A randomized trial of oral vs intravenous rehydration in a pediatric emergency department. Oral and intravenous rehydration of children. Erratum: Oral rehydration. Oral versus intravenous rehydration of moderately dehydrated children: a randomized, controlled trial. Comparison of nasogastric and intravenous methods of rehydration in pediatric patients with acute dehydration. Randomised controlled trial comparing oral and intravenous rehydration therapy in children with diarrhoea. Oral rehydration therapy of infantile diarrhea: a controlled study of well-nourished children hospitalized in the United States and Panama. A comparative trial of rapid oral and intravenous rehydration in acute diarrhoea. [Oral hydration versus intravenous hydration in patients with acute diarrhea]. Oral versus intravenous rehydration therapy in severe gastroenteritis. [Treatment of acute diarrhea in children. Comparative study of 3 oral rehydration solutions and venoclysis in Colombia]. Is a low-osmolarity ORS solution more efficacious than standard WHO ORS solution? [Oral rehydration: experience in the management of patients with acute gastroenteritis in the emergency room at the Dr. Antonio Ortiz pediatric hospital]. Effect of continued oral feeding on clinical and nutritional outcomes of acute diarrhea in children.
Physicians report several barriers to the use of oral rehydration therapy (ORT) for dehydration in children due to acute gastroenteritis.
                To compare ORT with intravenous therapy for the treatment of moderate dehydration in children with acute gastroenteritis and to determine whether the factors reported as barriers to the use of ORT would be substantiated in practice.
                Randomized controlled trial in an urban pediatric emergency department. Children with moderate dehydration due to acute gastroenteritis were randomly assigned to ORT (group 1) or intravenous therapy (group 2). The primary outcome was length of stay in the emergency department. Secondary outcomes included hospital admission rate, staff time, relapse after discharge from the hospital, and parental satisfaction. Two days after discharge, parents were surveyed by telephone to assess the relapse and their satisfaction with the visit.
                Eighteen patients were enrolled in group 1 and 16 in group 2. The mean length of stay in group 1 was 225 vs 358 minutes in group 2 (P<.01). Mean staff time was 35.8 minutes in group 1 compared with 65 minutes in group 2 (P =.03). Three patients failed ORT and required intravenous therapy. Two patients (11%) in group 1 vs 4 (25 %) in group 2 required admission to the hospital (P =.20). No patients relapsed after being discharged from the hospital. Fourteen parents (77%) in group 1 compared with 6 (37.5%) in group 2 reported that they were highly satisfied with all aspects of the visit (P =.01).
                Reported barriers to ORT were not supported by our data. Moreover, ORT performed better than intravenous therapy on all measured outcomes. We compared oral rehydration therapy (ORT) with rapid intravenous rehydration (IV) in 42 young children with mild to moderate dehydration due to diarrhea. Overall, treatment was successful for 82% of the ORT patients and for 78% of the IV patients. Many physicians in hospitals are unfamiliar with the use of ORT for treating dehydration. nan Dehydration from viral gastroenteritis is a significant pediatric health problem. Oral rehydration therapy (ORT) is recommended as first-line therapy for both mildly and moderately dehydrated children; however, three quarters of pediatric emergency medicine physicians who are very familiar with the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations for ORT still use intravenous fluid therapy (IVF) for moderately dehydrated children.
                To test the hypothesis that the failure rate of ORT would not be >5% greater than the failure rate of IVF. Secondary hypotheses were that patients in the ORT group will (1) require less time initiating therapy, (2) show more improvement after 2 hours of therapy, (3) have fewer hospitalizations, and (4) prefer ORT for future episodes of dehydration.
                A randomized, controlled clinical trial (noninferiority study design) was performed in the emergency department of an urban children's hospital from December 2001 to April 2003. Children 8 weeks to 3 years old were eligible if they were moderately dehydrated, based on a validated 10-point score, from viral gastroenteritis. Patients were randomized to receive either ORT or IVF during the 4-hour study. Treating physicians were masked and assessed all patients before randomization at 2 and 4 hours of therapy. Successful rehydration at 4 hours was defined as resolution of moderate dehydration, production of urine, weight gain, and the absence severe emesis (> or =5 mL/kg).
