eLetters

1593 e-Letters

  • Response to e-letter entitled: Importance of dermatology in paediatric vulval disease

     

    Thank you for the opportunity to reply, here is our response.

    We would like to thank the authors for their valuable comments, we believe that these comments add to and complement our article. Our article aimed to cover a wide breadth of common gynaecological conditions that can affect children and unfortunately we were therefore not able to go in to great detail for each condition covered. We would certainly agree on the importance of an early diagnosis for lichen sclerosus and collaboration with a dermatologist for treatment if available. The British Association of Dermatologists guidelines for the management of lichen sclerosus was not published when we wrote our article, we can see that this is a very valuable resource.

    Kind Regards

    Jo Ritchie

  • Response to Dr Smith - balanced fluids

    Dear Sir/ Editor,

    Dr Smith makes relevant and interesting points regarding the terminology used for fluids, which can be used for both “resuscitation” purposes and “maintenance” therapy, and we thank him for his interest and response.

    The purpose of this clinical question was to review the current evidence for paediatric patients in relation to “ balanced fluids”, a term emerging in the medical literature. NICE recommends using any isotonic crystalloid, which covers a wide range of sodium concentration from 130 to 154mmol/L (reference 1 in the article).

    The loss of electrolytes, either from the gut or as a result of renal impairment, needs regular clinical review. We observe that repeated bicarbonate measurements are not regularly undertaken after initial assessment or following admission and it is important to remind trainees to consider these losses, hence our recommendation of daily monitoring of electrolytes. By following this approach, appropriate individualised adjustments can be made to the fluid prescription of patients as necessary.

    Our conclusion from this question highlighted that research needs to be undertaken in the paediatric population of bicarbonate/ lactate containing fluids to determine whether this may affect acute kidney injury and other specific clinical outcomes. We agree attention to detail is always necessary when caring for infants and children receiving intrav...

    Show More
  • Response to comments of Dr Andrea Dotta and Dr Renato Cutrera

    Dear Editor,

    We thank you for the opportunity to discuss our data with the two correspondents who raised some concerns regarding the selected population of our analysis on neonatal outcomes following new reimbursement criteria on palivizumab use. They also reported data collected during the same time period and apparently different from our main results.

    In response to the first correspondent, our analysis is based on children < 2 years of age because the candidate for palivizumab treatments are included within this subpopulation. In fact, the therapeutic indication (1) of palivizumab includes not only the preterm infants up to 1 year of age but also children up to 2 years of age and treated for bronchopulmonary dysplasia or born with a serious heart disease. Furthermore, our selected population is consistent with previous analysis (2) that measured the association between updated guidelines-based palivizumab administration and hospitalization for Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV).   Table 1 of our study reports children up to 6 months of age, both at risk of RSV and including hospitalization data. We agree that this is probably the subpopulation with the major impact of the palivizumab treatment and regulatory decision. However, also in this case no differences in hospitalization rate have been detected before-after the AIFA’ limitation for palivizumab: 1031/47.608 (21.7 ‰) and 436/22715 (19.2 ‰) hospitalizations, respectiv...

    Show More
  • Response to comments of Professor Marchetti

    Dear Sir

    We thank Professor Marchetti for his comments on our article in ADC (1). He raises two important questions we wish to comment on.

    Regarding which dose of aspirin to use, we are also interested in the suggestion that anti-aggregant doses of aspirin might be a preferred option for the acute inflammatory phase of Kawasaki disease (KD). It is indeed possible that future guidance may recommend low dose aspirin (3-5 mg/kg/day) at all stages of KD, as suggested by the retrospective data referred to by Professor Marchetti (2). Whilst we acknowledge the potential merits of such an approach, particularly in relation to avoidance of toxicity, there has never been a prospective controlled clinical trial to support this and therefore no high-level evidence on which to base firm guidance. Two other practical considerations are worthy of highlighting in relation to aspirin. Firstly, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs such as ibuprofen, which antagonize platelet inhibition induced by aspirin (3), should be avoided in patients with KD receiving anti-aggregant doses of aspirin. Secondly, although the risk of low dose aspirin (3-5 mg/kg) in being associated with Reye syndrome is unknown, usual advice is to discontinue in the event of inter-current infection.

    Regarding the use of corticosteroids for primary treatment of KD, we have been strong advocates of this for several years, as reflected in previously published guidance (4, 5). This is now brought into...

    Show More
  • Response to letter re: ‘Improving newborn and infant screening’

    We thank Dr Cliona M Ni Bhrolchain  for her interest in our paper and her comments.  With the exceptions of newborn hearing and blood spot screening,  there is unacceptably wide variation at local level and a lack of commitment at national level in implementation and monitoring of preventive child health programmes.   We suggest that this is just one manifestation of a wider problem - the serious inadequacy of NHS investment  in leadership, education and training, both in general practice and in the specialties.  Morale is low and there are chronic shortages of staff with the relevant skills, when medicine is changing and public expectations rising faster than ever before. 

    David Hall and David Sowden (affiliations as on our original paper)

  • Response to: Over-estimation of association between SUDIC and chronic conditions

    We thank Dr. Garstang and Dr. Debelle for their comments on our article in ADC (1).

    We are pleased that the correspondents support our finding of a strong association between chronic conditions and respiratory tract Infection mortality in children which, though well-recognised by clinicians, has not previously been quantified.

