Mid-Childhood Outcomes after Dextrose Gel Treatment of Neonatal Hypoglycaemia: Follow-Up of the Sugar Babies Randomized Trial.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS Neonatology Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-12-14 DOI:10.1159/000527715
Sophie L St Clair, Darren W T Dai, Deborah L Harris, Gregory D Gamble, Christopher J D McKinlay, Samson Nivins, Rajesh K Shah, Benjamin Thompson, Jane E Harding
{"title":"Mid-Childhood Outcomes after Dextrose Gel Treatment of Neonatal Hypoglycaemia: Follow-Up of the Sugar Babies Randomized Trial.","authors":"Sophie L St Clair, Darren W T Dai, Deborah L Harris, Gregory D Gamble, Christopher J D McKinlay, Samson Nivins, Rajesh K Shah, Benjamin Thompson, Jane E Harding","doi":"10.1159/000527715","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Dextrose gel is widely used as first-line treatment for neonatal hypoglycaemia given its cost-effectiveness and ease of use. The Sugar Babies randomized trial first showed that 40% dextrose gel was more effective in reversing hypoglycaemia than feeding alone. Follow-up of the Sugar Babies Trial cohort at 2 and 4.5 years of age reported that dextrose gel appeared safe, with similar rates of neurosensory impairment in babies randomized to dextrose or placebo gel. However, some effects of neonatal hypoglycaemia may not become apparent until school age.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Follow-up of the Sugar Babies Trial cohort at 9-10 years of age was reported. The primary outcome was low educational achievement in reading or mathematics. Secondary outcomes included other aspects of educational achievement, executive function, visual-motor function, and psychosocial adaptation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 227 eligible children, 184 (81%) were assessed at a mean (SD) age of 9.3 (0.2) years. Low educational achievement was similar in dextrose and placebo groups (36/86 [42%] vs. 42/94 [45%]; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.76, 1.44; p = 0.79). Children allocated to dextrose gel had lower visual perception standard scores (95.2 vs. 100.6; MD -5.68, 95% CI -9.79, -1.57; p = 0.006) and a greater proportion had low (<85) visual perception scores (20/88 [23%] vs. 10/95 [11%]; RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.13, 4.37; p = 0.02). Other secondary outcomes, including other aspects of visual-motor function, were similar in both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Treatment dextrose gel does not appear to result in any clinically significant differences in educational achievement or other neurodevelopmental outcomes at mid-childhood.</p>","PeriodicalId":18924,"journal":{"name":"Neonatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9992292/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neonatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000527715","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Introduction: Dextrose gel is widely used as first-line treatment for neonatal hypoglycaemia given its cost-effectiveness and ease of use. The Sugar Babies randomized trial first showed that 40% dextrose gel was more effective in reversing hypoglycaemia than feeding alone. Follow-up of the Sugar Babies Trial cohort at 2 and 4.5 years of age reported that dextrose gel appeared safe, with similar rates of neurosensory impairment in babies randomized to dextrose or placebo gel. However, some effects of neonatal hypoglycaemia may not become apparent until school age.

Methods: Follow-up of the Sugar Babies Trial cohort at 9-10 years of age was reported. The primary outcome was low educational achievement in reading or mathematics. Secondary outcomes included other aspects of educational achievement, executive function, visual-motor function, and psychosocial adaptation.

Results: Of 227 eligible children, 184 (81%) were assessed at a mean (SD) age of 9.3 (0.2) years. Low educational achievement was similar in dextrose and placebo groups (36/86 [42%] vs. 42/94 [45%]; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.76, 1.44; p = 0.79). Children allocated to dextrose gel had lower visual perception standard scores (95.2 vs. 100.6; MD -5.68, 95% CI -9.79, -1.57; p = 0.006) and a greater proportion had low (<85) visual perception scores (20/88 [23%] vs. 10/95 [11%]; RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.13, 4.37; p = 0.02). Other secondary outcomes, including other aspects of visual-motor function, were similar in both groups.

Conclusion: Treatment dextrose gel does not appear to result in any clinically significant differences in educational achievement or other neurodevelopmental outcomes at mid-childhood.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
葡萄糖凝胶治疗新生儿低血糖症后的儿童中期疗效:糖宝宝随机试验的后续研究。
简介:葡萄糖凝胶因其成本效益高、使用方便而被广泛用作新生儿低血糖症的一线治疗方法。糖宝宝随机试验首次表明,40%葡萄糖凝胶在逆转低血糖症方面比单纯喂养更有效。对 "糖宝宝 "试验队列进行的 2 岁和 4.5 岁随访报告显示,葡萄糖凝胶似乎是安全的,随机使用葡萄糖凝胶或安慰剂凝胶的婴儿出现神经感觉障碍的比率相似。不过,新生儿低血糖的某些影响可能要到学龄期才会显现出来:方法:报告了糖宝宝试验组群在 9-10 岁时的随访情况。主要结果是阅读或数学成绩低下。次要结果包括学习成绩的其他方面、执行功能、视觉运动功能和社会心理适应能力:在 227 名符合条件的儿童中,184 人(81%)在平均(标清)9.3(0.2)岁时接受了评估。葡萄糖组和安慰剂组的低教育成就相似(36/86 [42%] vs. 42/94 [45%];RR 1.04,95% CI 0.76,1.44;P = 0.79)。接受葡萄糖凝胶治疗的患儿视知觉标准分较低(95.2 分 vs. 100.6 分;MD -5.68,95% CI -9.79,-1.57;p = 0.006),低分患儿的比例也较高(结论:葡萄糖凝胶的治疗效果并不明显:葡萄糖凝胶治疗似乎不会对儿童中期的教育成就或其他神经发育结果造成任何临床意义上的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neonatology
Neonatology 医学-小儿科
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
91
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: This highly respected and frequently cited journal is a prime source of information in the area of fetal and neonatal research. Original papers present research on all aspects of neonatology, fetal medicine and developmental biology. These papers encompass both basic science and clinical research including randomized trials, observational studies and epidemiology. Basic science research covers molecular biology, molecular genetics, physiology, biochemistry and pharmacology in fetal and neonatal life. In addition to the classic features the journal accepts papers for the sections Research Briefings and Sources of Neonatal Medicine (historical pieces). Papers reporting results of animal studies should be based upon hypotheses that relate to developmental processes or disorders in the human fetus or neonate.
期刊最新文献
The Impact of Maternal and Perinatal Factors on the Neonatal Electrocardiogram Front & Back Matter Front & Back Matter Front & Back Matter Therapeutic Hypothermia for Neonatal Encephalopathy in Low-Resource Settings: Methodological Inaccuracies and Inconsistencies in the Latest Systematic Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1