PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “PAEDIATRICS”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 163 records · Page 9Linked to original sources
PubMed1996

Paediatric dentistry--what's new. Paediatric dentistry and diet.

Many children are given so many soft, easy-to-swallow foods that they do not learn to chew. This affects not only their dental development but also their health. Up to one-third of Australian children are overweight and 50 per cent of 10-15 year olds have high levels of serum cholesterol. It's time to encourage children to eat fewer soft, fatty, sugary foods and more fruits, vegetables, chewy breads, and grain-based foods. This paper aims to show that the diet that is good for children's teeth is also good for their health.

Australia↗
PubMed2004

Demography of paediatric renal care in Europe: organization and delivery.

BACKGROUND: Members of the European Society of Paediatric Nephrology (ESPN) initiated a study of the demography and policy of paediatric renal care among European countries at the end of the 20th century. METHODS: A questionnaire was mailed to the presidents of each of 43 national renal paediatric societies or working groups in Europe. Data on each country's population, income as reflected by its gross national product and infant mortality rate, were obtained from the United Nations. The paediatric health care systems were previously divided into three types: general practitioner care system, paediatric care system and combined care system (CCS). RESULTS: In 1998, 842 specialized paediatric nephrologists worked in hospitals in 42 European countries. The median number of paediatric nephrologists per million child population (pmcp) was 4.9 (range 0-15). The median number of children served per paediatric nephrologist was significantly higher in countries with the general practitioner care system than in those with the paediatric or combined care system (CCS), namely 370 747 vs 169 456 and 191 788, respectively. In addition to specially trained paediatric nephrologists, there were 1087 paediatricians with a part-time interest/activity in paediatric nephrology in hospitals in 34 European countries. Eastern European countries had significantly more general paediatricians with part-time nephrological activities than countries belonging to the European Union (EU), 16.7 vs 6.6 pmcp. In 1998, 92% of 42 European countries offered paediatric dialysis facilities for acute renal failure and 90% for chronic renal failure and 55% offered paediatric renal transplantation (RTx). Only 30% of Eastern European countries (central omitted) offered paediatric RTx vs 87% of EU countries. The availability of paediatric RTx was associated significantly with the countries' gross national product (r = 0.53, P<0.001). The median number of paediatric hospitals offering dialysis for childhood chronic renal failure was 1.5 pmcp (range 0-5.0) and the median number of paediatric hospitals offering paediatric RTx was 0.4 pmcp (range 0-3.5). Fewer children were on dialysis or were transplanted in Eastern European countries than in the EU. CONCLUSIONS: At the end of the 20th century, there was a marked variation in delivery of paediatric renal care within Europe. This was related to factors such as size of the population, geographical and political situation, the type of primary paediatric care system and economic situation. European countries were far from equal with regard to access of renal replacement therapy for children. Improvement of the economic situation is beyond the capabilities of paediatric nephrologists. However, in these days of world-wide globalization paediatricians in greater Europe should be able to achieve better cooperation and exchange of ideas and information which would be the first step towards equality of renal care for children.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

[Paediatricians involvement in paediatric emergency care. A study in hospitals and paediatricians offices in the North of France].

UNLABELLED: Paediatrician involvement in paediatric emergency care is often considered insufficient. OBJECTIVES: To assess paediatrician involvement in paediatric emergency care, and how paediatric emergencies were dealt with in emergency department, paediatric emergency department, paediatric department and paediatrician offices. METHODS: Prospective multicentric study, January 29th, 2001, including all the emergency visits of children admitted to an emergency department, paediatric emergency department, paediatric department or in paediatrician offices. RESULTS: Paediatricians examined an average number of 21 children, 58% were considered as "urgent" (mean: 53% +/- 25% by paediatrician). Thirty five percent of paediatricians were available on call that night. In the 18 hospitals, 705 children were admitted that day, 42% to an emergency department, 40% to a paediatric emergency department, 18% to a paediatric department. The mean age was 6 years +/- 5 years. Trauma represented 40% of all cases and was more frequent in emergency department than in paediatric emergency department or paediatric department (63% versus 33% and 2%, p < 10(-8)). Hospitalisation rate was lower in paediatric emergency department than in emergency department and paediatric department, especially for non-traumatic conditions. CONCLUSION: Our findings prove paediatrician involvement in paediatric emergency care, in paediatrician offices and in hospital. This study points out the complementarity and insufficiencies of these different services.

Child↗
PubMed1998

Where should paediatric surgery be performed?

We have tried to review the evidence for the organisation of paediatric surgical care. Difficulties arise because of the lack of published data from district general hospitals concerning paediatric surgical conditions. Hence much of the debate about the surgical management of children is based on anecdotal evidence. However, at a time when the provision of health care is being radically reorganised to an internal market based on a system of purchasers and providers it is more important than ever to understand the issues at stake. Two separate issues have been discussed: the role of the specialist paediatric centre and the provision of non-specialist paediatric surgery in district general hospitals. There are arguments for and against large regional specialist paediatric centres. The benefits of centralisation include concentration of expertise, more appropriate consultant on call commitment, development of support services, and junior doctor training. The disadvantages include children and their families having to travel long distances for care, and the loss of expertise at a local level. If specialist paediatric emergency transport is available the benefits of centralisation far outweigh the adverse effects of having to take children to a regional paediatric intensive care centre. Specialist paediatric centres are aware of the importance of treating children and their parents as a family unit as highlighted by the Platt committee; this is an important challenge and enormous improvements have occurred to provide proper accommodation for families while their children are treated in hospital. To keep these arguments of large distances and separation from the home in context, one paediatric intensive care unit in Victoria, Australia, providing a centralised service to a region larger in are than England and with a similar admission rate, has a lower mortality rate than the decentralised paediatric intensive care provided in the Trent region of the UK. There is clear evidence that all neonatal surgery and anaesthesia should be conducted only by specialists. The debate now centres around the number of complex surgical cases a unit should treat to maintain its specialist status. The NHS executive, in its guidelines on contracting for specialist services, emphasises that "Sensible contracting needs to take into account the optimum population size not only for the stability of contracted referrals but also to give sufficient 'critical mass' for clinical effectiveness." Achieving this balance has consequences, not just for the maintenance of surgical expertise, but for the essential ancilliary services. There is clear evidence in anaesthesia that anaesthetists doing small numbers of neonatal procedures had significantly worse results. The same seems to be true in the fields of oncology, radiology, pathology, and intensive care. The reasons why the results of management of certain paediatric conditions are better at specialist centres are open to speculation. Presumably greater exposure to rare complex cases, concentration of expertise, more peer review, and a trickle down effect of the multidisciplinary approach all help to keep health care workers up to date with current world practice. In addition, it allows for appropriate specialist on call rotas and dedicated junior staff. If insufficient numbers of specialist surgical cases are being treated at a centre then the whole multidisciplinary team suffers. The 1989 NCEPOD report states "that paediatricians and general surgeons must recognise that small babies differ from other patients not only in size, and that they pose quite separate problems of pathology and management." The need for large centres of paediatric surgical expertise is now accepted by the Royal College of Surgeons of England, the British Association of Paediatric Surgeons, the Senate of Surgery of Great Britain and Ireland, the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, the Royal College of Anaesthetists, the Audit

Anesthesiology↗