{"title":"肌注与口服昂丹司琼治疗儿童急性脱水腹泻和呕吐:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Shubham Satyesh, Rajesh Kumar Meena, Dheeraj Shah, Rumpa Saha, Piyush Gupta","doi":"10.1007/s13312-025-00049-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare efficacy and safety of intramuscular (IM) ondansetron with oral ondansetron for improving utilization of Oral Rehydration Therapy (ORT) by controlling vomiting in children with acute diarrhea and some dehydration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We enrolled children aged 3 months to 12 years presenting with acute diarrhea (duration < 14 days) with some dehydration, and at least two episodes of vomiting within last 6 h in an open-label randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized to receive single dose (0.2 mg/kg) of IM or oral ondansetron before starting ORT. Primary outcome was failure of ORT (persistence of some dehydration after 4 h of ORT or need for intravenous fluids). Secondary outcomes included need for unscheduled intravenous fluids, amount of Oral Rehydration Salt Solution (ORS) ingested after 4 h, frequency of vomiting episodes, adverse effects, and caregiver satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We randomized 60 children (31 IM, 29 oral); 58 (29 per group) were followed-up for all outcomes. There were no significant differences between IM and oral routes in terms of ORT failure (31% vs. 24.1%; RR (95% CI) 1.3 (0.5, 3.0), P = 0.557), need for IV fluids during ORT (24.1% vs. 20.7%; P = 0.753), mean (SD) ORS ingested (mL) in 4 h [616.2 (429.7) vs. 645.5 (403.5); P = 0.79], mean (SD) frequency of vomiting [1.4 (2.0) vs. 2.3 (2.4); P = 0.107] or caregiver satisfaction. No adverse events attributable to the intervention were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Intramuscular ondansetron may not offer any advantage over oral use in management of children with acute diarrhea with vomiting and some dehydration.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinical Trials Registry-India (CTRI/2020/01/023082) available at ctri.nic.in.</p>","PeriodicalId":13291,"journal":{"name":"Indian pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intramuscular Versus Oral Ondansetron for Management of Children with Acute Dehydrating Diarrhea and Vomiting: A Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Shubham Satyesh, Rajesh Kumar Meena, Dheeraj Shah, Rumpa Saha, Piyush Gupta\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13312-025-00049-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare efficacy and safety of intramuscular (IM) ondansetron with oral ondansetron for improving utilization of Oral Rehydration Therapy (ORT) by controlling vomiting in children with acute diarrhea and some dehydration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We enrolled children aged 3 months to 12 years presenting with acute diarrhea (duration < 14 days) with some dehydration, and at least two episodes of vomiting within last 6 h in an open-label randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized to receive single dose (0.2 mg/kg) of IM or oral ondansetron before starting ORT. Primary outcome was failure of ORT (persistence of some dehydration after 4 h of ORT or need for intravenous fluids). Secondary outcomes included need for unscheduled intravenous fluids, amount of Oral Rehydration Salt Solution (ORS) ingested after 4 h, frequency of vomiting episodes, adverse effects, and caregiver satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We randomized 60 children (31 IM, 29 oral); 58 (29 per group) were followed-up for all outcomes. There were no significant differences between IM and oral routes in terms of ORT failure (31% vs. 24.1%; RR (95% CI) 1.3 (0.5, 3.0), P = 0.557), need for IV fluids during ORT (24.1% vs. 20.7%; P = 0.753), mean (SD) ORS ingested (mL) in 4 h [616.2 (429.7) vs. 645.5 (403.5); P = 0.79], mean (SD) frequency of vomiting [1.4 (2.0) vs. 2.3 (2.4); P = 0.107] or caregiver satisfaction. No adverse events attributable to the intervention were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Intramuscular ondansetron may not offer any advantage over oral use in management of children with acute diarrhea with vomiting and some dehydration.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinical Trials Registry-India (CTRI/2020/01/023082) available at ctri.nic.in.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian pediatrics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian pediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-025-00049-x\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-025-00049-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:比较肌注昂丹司琼与口服昂丹司琼控制急性腹泻和部分脱水患儿呕吐,提高口服补液治疗(ORT)利用率的疗效和安全性。方法:我们招募了年龄为3个月至12岁的急性腹泻儿童(持续时间)。结果:我们随机选择了60名儿童(31名IM, 29名口服);对58例(每组29例)进行了所有结果的随访。IM和口服途径在ORT失败方面没有显著差异(31% vs. 24.1%;RR (95% CI) 1.3 (0.5, 3.0), P = 0.557), ORT期间静脉输液需求(24.1% vs. 20.7%;P = 0.753), 4小时内摄入的ORS (mL)均值(SD)[616.2(429.7)比645.5 (403.5)];P = 0.79],平均呕吐频率(SD) [1.4 (2.0) vs. 2.3 (2.4)];P = 0.107]或照顾者满意度。未观察到可归因于干预的不良事件。结论:在治疗急性腹泻伴呕吐和部分脱水的儿童中,肌注昂丹司琼可能没有口服的优势。试验注册:印度临床试验注册中心(CTRI/2020/01/023082),可在cri . nicin .查阅。
Intramuscular Versus Oral Ondansetron for Management of Children with Acute Dehydrating Diarrhea and Vomiting: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Objectives: To compare efficacy and safety of intramuscular (IM) ondansetron with oral ondansetron for improving utilization of Oral Rehydration Therapy (ORT) by controlling vomiting in children with acute diarrhea and some dehydration.
Methods: We enrolled children aged 3 months to 12 years presenting with acute diarrhea (duration < 14 days) with some dehydration, and at least two episodes of vomiting within last 6 h in an open-label randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized to receive single dose (0.2 mg/kg) of IM or oral ondansetron before starting ORT. Primary outcome was failure of ORT (persistence of some dehydration after 4 h of ORT or need for intravenous fluids). Secondary outcomes included need for unscheduled intravenous fluids, amount of Oral Rehydration Salt Solution (ORS) ingested after 4 h, frequency of vomiting episodes, adverse effects, and caregiver satisfaction.
Results: We randomized 60 children (31 IM, 29 oral); 58 (29 per group) were followed-up for all outcomes. There were no significant differences between IM and oral routes in terms of ORT failure (31% vs. 24.1%; RR (95% CI) 1.3 (0.5, 3.0), P = 0.557), need for IV fluids during ORT (24.1% vs. 20.7%; P = 0.753), mean (SD) ORS ingested (mL) in 4 h [616.2 (429.7) vs. 645.5 (403.5); P = 0.79], mean (SD) frequency of vomiting [1.4 (2.0) vs. 2.3 (2.4); P = 0.107] or caregiver satisfaction. No adverse events attributable to the intervention were observed.
Conclusion: Intramuscular ondansetron may not offer any advantage over oral use in management of children with acute diarrhea with vomiting and some dehydration.
Trial registration: Clinical Trials Registry-India (CTRI/2020/01/023082) available at ctri.nic.in.
期刊介绍:
The general objective of Indian Pediatrics is "To promote the science and practice of Pediatrics." An important guiding principle has been the simultaneous need to inform, educate and entertain the target audience. The specific key objectives are:
-To publish original, relevant, well researched peer reviewed articles on issues related to child health.
-To provide continuing education to support informed clinical decisions and research.
-To foster responsible and balanced debate on controversial issues that affect child health, including non-clinical areas such as medical education, ethics, law, environment and economics.
-To achieve the highest level of ethical medical journalism and to produce a publication that is timely, credible and enjoyable to read.