Mortality from gastrointestinal congenital anomalies at 264 hospitals in 74 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries: a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study

Background: Congenital anomalies are the fifth leading cause of mortality in children younger than 5 years globally. Many gastrointestinal congenital anomalies are fatal without timely access to neonatal surgical care, but few studies have been done on these conditions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared outcomes of the seven most common gastrointestinal congenital anomalies in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries globally, and identified factors associated with mortality. // Methods: We did a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of patients younger than 16 years, presenting to hospital for the first time with oesophageal atresia, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, intestinal atresia, gastroschisis, exomphalos, anorectal malformation, and Hirschsprung's disease. Recruitment was of consecutive patients for a minimum of 1 month between October, 2018, and April, 2019. We collected data on patient demographics, clinical status, interventions, and outcomes using the REDCap platform. Patients were followed up for 30 days after primary intervention, or 30 days after admission if they did not receive an intervention. The primary outcome was all-cause, in-hospital mortality for all conditions combined and each condition individually, stratified by country income status. We did a complete case analysis. // Findings: We included 3849 patients with 3975 study conditions (560 with oesophageal atresia, 448 with congenital diaphragmatic hernia, 681 with intestinal atresia, 453 with gastroschisis, 325 with exomphalos, 991 with anorectal malformation, and 517 with Hirschsprung's disease) from 264 hospitals (89 in high-income countries, 166 in middle-income countries, and nine in low-income countries) in 74 countries. Of the 3849 patients, 2231 (58·0%) were male. Median gestational age at birth was 38 weeks (IQR 36–39) and median bodyweight at presentation was 2·8 kg (2·3–3·3). Mortality among all patients was 37 (39·8%) of 93 in low-income countries, 583 (20·4%) of 2860 in middle-income countries, and 50 (5·6%) of 896 in high-income countries (p<0·0001 between all country income groups). Gastroschisis had the greatest difference in mortality between country income strata (nine [90·0%] of ten in low-income countries, 97 [31·9%] of 304 in middle-income countries, and two [1·4%] of 139 in high-income countries; p≤0·0001 between all country income groups). Factors significantly associated with higher mortality for all patients combined included country income status (low-income vs high-income countries, risk ratio 2·78 [95% CI 1·88–4·11], p<0·0001; middle-income vs high-income countries, 2·11 [1·59–2·79], p<0·0001), sepsis at presentation (1·20 [1·04–1·40], p=0·016), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score at primary intervention (ASA 4–5 vs ASA 1–2, 1·82 [1·40–2·35], p<0·0001; ASA 3 vs ASA 1–2, 1·58, [1·30–1·92], p<0·0001]), surgical safety checklist not used (1·39 [1·02–1·90], p=0·035), and ventilation or parenteral nutrition unavailable when needed (ventilation 1·96, [1·41–2·71], p=0·0001; parenteral nutrition 1·35, [1·05–1·74], p=0·018). Administration of parenteral nutrition (0·61, [0·47–0·79], p=0·0002) and use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (0·65 [0·50–0·86], p=0·0024) or percutaneous central line (0·69 [0·48–1·00], p=0·049) were associated with lower mortality. // Interpretation: Unacceptable differences in mortality exist for gastrointestinal congenital anomalies between low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries. Improving access to quality neonatal surgical care in LMICs will be vital to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3.2 of ending preventable deaths in neonates and children younger than 5 years by 2030

Cognitive Analytic Therapy (CAT) for Borderline Personality Disorder: Is CAT effective, and what influences the delivery of this therapy?

Study Design - A cross-sectional study with a test–retest design. Objective - To translate and culturally adapt the numerical rating scale (NRS) for neck pain intensity and the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and asses their measurement properties in a Nepalese neck pain population. Summary of Background Data - Neck pain is one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders in Nepal. Research on neck pain disorders has been hampered by lack of standardized patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in Nepali language. Therefore, we aimed at validating a Nepali version of the NDI and NRS neck pain. Methods - At Dhulikhel hospital in Nepal, 150 patients with neck pain and/or cervical radiculopathy completed the translated self-administered questionnaires. We had made one cultural adaption of the NDI driving item in the final Nepali version. Relative reliability was analyzed with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 2.1) and absolute reliability with the smallest detectable change (SDC). Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach alpha. Construct and discriminative validity was assessed by Spearman correlation for a priori hypotheses, receiver-operating characteristics curves, and analysis of variance. Time spent and assistance needed to complete the questionnaires were used to assess feasibility. Results - Test–restest reliability was excellent with ICC (95% confidence intervals) of 0.87 (0.66, 0.94) for NDI and 0.97 (0.94, 0.99) for NRS neck pain. The absolute reliability was acceptable (a SDC of 1.6 for NRS and 9.3 for NDI) and a Cronbach alpha (internal consistency) of 0.70 for NDI, as well as acceptable construct validity, discriminative validity, and feasibility. Conclusion - The Nepali versions of the NRS neck pain and NDI can be recommended for assessing pain and disability among patients with neck pain and cervical radiculopathy, but their responsiveness to change remains to be tested.<p

Immunisation practices in centres caring for children with perinatally acquired HIV: A call for harmonisation

Background Current national immunisation schedules differ between countries in terms of vaccine formulation, timing of vaccinations and immunisation programme funding and co-ordination. As a result, some HIV infected paediatric population may be left susceptible to vaccine preventable infections. Vaccines used in healthy population should be subjected to high quality ethical research and be explicitly validated for use in children with special vaccination needs such as those infected with HIV. This survey was completed to assess current vaccination practices and attitudes toward vaccination among pediatricians who care for vertically HIV infected children. Methods An online questionnaire was completed by 46 experts in paediatric HIV-infection from the Paediatric European Network for Treatment of AIDS (PENTA). Data were collected between November 2013 and March 2014. Results 46 units looking after 2465 patients completed the questionnaire. The majority of units (67%) reported that common childhood immunisation were administered by the family doctor or local health services rather than in the HIV specialist centre. Vaccination histories were mostly incomplete and difficult to obtain for 40% of the studied population. Concerns were reported regarding the use of live attenuated vaccines, such as varicella and rotavirus, and these were less frequently recommended (61% and 28% of the units respectively). Monitoring of vaccine responses was employed in a minority of centres (41%). A range of different assays were used resulting in diverse units of measurement and proposed correlates of protection. Conclusion Vaccination practices for perinatally HIV-infected children vary a great deal between countries. Efforts should be made to improve communication and documentation of vaccinations in healthcare settings and to harmonise recommendations relating to additional vaccines for HIV infected children and the use of laboratory assays to guide immunisation. This will ultimately improve coverage and vaccine induced immunity in this vulnerable patient group