MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W608846198 · doi:10.1093/pch/20.5.235

A call for advocacy: Standardized concentration and weight-based dosing of acetaminophen may enhance the therapeutic benefit and reduce the risk for harm

2015· article· en· W608846198 sur OpenAlexaff
Shadi Tamur, Sophie Gosselin

Notice bibliographique

RevuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueThermal Regulation in Medicine
Établissements canadiensMcGill University Health CentreMontreal Children's Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDosingAcetaminophenHarmMedicineIntensive care medicinePharmacologyPsychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Fever is one of the more common reasons that parents seek medical attention for their children, representing an estimated one-third of the primary complaints of paediatric patients. Furthermore, fever is a secondary complaint for an even larger proportion of patients, prompting numerous office calls and visits. While fever is defined as a rectal temperature >38.2°C in children >1 month of age, approximately one-half of parents consider a temperature <38°C to be a fever and 25% of caregivers would give antipyretics for temperatures <37.8°C (1). As many as 50% of parents administer incorrect doses of antipyretics and approximately 15% give supratherapeutic doses of acetaminophen. Caregivers who understand correctly which temperatures constitute fever and that dosing should be based on weight rather than age or the level of the fever are much less likely to give an incorrect dose (2). Parents and health care workers often incorrectly assume that there is urgency to bring a fever down. The primary reason to administer antipyretics is to make the child more comfortable because febrile children experience altered activity and sleep patterns in addition to a decreased oral intake (3). Antipyretics also provide analgesia, which may enhance their overall clinical effect. Acetaminophen doses of 10 mg/kg to 15 mg/kg given every 4 h to 6 h orally are generally considered to be safe and effective, and the onset of an antipyretic effect is usually reported to be within 30 min to 60 min (4). However, a recent pharmacokinetics study presented in abstract form by Abourbih et al (5) challenged this dosing. The authors investigated the potential for the weight-based dose recommended by the manufacturer to attain concentrations reported to produce an antipyretic effect (10 μg/mL to 20 μg/mL) in the two- to three-year-old age group. They reported that a 10 mg/kg dose is ineffective at achieving an antipyretic blood concentration of acetaminophen, while a dose of 15 mg/kg would be effective only if the upper range of a given pharmacokinetic constant (Ka) is used for the calculations. The pharmacokinetic constants used to predict acetaminophen concentrations in children remain imprecise because they have been derived based on a small number of children. Thus, the recommended age-based dose for the two- to three-year-old age group of 160 mg found in most commercially available products is predicted to be effective only in patients weighing <10.9 kg (5). Although alternative dosing regimens, including a higher loading dose, have been suggested, no consistent evidence has indicated that such a dose, administered either orally (30 mg/kg) or rectally (40 mg/kg), improves antipyretic efficacy. The higher rectal dose is often used in intraoperative conditions but cannot be recommended for use in routine clinical care. The use of higher loading doses in clinical practice would contribute to the potential for dosing confusion and hepatotoxicity. Although hepatotoxicity associated with acetaminophen at recommended doses has rarely been reported, the potential for hepatotoxicity exists if dosages exceed 75 mg/kg to 90 mg/kg per 24 h. The most commonly reported scenarios are those of children receiving multiple supratherapeutic doses (15 mg/kg) or appropriate single doses at intervals of <4 h, resulting in total dosages of >90 mg/kg per day for several days (6). A recent Canadian cross-sectional study (7) demonstrated that 41% of febrile children presenting to an urban tertiary children's hospital had received inadequate (30%) or supratherapeutic (11%) doses. A study from Saudi Arabia reported that the reasons for inaccurate dosing included parental inability to determine, measure or administer the appropriate dose, complicated by package labelling listing doses according to age and not weight, and low parental level of education (8). Recently in the United Kingdom, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency published a report regarding acetaminophen dosing in children. It led to changes in the labelling of bottles to ensure that correct, age-based dosing information is presented in an easy-to-read manner (9). The new labelling displays acetaminophen concentrations of 120 mg/5 mL or 250 mg/5 mL in tables with narrow weight intervals. In Canada, the commercial availability of varying concentrations of acetaminophen creates confusion among parents that could be avoided by mandating all manufacturers to supply a uniform concentration. The current concentrations of many commercial preparations are 160 mg/5 mL or 80 mg/mL. Neither number is easy for parents to multiply if they know the mg/kg dose. A concentration of 15 mg/mL may help to avoid this problem. Because we believe that the optimal dose is 15 mg/kg, parents could be advised to administer 1 mL/kg (recognizing that this does not completely solve the problem because many parents only know their child's weight in pounds). Any physician caring for children should remember how critical it is to take the time to explain the appropriate use (ie, formulation, dose and dosing interval) of acetaminophen to caregivers. Child safety and medication efficacy will be further enhanced by the development of simplified weight-based dosing methods and standardized delivery devices (10). To promote proper dosing and child safety, we are advocating clear labelling of weight-based dosing instructions and encourage Health Canada to require manufacturers to make available in Canada a single concentration of acetaminophen liquid formulation for both infants and children.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,042
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,136
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,104
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,223

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0420,136
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,004
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0060,019
Communication savante0,0120,023
Science ouverte0,0050,008
Intégrité de la recherche0,1040,109
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0210,005

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,329
Écart entre enseignants0,303 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentnon

Explorer davantage

Même revuePaediatrics & Child HealthMême sujetThermal Regulation in MedicineTravaux en français237 207