                Seventy-three patients were enrolled in the study: 36 were randomized to ORT and 37 were randomized to IVF. Baseline dehydration scores and the number of prior episodes of emesis and diarrhea were similar in the 2 groups. ORT demonstrated noninferiority for the main outcome measure and was found to be favorable with secondary outcomes. Half of both the ORT and IVF groups were rehydrated successfully at 4 hours (difference: -1.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -24.0% to 21.6%). The time required to initiate therapy was less in the ORT group at 19.9 minutes from randomization, compared with 41.2 minutes for the IVF group (difference: -21.2 minutes; 95% CI: -10.3 to -32.1 minutes). There was no difference in the improvement of the dehydration score at 2 hours between the 2 groups (78.8% ORT vs 80% IVF; difference: -1.2%; 95% CI: -20.5% to 18%). Less than one third of the ORT group required hospitalization, whereas almost half of the IVF group was hospitalized (30.6% vs 48.7%, respectively; difference: -18.1%; 95% CI: -40.1% to 4.0%). Patients who received ORT were as likely as those who received IVF to prefer the same therapy for the next episode of gastroenteritis (61.3% vs 51.4%, respectively; difference: 9.9%; 95% CI: -14% to 33.7%).
                This trial demonstrated that ORT is as effective as IVF for rehydration of moderately dehydrated children due to gastroenteritis in the emergency department. ORT demonstrated noninferiority for successful rehydration at 4 hours and hospitalization rate. Additionally, therapy was initiated more quickly for ORT patients. ORT seems to be a preferred treatment option for patients with moderate dehydration from gastroenteritis. To assess the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of rapid nasogastric hydration (RNG) and rapid intravenous hydration (RIV) administered in the emergency department (ED) to young children suffering with uncomplicated, acute moderate dehydration.
                Ninety-six children aged 3 to 36 months, who presented with signs and symptoms of uncomplicated, acute moderate dehydration caused by vomiting and/or diarrhea, presumed to be caused by viral gastroenteritis, were randomly assigned to receive either RNG with a standard oral rehydration solution or RIV with normal saline. Each solution was administered at a rate of 50 mL/kg of body weight, delivered over a 3-hour period in our urban pediatric ED. All participants were weighed pretreatment and posttreatment and underwent initial and final measurements of their serum electrolytes, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, and glucose levels, along with urine chemistry and urine specific gravity. Telephone follow-up by completion of a standardized questionnaire was obtained approximately 24 hours after discharge from the ED.
                Ninety-two of 96 enrolled patients completed the study. Three patients failed treatment (2 RIV and 1 RNG) and were excluded and hospitalized because of severe, intractable vomiting, and 1 patient was withdrawn secondary to an intussusception. Among 92 evaluable patients, 2 were found to be severely dehydrated (>10% change in body weight) and were excluded from analysis, leaving 90 patients (RNG: N = 46 and RIV: N = 44), who completed the study. Both RNG and RIV were found to be a safe and efficacious means of treating uncomplicated, acute moderate dehydration in the ED. Determinations of electrolytes, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, or glucose were not found to be of value on an intent-to-treat basis in the care of these patients. The urine specific gravity and incidence of ketonuria declined from levels commensurate with moderate dehydration in the RNG group, but not as consistently so in the RIV group. Both RNG and RIV were substantially less expensive to administer than standard care with intravenous fluid deficit therapy in-hospital, and RNG was more cost-effective to administer over RIV in the outpatient setting.
