Express as difference (the Oblique diameter difference (ODD) = ODL−ODR) or else ratio between the ODL and the ODR (oblique diameter difference index, or ODDI).

[European Journal of Pediatrics March 2006, Volume 165, Issue 3, pp 149-157]

Treatment

Dutch RCT of 6 months of helmet therapy (n=84 infants aged 5 to 6 months with moderate to severe skull deformation, exclusions were prems, muscular torticollis, craniosynostosis, or dysmorphic features). Full recovery was achieved in 10 of 39 (26%) participants in the helmet therapy group and 9 of 40 (23%) participants in the natural course group (odds ratio 1.2, 95% confidence interval 0.4 to 3.3, P=0.74). All parents reported one or more side effects.

[van Wijk RM BMJ 2014; 348 (); g2741]

Some evidence for bedding pillows (but SUDI risk?) and stretching exercises.

Haemangiomata

Clinical, Common, Dermatology, General paediatrics

2018 classification (ISVVA.org) – rather functional and lacking in poetry!

Basically benign tumours, involving blood vessels.  Seen in 12% of all infants  – more common in girls, whites, premature infants, twins and are babies born to mothers of higher maternal age!  Mostly seen in head and neck region, including the face, but can be anywhere.

Tumours distinguished from malformations.

Infantile Haemangioma

Cutaneous/mucosal haemangiomata usually develop after birth, appearing in the first 8 weeks of life.  They then develop and grow for 6-12 months, often resembling a strawberry.  Most then start to reduce and fade gradually, although it can take up to 9 years.   Often there will be complete disappearance with no cosmetic defect, but there may well be scarring, telangiectasia, or loose fibro-fatty tissue.

Can be further differentiated by depth (superficial tend to be raised and bright red, deep are generally darker red or even purple/blue, they can also be mixed) and extent/pattern (focal or segmental).

Typically they are in the skin and soft tissues, but can sometimes affect the liver or airways.  Associated with GLUT-1 positive staining on biopsy.

Congenital Haemangioma

Much less common. Present at birth and do not progress, although they may grow proportionally with child.  Oval or round, plaques or exophytic.  Some rapidly involute during the first year of life but otherwise they are permanent.

Vascular malformations

Grow slowly compared with vascular tumours.  Usually present at birth but perhaps inconspicuous until child grows.  Can involve arteries, veins, lymphatics in various combinations.

Capillary malformations most common – dilated capillaries, classic port wine stain (naevus flammeus).  Darken over time, do not regress.  Can be associated with bone or soft tissue overgrowth. Multiple can be associated with underlying AVM!

Nevus simplex is the classic “stork bite” at the nape, eyelid or forehead at birth. Lighter, regress.

Venous malformation more ill defined, bluish, easily compressible.  Multifocal tend to be autosomal dominant.  Some syndromes eg Blue rubber bleb naevus syndrome (widespread, including palms/soles).

Lympoedema and cystic hygroma are the lymphatic versions.

Others

  • Pyogenic granuloma – reaction to trauma, well demarcated, raised or even pedunculate
  • Telangiectasia eg Hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT)
  • Angiokeratoma – characteristic of tubersclerosis
  • PHACE syndrome (post fossa malformations, haemangiomata, arterial anomalies, cardiovascular defects, eye anomalies – but also midline defects)
  • Tufted angioma and Kaposiform haemangioendothelioma – similar histologically, but latter bruised, purpuric appearance, infiltrate into muscle/adipose tissue and associated with Kasabach-Merritt syndrome (consumptive coagulopathy).
[Seminar intervent radiol 2017][Ped dermatology 2016]

Leadership

Generic, Management

Leadership is not the same as management: yes, it’s about people and systems and getting things done.  But it’s more about inspiration, long term goal setting, encouraging people in their own journeys.

Can all be a bit alpha and masculine.  Yet lots of evidence that a compassionate style is more effective.  Study by Jonathan Haidt (New York University) shows that if employees are moved by the compassion or kindness of their leaders (a state he terms elevation), the more loyal they become to him or her, even if it isn’t directed at them personally.

We are especially sensitive to signs of trustworthiness in our leaders, and react strongly to “arsehole” behaviour.  

Not only does an angry response erode loyalty and trust, it also inhibits creativity by jacking up stress levels. Positions of power tend to lower our natural inclination for empathy, so it is particularly important as a leader to be self aware, and actively practice seeing situations form their employee’s perspective.

Key challenges – junior doctor training, MCNs, HEAT targets, centralization vs local demand.  Opportunities: improvement, efficiency.

Circle of influence (Steven Covey) – small subset of circle of concerns.  Note potential for stress and disillusionment in face of concerns, at time of need for motivation and creativity!  Always potential for extending circle of influence…

SWOT analysis: strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats.  Build on strengths, mitigates weaknesses, capitalize on opportunities, tackle threats head on.

To maintain trust and confidence – stay in touch, know your people.  Have a common platform rather than being seen as separate.