    The correspondents rightly highlight that our analyses concentrate only on unexpected deaths after age 2 months. We chose this definition because these early deaths are more prone to linkage error and more importantly, tend to be related to maternal health during pregnancy and delivery, preterm birth, intrapartum events and congenital anomalies, and therefore may not be avoidable through improved care after postnatal discharge.

    As our paper highlights, an indication of whether a death was expected or not on a death certificate or in hospital records is necessary in order to assess whether a death was avoidable or amenable to healthcare intervention. A classification of whether a death was expected or unexpected could also be notified to Child Death Overview Panels and other agencies by those completing the death certificates. This would be helpful to Child Death Overview Panels in their deliberations as well as feeding into the collation of mortality statistics‎.

    References:

    1.     1. Verfürden ML, Gilbert R, Sebire N, Hardelid P. Arch Dis Child 2018;103:1125–1131.

  • Response to: Failing to consider Virtual Academic Units within UK infrastructure for research that benefits infants, children and young people

    Dear Editor,

    Re: Professor Andrew N Williams’ letter to ADC “Failing to consider Virtual Academic Units within UK infrastructure for research that benefits infants, children and young people”

    We were pleased to hear the success of the Virtual Academic Unit and invited Professor Andrew Williams to contribute to the RCPCH research bulletin of March 2019.

    At the RCPCH, we know from our research and from speaking to our membership, that paediatricians around the country have little or no allocated funding or designated research time. We, therefore, applaud all those paediatricians who continue to go above and beyond to undertake research to achieve better health outcomes for children and young people.

    The RCPCH is fully committed to strengthening basic science and clinical research and the development of devices, medicines and technologies that address the needs of children. Furthermore, our committment includes supporting our members and growing and promoting opportunities for research within paediatrician’s careers.

    We will continue to work with our partners across the UK to influence, promote and grow child health research.

     

    Lindsey Hunter, Research Development Manager, RCPCH

    Professor Anne Greenough, immediate past Vice President Science and Research, RCPCH and Professor of Neonatology and Clinical Respiratory Physiology, King's College London

  • Re: Conclusions not justified by findings

    Dear Editor,

    We thank Professor Wright for her comments, and we welcome the opportunity to provide some clarification and further analysis. 

    We reported Z-scores rather than percentiles, although some comments on approximate percentiles can be made.  Assuming that Z scores of -1.96 and -3 represent approximately the 2.5th and 0.2nd centiles respectively, 36/101 children were below the 2.5th centile, and 17/101 were below the 0.2nd centile for weight.  Additionally, our mixed effects model (accounting for multiple measurements) modelling the group trend over time estimated the mean weight Z score at 11 years to be -1.63 (approximately 5th centile). 

    Despite the overall short stature of the group, 24/101 children had a BMI Z score of less than -1.96.  So, by this approach, their weight was low even after taking into account stature.  We agree that we cannot infer causality from this observational study, but we believe a proportion of the stunted growth is explained by low weight. We are exploring other measures of malnutrition, such as skin-fold thickness. 

    Whilst our patient numbers are small, they do give some weight to the argument that PEG feeding halts the progression of malnutrition.  We investigated the rate of decline of weight after PEG insertion.  In a mixed effects model with a random intercept for individual patients, the rate of wei...

    Show More
  • Error in percentage taken from Morandini et al.

    In the section titled 'Neurodevelopmental conditions', Taylor et al. state, "One study reported data separately for 2012 and 2015 and demonstrated an increase from 1.8% to 15.1%". However, the last row in Table 2 in the paper cited, Morandini et al, seems to give the relevant figure as 13.8%, not 1.8%.[1]

    Ocham's Razor would suggest this was a simple typographical error that was missed during proofreading and peer review rather than some Machiavellian attempt to mislead as I don't think that Taylor or Cass rely on this particular figure for any conclusions or recommendations.

    Note that this error was reported in a paper by Grijseels.[2]

    References

    1 Shifts in demographics and mental health co-morbidities among gender dysphoric youth referred to a specialist gender dysphoria service - James S Morandini, Aidan Kelly, Nastasja M de Graaf, Polly Carmichael, Ilan Dar-Nimrod, 2022. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/13591045211046813 (accessed 23 June 2024)

    2 Grijseels DM. Biological and psychosocial evidence in the Cass Review: a critical commentary. International Journal of Transgender Health. 2024;0:1–11. doi: 10.1080/26895269.2024.2362304

  • Methodology differs from PROSPERO registration

    The PROSPERO registration of the Gender Identity Service Series https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021289659 specifies the use of the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) as its tool for assessing study quality, however in the final review series, a number of different appraisal tools were used, primarily the Newcastle-Ottowa Scale (NOS).

    The Review's modified NOS scale specifies a score cutoff of <= 50% for designating studies as low quality.

    The methodology also indicates that studies in languages other than English would be excluded, but "Clinical guidelines for children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria or incongruence: a systematic review of guideline quality (part 1)" notes that guidelines that could be reliably translated would be included.

    Could the authors please clarify:
    a) When this change in methodology took place
    b) The reasoning behind this change in methodology
    c) Why the PROSPERO record has been updated on April 24 2024 with the completion of the study without noting the change in methodology
    d) How the 50% cutoff was decided
    e) Why the decision to include documents that could be reliably translated was only applied to one study in the series

Pages