Letter to the Editor: Recommendations for the Care of Pediatric Orthopaedic Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
To the Editor: We read with interest the review by Farrell et al1 regarding modifications to paediatric orthopaedic practice which may be necessary in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We particularly wish to focus on their comments regarding developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). We write on behalf of the International Interdisciplinary Consensus Committee on DDH Evaluation, a recently formed organisation of specialists concerned with the early detection and treatment of DDH, and the promotion and teaching of the Graf method of infant hip ultrasonography.2,3 We note that our colleagues in Australia and Canada propose to “postpone assessment and treatment of DDH for the next 2 to 4 months.” We fully understand and share the concerns that lie behind this proposal. Indeed some of our own members are located in some of the centers in Europe which have been worst affected by the pandemic. However, we feel some points are worthy of note. First, as of now, we do not know if circumstances will be any more favorable in 2 to 4 months' time. Indeed, some point out that the COVID-19 event still has a long way to run, and restrictions may have to continue for many months and/or until a vaccine is developed.4 Although good outcomes can of course be achieved for children who present late with DDH, early treatment is associated with the best results, including the avoidance of late and often complex surgery.5,6 Even in the context of early, closed treatment, time is of the essence. Pavlik harness treatment for example, has been shown to be less effective over the age of 4 months.7 Therefore, a decision to defer the treatment of 2 to 4 months, let alone a longer period of time, cannot be taken lightly. The authors rightly raise concerns about the dangers involved in bringing small children into the acute hospital setting at this time. In the case of some of our own members, assessment and early closed treatment of DDH occurs outside such settings, for example, in community-based clinics; in the cases of others, the process has been moved out of the acute hospital to a community setting for the duration of the crisis. In any case, however, only a single parent/legal guardian/accompanying person should be allowed along with the child. We suggest that this may provide an answer to this concern; of course, all necessary precautions must be observed. We realise that circumstances in every centre are different, and at this time, it behoves all of us to be mutually helpful. We hope our comments will encourage colleagues, where local circumstances permit, to continue efforts as far as possible in detection and treatment of DDH. Finally, we agree with the authors that at a later stage there will be a need for research into the impact which the pandemic has had on paediatric orthopaedic outcomes—which of course includes DDH.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,058 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,024 | 0,024 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,007 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».