You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 152 No. 2, February 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Article
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (4)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Pediatrics, Other
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati
What's this?

Frozen Oral Hydration as an Alternative to Conventional Enteral Fluids

Karen A. Santucci, MD; Angela C. Anderson, MD; William J. Lewander, MD; James G. Linakis, MD, PhD

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1998;152:142-146.

Background  Oral hydration therapy is effective in dehydration, but is often bypassed or may fail.

Objective  To compare the tolerance (amount accepted minus amount vomited) of a frozen solution (FS) (Revital-ICE, PTS Labs, Deerfield, Ill) with the conventional glucose electrolyte solution (CS).

Design  Prospective, controlled crossover trial.

Setting  Pediatric emergency department.

Participants  A convenience sample of 91 children with enteritis, 6 months to 13 years of age, with mild to moderate dehydration.

Intervention  Children were offered either FS or CS. Each group was offered 10 mL/kg of either product during a 90-minute trial period, in 3 equal aliquots, and was monitored for the quantities consumed and vomited. Complete treatment failures (absolute refusals) were crossed over to the alternate product and intake was recorded.

Main Outcome Measures  Tolerance of the full 10 mL/kg of the original product offered and, for treatment failures, the percentage who tolerated the alternate product.

Results  Of the patients who initially received FS, 23 (55%) tolerated the full amount offered, compared with 5 (11%) in the CS group (P<.001). Of the 57% who completely refused CS, after crossover, 20% tolerated the full amount of FS and 33% tolerated between 5 and 9 mL/kg of FS and were discharged from the hospital. The original treatment failures for FS (12%) were crossed over to CS; none tolerated more than 5 mL/kg.

Conclusions  Children with mild or moderate dehydration are more likely to tolerate FS than CS. Conventional solution failures crossed over to FS had a greater tolerance rate than the reverse.


From the Department of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Pilot study of a paediatric emergency department oral rehydration protocol
Boyd et al.
Emerg. Med. J. 2005;22:116-117.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Oral Rehydration: Fresh, Frozen, or Flavored?
JWatch Emergency Med. 1998;1998:3-3.
FULL TEXT  

The Success of Frozen Rehydration Solution
JWatch General 1998;1998:6-6.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1998 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.