8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Nasogastric hydration versus intravenous hydration for infants with bronchiolitis: a randomised trial.

      The Lancet. Respiratory Medicine
      Administration, Intravenous, adverse effects, methods, Australia, Bronchiolitis, therapy, Comparative Effectiveness Research, Female, Fluid Therapy, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Intubation, Gastrointestinal, Length of Stay, statistics & numerical data, Male, New Zealand, Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care), Rehydration Solutions, pharmacology, Treatment Outcome

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Bronchiolitis is the most common lower respiratory tract infection in infants and the leading cause of hospital admission. Hydration is a mainstay of treatment, but insufficient evidence exists to guide clinical practice. We aimed to assess whether intravenous hydration or nasogastric hydration is better for treatment of infants. In this multicentre, open, randomised trial, we enrolled infants aged 2-12 months admitted to hospitals in Australia and New Zealand with a clinical diagnosis of bronchiolitis during three bronchiolitis seasons (April 1-Oct 31, in 2009, 2010, and 2011). We randomly allocated infants to nasogastric hydration or intravenous hydration by use of a computer-generated sequence and opaque sealed envelopes, with three randomly assigned block sizes and stratified by hospital site and age group (2-<6 months vs 6-12 months). The primary outcome was length of hospital stay, assessed in all randomly assigned infants. Secondary outcomes included rates of intensive-care unit admission, adverse events, and success of insertion. This trial is registered with the Australian and New Zealand clinical trials registry, ACTRN12605000033640. Mean length of stay for 381 infants assigned nasogastric hydration was 86·6 h (SD 58·9) compared with 82·2 h (58·8) for 378 infants assigned intravenous hydration (absolute difference 4·5 h [95% CI -3·9 to 12·9]; p=0·30). Rates of admission to intensive-care units, need for ventilatory support, and adverse events did not differ between groups. At randomisation, seven infants assigned nasogastric hydration were switched to intravenous hydration and 56 infants assigned intravenous hydration were switched to nasogastric hydration because the study-assigned method was unable to be inserted. For those infants who had data available for successful insertion, 275 (85%) of 323 infants in the nasogastric hydration group and 165 (56%) of 294 infants in the intravenous hydration group required only one attempt for successful insertion. Intravenous hydration and nasogastric hydration are appropriate means to hydrate infants with bronchiolitis. Nasogastric insertion might require fewer attempts and have a higher success rate of insertion than intravenous hydration. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Samuel Nissen Charitable Foundation (Perpetual), Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Victorian Government. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article