Aggressive vs. conservative phototherapy for infants with extremely low birth weight.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether aggressive phototherapy to prevent neurotoxic effects of bilirubin benefits or harms infants with extremely low birth weight (1000 g or less). METHODS: We randomly assigned 1974 infants with extremely low birth weight at 12 to 36 hours of age to undergo either aggressive or conservative phototherapy. The primary outcome was a composite of death or neurodevelopmental impairment determined for 91% of the infants by investigators who were unaware of the treatment assignments. RESULTS: Aggressive phototherapy, as compared with conservative phototherapy, significantly reduced the mean peak serum bilirubin level (7.0 vs. 9.8 mg per deciliter [120 vs. 168 micromol per liter], P<0.01) but not the rate of the primary outcome (52% vs. 55%; relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 1.02; P=0.15). Aggressive phototherapy did reduce rates of neurodevelopmental impairment (26%, vs. 30% for conservative phototherapy; relative risk, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.99). Rates of death in the aggressive-phototherapy and conservative-phototherapy groups were 24% and 23%, respectively (relative risk, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.22). In preplanned subgroup analyses, the rates of death were 13% with aggressive phototherapy and 14% with conservative phototherapy for infants with a birth weight of 751 to 1000 g and 39% and 34%, respectively (relative risk, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.34), for infants with a birth weight of 501 to 750 g. CONCLUSIONS: Aggressive phototherapy did not significantly reduce the rate of death or neurodevelopmental impairment. The rate of neurodevelopmental impairment alone was significantly reduced with aggressive phototherapy. This reduction may be offset by an increase in mortality among infants weighing 501 to 750 g at birth. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00114543.)

Birth prevalence of isolated congenital limb reduction defects in Texas 1999--2001

Objective. Congenital limb defects are common birth defects occurring in approximately 2-7/10,000 live births. Because congenital limb defects are pervasive throughout all populations, and the conditions profoundly affect quality of life, they represent a significant public health concern. Currently there is a paucity of etiologic information in the literature regarding congenital limb reduction defects which represents a major limitation in developing treatment strategies as well as identifying high risk pregnancies. ^ Additionally, despite the fact that the majority of congenital limb reduction defects are isolated, most previous studies have not separated them from those occurring as part of a known syndrome or with multiple additional congenital anomalies of unknown etiology. It stands to reason that factors responsible for multiple congenital anomalies that happen to include congenital limb reduction defects may be quite different from those factors leading to an isolated congenital limb reduction defect. ^ As a first step toward gaining etiologic understanding, this cross-sectional study was undertaken to determine the birth prevalence and obtain demographic information about non-syndromic (isolated) congenital limb reduction defects that occurred in Texas from 1999-2001. ^ Methods. The study population included all infants/fetuses with isolated congenital limb reduction defects born in Texas during 1999-2001; the comparison population was all infants who were born to mothers who were residents of Texas during the same period of time. The overall birth prevalence of limb reduction defects was determined and adjusted for ethnicity, gender, site of defect (upper limb versus lower limb), county of residence, maternal age and maternal education. ^ Results. In Texas, the overall birth prevalence of isolated CLRDs was 2.1/10,000 live births (1.5 and 0.6/10,000 live births for upper limb and lower limb, respectively). ^ The risk of isolated lower limb CLRDs in Texas was significantly lower in females when gender was examined individually (crude prevalence odds ratio of 0.57, 95% CI of 0.36-0.91) as well as in relation to all other variables used in the analysis (adjusted prevalence odds ratio of 0.58, 95% CI of 0.36-0.93). ^ Harris County (which includes the Houston metropolitan area) had significantly lower risks of all (upper limb and lower limb combined) isolated CLRDs when examined in relation to other counties in Texas, with a crude prevalence odds ratio of 0.4 (95% CI: 0.29-0.72) and an adjusted prevalence odds ratio of 0.50 (95% CI: 0.31-0.80). The risk of isolated upper limb CLRDs was significantly lower in Harris County (crude prevalence odds ratio of 0.45, CI of 0.26-0.76 and adjusted prevalence odds ratio of 0.49, CI of 0.28-0.84). This trend toward decreased risk in Harris County was not observed for isolated lower limb reduction defects (adjusted prevalence odds ratio of 0.50, 95% confidence interval: 0.22-1.12). ^ Conclusions. The birth prevalence of isolated congenital limb reduction defects in Texas is in the lower limits of the range of rates that have been reported by other authors for other states (Alabama, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah, Washington) and other countries (Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Denmark, Ecuador, England, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, Mexico, Norway, Paraguay, Peru, Spain, Scotland, Sweden, Switzerland, Uruguay, and Venezuela). In Texas, the birth prevalence of isolated congenital lower limb reduction defects was greater for males than females, while the birth prevalence of isolated congenital upper limb reduction defects was not significantly different between males and females. The reduced rates of limb reduction defects in Harris County warrant further investigation. This study has provided an important first step toward gaining etiologic understanding in the study of isolated congenital limb reduction defects. ^

Minimum income for healthy living

Objectives: We sought to estimate the costs of implementing the current recommendations for healthy choices for a mother with two young children in Atlanta, Georgia. ^ Methods: Current recommendations for healthy choices promoted by the federal government or other credible source were compiled and operationalized into specific conditions or behaviors. The costs of implementing these choices in Atlanta were estimated by using internet searches of retailers/suppliers, phone interviews, and direct observation. The least expensive option was chosen when options were available. ^ Results: Recommendations for choosing a healthy neighborhood, home, school, child care, food, physical activity, and maintaining healthy relationships as well as access to health care were considered. Total costs for this family of three totaled $38,181. Housing, child care, and health insurance contributed to 78% of the total costs. ^ Conclusions: The minimum income needed to choose healthy choices falls short of current wages, and eligibility levels and benefits for income support. ^

MEDICINE MAN IN TEXAS

The author George (Georgia?) Plunkett Red was the wife of Samuel Clark Red (1861-1940). Dr. Red was the son of Texas pioneer physician Dr. George Clark Red. Dr. Samuel Clark Red was “the county physician of Harris County, one of the organizers of the Harris County Medical Society, a fellow of the American College of Surgeons, and president of the Texas Medical Association.” Not much is known about the author, but given her husband’s position and family history, it can be surmised that she was interested in history and had access to some of the children of other pioneer medical families. There is a brief bibliography for each of the chapters. Part Two of the book consists of biographies of physicians from Texas Counties. Merle Weir, "RED, SAMUEL CLARK," Handbook of Texas Online (http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/fre09), accessed December 10, 2012. Published by the Texas State Historical Association.