BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Premature infants are often given glycerin suppositories or enemas to facilitate meconium evacuation and the transition to enteral feeds. We reviewed the best-available evidence for the use of glycerin suppositories and enemas in premature infants. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of premature infants treated with glycerin suppositories or enemas through January 2022. Studies were screened and data extracted independently and in duplicate. We included RCTs of premature infants <32 weeks gestation and/or birth weight <1500 g who were treated with glycerin suppositories or enemas. Meta-analysis was performed using random effects and reported as relative risk or mean difference. RESULTS: We identified 6 single-center, RCTs of 389 premature infants treated with glycerin suppositories (n = 207) or enemas (n = 182). Mortality rates ranged from 0% to 17%, and the meta-analysis revealed no differences between treatment groups (P = .86). Active treatment was associated with earlier meconium evacuation (mean, 1.5 days; 95% confidence interval, 3.0 to 0.01; P = .05) but not a faster time to enteral feeds (mean, 0.5 days; P = .48). We identified 1 ongoing trial with a target recruitment of 220 premature infants. The quality of evidence was very low to moderate because of inadequate statistical power and other methodologic issues. CONCLUSIONS: The use of glycerin suppositories and enemas in premature infants is associated with earlier meconium evacuation, but the clinical significance of this finding is uncertain. Treatment has no definitive effects on mortality, necrotizing enterocolitis, or enteral feeds.

OBJECTIVES For hospitalized children and their families, laboratory study collection at night and in the early morning interrupts sleep and increases the stress of a hospitalization. To change this practice, our quality improvement (QI) study developed a rounding checklist aimed at increasing the percentage of routine laboratory studies ordered for and collected after 7 am. METHODS Our QI study was conducted on the pediatric hospital medicine service at a single-site urban children’s hospital over 28 months. Medical records from 420 randomly selected pediatric inpatients were abstracted, and 5 plan-do-study-act cycles were implemented during the intervention. Outcome measures included the percentage of routine laboratory studies ordered for and collected after 7 am. The process measure was use of the rounding checklist. Run charts were used for analysis. RESULTS The percentage of laboratory studies ordered for after 7 am increased from a baseline median of 25.8% to a postintervention median of 75.0%, exceeding our goal of 50% and revealing special cause variation. In addition, the percentage of laboratory studies collected after 7 am increased from a baseline median of 37.1% to 76.4% post intervention, with special cause variation observed. CONCLUSIONS By implementing a rounding checklist, our QI study successfully increased the percentage of laboratory studies ordered for and collected after 7 am and could serve as a model for other health care systems to impact provider ordering practices and behavior. In future initiatives, investigators should evaluate the effects of similar interventions on caregiver and provider perceptions of patient- and family-centeredness, satisfaction, and the quality of patient care.

Engaging family advisors in pediatric quality improvement (QI) efforts is well-studied in intensive care but less understood in other settings. The purpose of this study was to assess the perceived impact of including a family advisor as a colead on a QI initiative that successfully improved the family-centered timing of routine morning blood tests performed on pediatric inpatients. Five structured written reflections from core QI team members were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis and 3 major themes were identified. The first found that a family advisor’s presence from the beginning of a QI initiative helps inform project design. The second determined that family partners working with residents fostered a better shared understanding of the role of trainees and caregivers in improving the quality of care. The third found that a family partner is an effective change agent to enact practice improvement, support professional development, and enhance resident education. Our qualitative analysis showed that engaging a family advisor as a colead influenced the design, implementation, and post-intervention impact of the initiative and improved family-centered outcomes.

No abstract