                RNG and RIV administered in the ED are safe, efficacious, and cost-effective alternatives to the standard treatment for uncomplicated, acute moderate dehydration in young children. RNG is as efficacious as RIV, is no more labor intensive than RIV, and is associated with fewer complications. In addition, we found that most routine laboratory testing is of little value in these patients and should be avoided, except when clearly clinically indicated. To determine the effectiveness of oral rehydration in children with moderate dehydration caused by gastroenteritis, and to compare the complications of oral and intravenous treatment.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                Emergency department and infectious diseases ward in a large urban teaching hospital.
                111 children aged 3-36 months who had been previously healthy, had had diarrhoea for seven days or less, had clinical signs of dehydration, and were not in shock. Six children were withdrawn because the diagnosis was incorrect (four in oral group, two in intravenous group) and one (oral group) was withdrawn at her parents' request.
                Oral rehydration fluid was given by mouth or nasogastric tube, or both to 52 children. The remaining 52 received intravenous rehydration fluids but were allowed to drink.
                Success or failure of rehydration. Number of times child vomited or passed stool after starting treatment. Time taken to rehydrate.
                Oral treatment failed in two children (failure rate 3.8%, upper 95% confidence limit 11.6%) and intravenous treatment in none. Vomiting was more common in the oral group (p less than 0.01): 26 of 50 children (52%) in the oral group and 11 of 50 (22%) in the intravenous group vomited during rehydration. There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups in the number of stools passed during rehydration (p = 0.09). None of the children had serious complications of treatment.
                Rehydration by mouth or nasogastric tube is a safe and effective treatment for moderately dehydrated children with gastroenteritis. Although oral glucose-electrolyte solutions containing 90 mmol of sodium per liter have been widely used in the treatment of acute diarrhea among under-nourished children in the developing world, they have rarely been studied in well-nourished children. We therefore conducted a controlled randomized study among well-nourished children three months to two years who were hospitalized with acute diarrhea (52 in the United States, and 94 in Panama), to compare the efficacy of this solution with that of one containing 50 mmol of sodium per liter and with standard intravenous therapy. Oral rehydration with both solutions according to protocol was successful in 97 of 98 children (one required unscheduled intravenous therapy), and in 87 (89 per cent) no intravenous therapy was required. All of six children admitted with hypernatremia were successfully treated with oral therapy alone. We conclude that glucose-electrolyte oral solutions containing either 50 or 90 mmol of sodium per liter are effective and safe in the treatment of well-nourished children hospitalized with acute diarrhea, and that they may completely replace the intravenous fluids in the majority of such children. 37 children under the age of 5 years hospitalized for acute diarrhoea and dehydration were randomized to receive oral or intravenous rehydration during 6 to 12 hours. Rehydration was satisfactory in both groups, with correction of dehydration, metabolic acidosis and sodium deficit at equal rates. The reintroduction of normal feedings was successful in most of the orally rehydrated children after 12 hours, but often unsuccessful in the i.v. therapy group. Consequently the orally rehydrated children showed a 2.9% weight gain by the time of discharge whereas the intravenously treated children did not gain weight in the hospital. The duration of diarrhoea was also shorter in the orally rehydrated children. Thus oral rehydration therapy was equal or superior to even rapid intravenous rehydration therapy in the management of acute diarrhoea in children. nan A controlled, randomised trial comparing the results of oral rehydration therapy with those of intravenous fluid treatment in 470 children with severe gastroenteritis was undertaken. The oral rehydration therapy was divided into two phases--a rehydration phase that used high sodium isotonic fluid at 40 ml/kg per hour and a maintenance phase using low sodium isotonic fluid (sodium 40, potassium 30, bicarbonate 25, chloride 45, and dextrose 130 mmol/l). The results indicate that oral rehydration treatment, used according to this protocol, is successful in treating severe diarrhoea and dehydration, and has considerable advantages over intravenous fluid therapy