Suppr超能文献

比较口服补液疗法和静脉补液疗法治疗儿童腹泻的随机对照试验。

Randomised controlled trial comparing oral and intravenous rehydration therapy in children with diarrhoea.

作者信息

Mackenzie A, Barnes G

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.

出版信息

BMJ. 1991 Aug 17;303(6799):393-6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.303.6799.393.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of oral rehydration in children with moderate dehydration caused by gastroenteritis, and to compare the complications of oral and intravenous treatment.

DESIGN

Randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Emergency department and infectious diseases ward in a large urban teaching hospital.

PATIENTS

111 children aged 3-36 months who had been previously healthy, had had diarrhoea for seven days or less, had clinical signs of dehydration, and were not in shock. Six children were withdrawn because the diagnosis was incorrect (four in oral group, two in intravenous group) and one (oral group) was withdrawn at her parents' request.

INTERVENTIONS

Oral rehydration fluid was given by mouth or nasogastric tube, or both to 52 children. The remaining 52 received intravenous rehydration fluids but were allowed to drink.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Success or failure of rehydration. Number of times child vomited or passed stool after starting treatment. Time taken to rehydrate.

RESULTS

Oral treatment failed in two children (failure rate 3.8%, upper 95% confidence limit 11.6%) and intravenous treatment in none. Vomiting was more common in the oral group (p less than 0.01): 26 of 50 children (52%) in the oral group and 11 of 50 (22%) in the intravenous group vomited during rehydration. There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups in the number of stools passed during rehydration (p = 0.09). None of the children had serious complications of treatment.

CONCLUSION

Rehydration by mouth or nasogastric tube is a safe and effective treatment for moderately dehydrated children with gastroenteritis.

摘要

目的

确定口服补液对因肠胃炎导致中度脱水儿童的有效性,并比较口服和静脉治疗的并发症。

设计

随机对照试验。

地点

大型城市教学医院的急诊科和传染病病房。

患者

111名年龄在3至36个月之间、此前健康、腹泻7天或更短时间、有脱水临床体征且未休克的儿童。6名儿童因诊断错误退出(口服组4名,静脉组2名),1名(口服组)应其父母要求退出。

干预措施

52名儿童通过口服或鼻胃管或两者同时给予口服补液盐。其余52名接受静脉补液,但允许饮水。

主要观察指标

补液成功或失败。开始治疗后儿童呕吐或排便的次数。补液所需时间。

结果

2名儿童口服治疗失败(失败率3.8%,95%置信上限11.6%),静脉治疗无失败病例。口服组呕吐更常见(p<0.01):口服组50名儿童中有26名(52%)在补液期间呕吐,静脉组50名中有11名(22%)呕吐。补液期间两组排便次数无显著差异(p = 0.09)。所有儿童均无严重治疗并发症。

结论

对于中度脱水的肠胃炎儿童,口服或鼻胃管补液是一种安全有效的治疗方法。

相似文献

5
[Nasogastric rehydration for treating children with gastroenteritis].[鼻胃管补液治疗儿童肠胃炎]
Arch Pediatr. 2017 Jun;24(6):527-533. doi: 10.1016/j.arcped.2017.03.006. Epub 2017 Apr 14.

引用本文的文献

4
Parachute approach to evidence based medicine.循证医学的降落伞方法。
BMJ. 2006 Sep 30;333(7570):701-3. doi: 10.1136/bmj.333.7570.701.
10
Pharmacoeconomics of antibacterial treatment.抗菌治疗的药物经济学
Pharmacoeconomics. 1992 Jun;1(6):409-37. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199201060-00003.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验