ObjectivesRelevant guidelines and consensuses for COVID-19 contain recommendations aimed at optimising the management in paediatric wards. The goal of this study was to determine the quality of those recommendations and provide suggestions to hospital managers for the adjustment of existing hospital prevention and control strategies, and also to offer recommendations for further research.DesignA rapid review of the guidelines and consensuses for the management in paediatric wards facing COVID-19.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, UpToDate, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Wanfang database and relevant websites such as medlive.cn, dxy.cn, the National Health and Health Commission and the China Center for Disease Control and Prevention were systematically searched through late May 2020. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool was then used to assess the quality of the selected articles and summarise the relevant evidence concerning management in paediatric wards.ResultsA total of 35 articles were included, composed of 3 consensus guidelines, 25 expert consensuses and 7 expert opinions. Of the 35 papers, 24 were from China, 2 from the USA, 1 from Spain, 1 from Brazil, 1 from Saudi Arabia and 6 from multinational cooperative studies. Scores for the six domains of the AGREE II tool (scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigour of development, clarity of presentation, applicability and editorial independence) were 98.57%, 53.57%, 17.92%, 69.62%, 26.96% and 50.35%, respectively. Recommendations for nosocomial infection and control, human resource management as well as management of paediatric patients and their families were summarised.ConclusionsDue to the outbreak of COVID-19, the quality of rapid guidelines and consensuses for the management in paediatric wards affected by COVID-19 is unsatisfactory. In the future, it will be necessary to develop more high-quality guidelines or consensuses for the management in paediatric wards to deal with nosocomial outbreaks in order to fully prepare for emergency medical and health problems.

BackgroundMalnutrition is common in complex congenital heart disease (CCHD). The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of early initiation of high-energy enteral nutrition (EN) with regular energy EN in infants after surgery for CCHD.MethodsThis is a subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) which was conducted in the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) of the largest pediatric heart center in China. Eighty children with CCHD after surgery were from two groups, the intervention group (n = 40) was given high-energy EN and the control group (n = 40) was given regular energy EN. We analyzed the effects of the two interventions on outcomes such as caloric attainment rate, gastrointestinal intolerance, duration of mechanical ventilation, and anthropometry at discharge.ResultsThere was no difference in the daily milk intake between the two groups, but the calorie intake (50.2 vs. 33.4, P < 0.001), protein intake (1.1 vs. 0.9, P < 0.001) and caloric attainment rate were higher in the intervention group (77.5 vs. 45.0%, P = 0.003). In addition, the incidence of pneumonia (P = 0.003) and duration of mechanical ventilation (P = 0.008) were less in the intervention group, and biceps circumference and triceps skinfold thickness at hospital discharge were greater than those in the control group (P < 0.001). We have not found statistical differences in gastrointestinal intolerance, glycemic fluctuations, incidence of pressure ulcers, length of CICU stay and postoperative hospital days between the two groups.ConclusionsEarly initiation of high-energy EN may be safe and effective in infants after complex cardiac surgery. Low doses high-energy EN did not increase gastrointestinal intolerance or glycemic fluctuations and also improved post-operative nutrition by increasing caloric and protein intake without increasing fluid intake.

No abstract