Hip Surveillance is Important to Children with Cerebral Palsy: Stop Waiting, Start Now
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
One in three children with cerebral palsy (CP) will develop hip displacement.1,2 Displacement is often silent, with no clinical symptoms. Left undetected and untreated, displacement can progress to dislocation and cause pain and decreased quality of life.3,4 Population-based hip surveillance programs for children with CP are effective in preventing hip dislocations in children with CP.5,6 Programs in Sweden and Australia have demonstrated that systematic screening can identify hip displacement early and, when combined with timely orthopaedic management, reduce the prevalence of hip dislocations in children with CP.5,6 The development of such programs is complex with implementation highly dependent on the local system of care for children with CP. Population-based programs should always be the aim of hip surveillance initiatives, but the challenge of designing a system-wide approach should not discourage individuals from acting. All clinicians should be following guidelines within their individual practice. Despite the awareness that surveillance is effective, established guidelines for hip surveillance are underutilized. A 2016 survey of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America membership found widespread agreement that a dislocated hip in a child with CP should be prevented by hip surveillance (93%), yet only a small proportion (18%) followed a regular surveillance program.7 In 2017, the American Academy of Cerebral Palsy and Developmental Medicine released a hip surveillance care pathway that was developed by a group of international experts (AACPDM.org [Internet]. Wilwaukee, WI, AACPDM, c2017. http://www.aacpdm.org/publications/care-pathways/hip-surveillance). The resultant pathway represents the consensus reached on the recommended components of surveillance, frequency, and referral criteria. Using such resources is a good starting point to initiate hip surveillance and can have an immediate impact. Notably, the authors from the Child Health BC Hip Surveillance Program saw a difference in the rate of dislocations and surgical interventions required once a systematic approach to hip surveillance was established in their center, even before a formal program was initiated (Child Health BC Hip Surveillance Program for Children with Cerebral Palsy [Internet]. Vancouver, BC, Child Health BC, c2018. www.childhealthbc.ca/hips). The introduction of mobile solutions, such as the HipScreen app (www.hipscreen.org, Shriners Hospitals for Children, Sacramento, California), makes hip surveillance resources and guidelines readily accessible in a busy clinical practice. Patients and families are strong advocates for system change and should be educated on hip displacement and the importance of hip screening. Similarly, every opportunity should be undertaken to educate the team of clinicians within one's healthcare system that support children with CP, including pediatricians, physical and occupational therapists, nurses, and social workers. All can become advocates for hip health in this population and collaborate to implement systematic screening. Just like the Australasian Academy of Cerebral Palsy and Developmental Medicine, American Academy of Cerebral Palsy and Developmental Medicine, and Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America, professional societies have a role to play in establishing hip surveillance. These societies must work with their membership to determine which guidelines are best suited to their systems of care and, where appropriate, foster collaborations with key stakeholders to facilitate guideline development and system-wide implementation. Offered the choice, surely children with CP and their families will choose hip surveillance and its proven benefits over the alternative. Those waiting for system-wide implementation are missing an opportunity to provide quality care to the patients in their practice.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».