in reducing complications associated with the treatment of hypernatraemia, in promoting rapid correction of hypokalaemia and acidosis, in decreasing the duration of diarrhoea, and in promoting a greater weight gain at hospital discharge. nan The clinical efficacy of a diluted oral rehydration salts (ORS) solution was compared in a pilot study with that of intravenous (i.v.) therapy and of standard World Health Organization (WHO)/United Nations Childrens Fund (UNICEF) ORS solution in children with acute diarrhea. Sixty-one boys aged 3 to 24 months, admitted to hospital with acute diarrhea and signs of dehydration, were randomly assigned to groups receiving standard ORS solution, diluted ORS solution, or i.v. therapy. In children treated with standard ORS solution and small amounts of plain water, the total fluid intake was 25-39% greater, the stool output was 58-77% greater (p < 0.01), and the duration of diarrhea was 30-55% greater than in the other treatment groups. Intake of plain water, taken separately or added to the ORS solution, was greater in children given diluted ORS solution (73 +/- 23 ml/kg) than in those given standard ORS solution (21 +/- 32 ml/kg) (p < 0.001). The mean serum sodium concentration increased by 2.2 mEq/L in children given standard ORS solution, whereas it decreased by 2.9 mEq/L in those given diluted ORS solution. This study shows that some children develop worsening diarrhea and increasing serum sodium concentrations when treated with standard ORS solution and given only small amounts of plain water. This is probably caused by the slight hypertonicity of standard ORS solution combined with transient partial glucose malabsorption. This can be avoided if water, breast milk, or another low-solute drink is given liberally during maintenance therapy with ORS solution, as recommended by the WHO. Oral rehydration solutions containing 50-90 mEq/L of sodium (Na+) have recently been recommended for the ambulatory management of children with acute diarrhea in the United States. We conducted a randomized study comparing the use of a commercial oral rehydration solution (Rehydralyte), containing 75 mEq/L of Na with the usual method of rehydration with an intravenous solution. Patients treated in the University Pediatric Hospital Emergency Room with acute diarrhea were randomly chosen to receive the oral rehydration solution (Rehydralyte) (Group A), control patients (Group B) were hydrated with the usual intravenous fluids, ie, Ringer's Lactate and then a solution of 56 mEq/L of Na. All patients received orientation about this modality of treatment. Both groups were compared as for weight gain, metabolic parameters, duration of diarrhea, impact on complications associated with use of intravenous solution and cost impact. When both groups were compared there were no differences in measurements of clinical, laboratory data and outcome. Advantages of oral rehydration on cost containment and less human suffering were demonstrated. It can be concluded that in Puerto Rican children oral rehydration solution containing 75 mEq/L Na may be used safely for the treatment of acute diarrhea on ambulatory basis. One hundred twenty-eight nonmalnourished male patients between 3 and 36 months of age were randomly assigned to receive one of four lactose-free dietary treatments to determine the effect of dietary therapy on the severity and nutritional outcome of diarrheal illness. Group 1 received a formula diet composed of casein, sucrose, dextrin with maltose (Dextri-Maltose), and vegetable oil to provide 110 kcal/kg body weight/d (CSO-110). Group 2 received CSO to provide 55 kcal/kg/d (CSO-55) for 2 days and then CSO-110. Group 3 received only oral glucose-electrolyte solution (GES) for 2 days, CSO-55 for the next 2 days, and then CSO-110. Group 4 received the same diets as Group 3 except that only intravenous GES was used for the first 2 days. The GES maintenance solutions provided 24 to 30 kcal/kg/d. Therapeutic success rates were similar among dietary groups, ranging from 90% to 97%. Fecal excretion was initially lower in group 4 (P less than 0.05) but was similar initially among groups treated orally and among all four groups beginning on day 3. Net apparent absorption of nitrogen, fat, carbohydrate, and total energy; retention of nitrogen; and increments in body weight, arm circumference, and skin-fold thickness were positively related to the amounts of dietary energy consumed. Thus continued oral feeding with the CSO diets during the early phase of therapy yielded improved nutritional results.
Although no clinically important differences between ORT and IVT, the ORT group did have a higher risk of paralytic ileus, and the IVT group was exposed to risks of intravenous therapy. For every 25 children (95% CI 14 to 100) treated with ORT one would fail and require IVT.