  • Direction and purpose – conflicts?  Wrong activities?
  • Align systems/processes – bureaucracy?  Slow processes? Going through the motions?
  • Know the people – do they say what you want to hear rather than being honest?
  • Release potential – and frees up your own time!
  • Influence and communicate – perception does not always equal reality

Transactional vs transformational styles:

  • Problem solving                   Coaching
  • Power based authority                        Influencing but no authority
  • Conservative                           Creative
  • Lack of growth                       Woolly
  • Work harder as philosophy     Change for change’s sake
  • Vulnerability to change
  • Thorough
  • Safe

Vision – relevant, strategically worthwhile over years, concordant – should stretch capabilities and self-image

Determines Mission: standards and values

Then in turn Goals (organisational), Strategies, Action plans

Having the broader goals and strategies helps services align, and allows stepwise change within a comfort zone rather than radical revolution with panic

SMART Plus objective – specific, measurable etc Plus clarification about why it’s important, acknowledgement and recognition.

Barriers should be flagged up as next steps – need to keep a “wildly important goal” (WIG) on the agenda of each meeting to maintain perspective.

Individual responsibility for health

Ethics, Generic, Patients

Deciding how to distribute health care costs may include looking backwards at what behaviours have contributed to a condition (eg tattoo removal may not be publicly funded, but removal of a disfiguring skin lesion where suffering is equivalent is), or may look forward to how behaviour might affect the effectiveness of a treatment (eg liver transplant with continued alcohol excess).  Sometimes looking forward and looking backwards have the same outcome, but not necessarily.

There are a number of arguments against these attitudes:

  • Humanitarian – a patient’s suffering should be addressed, regardless of the circumstances
  • Libertarian – denying treatment is likely to lead to even worse consequences, with eventual loss of political and civic participation (which is a societal good, as per JS Mill)
  • Fairness – although certain behaviour may increase the risk of a negative health outcome, other factors also play a role which are outside individual control, and rarely straightforward to establish causality.
  • Practical – if a doctor makes decisions based on behaviour, it encourages intrusiveness on their part, and defensiveness on the patient’s part, both impact on doctor-patient relationship
  • Moralistic – who decides which behaviours are acceptable and which not? Rarely non-judgmental

The liberal egalitarian response is to hold individuals responsible for their choice, but not for the consequences of their choice.  The egalitarian view is that everyone should have equal opportunities, regardles of their natural or social advantages/disadvantages at birth.  Of course, it can often be debated whether “choice” is ever truly distinct and independent of circumstance!  The liberal view is that there should be no formal or informal barriers (although not necessarily compensation for the disadvantaged).

So it would be appropriate to tax smokers an amount related to the increased health costs of smoking.  It would not be fair to tax some smokers more than others, even if the costs of their treatment might be more – it is the choice that matters.  This avoids all the objections above, apart from the moralistic one: but at least decisions on lifestyle taxes are made democratically, not by health care providers.

Does not solve the problem of whether behaviours can truly be considered a choice, when they are often predictable based on socio-economic factors.  Plus, not all types of behaviour can be taxed – physical inactivity?  Poor health care seeking behaviour?  Unsafe sex?

Cappelen and Norheim, J Med Ethics 2005;31:476–480. doi: 10.1136/jme.2004.010421

Significant Event Analysis

Clinical governance, Generic, Patients

Traditional M&M (mortality and morbidity) meetings – Many errors are not reviewed, and the key protagonists often not present when a case is being discussed; fail to engage affected families. This lack of transparency in the context of the Francis report is at odds with our duty of candour to patients when things go wrong.

Much energy is spent in the NHS concluding whether errors, adverse incidents and deaths are ‘avoidable’ or ‘preventable’.

‘Avoidability’ is an arbitrary conclusion – what matters, surely, is the care that the child received. Professional analysis of the care given reassures parents that their child’s life is of primary importance, and may provide some comfort that their experience will benefit other children.

Root cause analysis (RCA) tracks the origins of an adverse event back to find causes – too simplistic?

cf ‘Safety-II’ approach – focuses on understanding how things usually go right, and only then exploring why things occasionally go wrong.  Rare serious events, although easy to identify, often have complex aetiology, and factors may be difficult to modify. In contrast, “normal” behaviour may be easier to understand and to influence.

Parents’ own questions should inform professional discussion.  Analysis should go beyond identifying what the child died from, to considering why a child died of that condition, in that place,  at that time.

“The investigation of medical error, adverse events and child mortality each requires a distinct approach that revolves around a continuous cycle of reporting, professional scrutiny and follow-through of SMART actions. These processes should separately feed into a properly formatted clinical governance meeting, the purpose of which is to provide assurance to hospital boards and other regulatory bodies that there exists coordinated oversight of risk management, clinical effectiveness, audit and patient experience.”

[James Fraser, Bristol – Arch Dis Child doi:10.1136/archdischild-2015-309536 ]

Angioedema

Allergy, Clinical, Common, General paediatrics, Immunology

Swelling, usually acute, non-pitting.  May be erythema too.  Typically affects face, especially lips, tongue, eyes, but can be limbs, even internal!

Usually related to urticaria (wheals). As with urticaria, can be allergy – clue is consistent trigger, pattern of recurrent episodes – but can have other causes.

Angioedema without urticaria – consider hereditary or drugs, especially NSAIDs and ACE inhibitors.