Paediatrics

Dr Mihiri Silva
Clinical Articles iconClinical Articles

If you imagine a teething child, what do you see? An irritable tot with a fever, in pain, and generally unwell? Teething’s a normal developmental process that people have long associated with illness. However, the evidence says otherwise. How strong is this evidence? Is there anything you can do to help a teething child? What about teething gels and teething necklaces? Teething is when new teeth emerge through the gums, and usually starts at about six months of age. A review of 16 studies found that although teething was linked with signs and symptoms, these were usually mild involving gum irritation, irritability, and drooling. Although body temperature may be slightly raised, the review found poor evidence to suggest teething caused fever. Many symptoms linked to teething, like irritability, sleep disturbance and drooling, are difficult to measure objectively and are based on what parents report, which is subjective and may be inaccurate. And, as teething comes and goes, and its timing is relatively unpredictable, recording even measurable symptoms like temperature changes in a reproducible, reliable way is virtually impossible. So teething problems seem to be over-reported in the types of studies that rely on people remembering what happened.

What else could cause the symptoms?

Other biological triggers may in fact explain the symptoms traditionally linked to teething. Teething coincides with normal changes in children’s immunity; the mother’s antibodies are transferred to babies in pregnancy and help protect the baby in the first 6-12 months of life, but start to wane at about the same time as teething. This, together with behavioural changes as infants start to explore their surroundings, increases the chances of catching viral infections with symptoms like those reported for teething. Separation anxiety and normal changes in sleep patterns may also account for irritability and sleep disturbances, which may be mistakenly attributed to teething. As teething symptoms are generally likely to be mild and focused on the mouth, parents are warned against presuming that signs of illness in other parts of the body are due to teething. That’s because this may delay the detection of potentially serious infections that may need medical attention. It may also delay parents getting help settling their child to sleep.

How about teething gels?

The search for solutions to the perceived problem of teething may lead parents to pin their hopes on gels, toys and other products, none of which have been scientifically assessed to alleviate teething symptoms. Nevertheless, teething gels usually contain a variety of ingredients that help relieve supposed teething-related symptoms. Some, such as the recently discontinued Adelaide Women’s and Children’s Hospital Teething Gel, contain the anaesthetic lidocaine. Very little lidocaine is absorbed into the body when applied to the gums, and only minor complications like vomiting have been reported in Australia. However, accidental swallowing and applying too much can lead to poisoning, resulting in seizures, brain injury, and heart problems. The decision to discontinue the gel follows a 2014 warning issued by the US Food and Drug Administration against using teething gels with topical anaesthetics, after reports of infant and child hospitalisation and death. There have also been warnings about teething gels containing benzocaine. This is another anaesthetic applied to the gums that can lead to a dangerous and fatal blood condition called methaemoglobinaemia, which affects the blood’s ability to carry oxygen. Another common ingredient in popular teething gels is choline salicylate, an anti-inflammatory similar to aspirin. This increases the risk of liver disease and brain injury if the child eats too much. This may also carry the risk of Reye syndrome, a rare but serious condition that can lead to seizures, loss of consciousness and death. Reye syndrome has been linked to the use of aspirin in children, particularly during viral infections. A case of suspected teething gel-induced Reye syndrome in 2008 led to the products being contraindicated (warned against) in children in the UK. A number of young Australian children who used too much salicylate-containing teething gel have also reportedly been hospitalised with side-effects. But the products are still available in Australia.

How about ‘natural’ products?

Although a range of “natural” and homeopathic teething solutions are heavily marketed to parents of young children, these too have risks. A manufacturer recently recalled a range of natural teething gels after cases of reported poisoning. And US regulatory authorities found the same range contained higher than reported levels of belladonna, a poisonous plant that despite its dangers is used as a homeopathic pain killer and sedative. In searching for “natural” therapies, parents are also turning to amber teething necklaces that supposedly relieve teething symptoms. Amber is a fossilised tree resin that has historically been suggested to have anti-inflammatory properties. However, several widely reported cases of strangulation have led to warnings from both US and Australian regulatory authorities. There is currently no scientific evidence these necklaces work. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) says amber and other “teething” necklaces, even when mothers wear them, are:
…colourful and playful in design, and may be confused with toys.
All toys for children aged 36 months and below, including teething toys, are strictly regulated by Australian standards. As the ACCC warns, teething necklaces are unlikely to fulfil this requirement.

What to do?

So what are the best options to relieve teething symptoms? With a lack of any good-quality evidence to recommend any specific therapy, experts suggest the best remedy is affection and attention. Rubbing a clean finger on the gum, or applying gentle, firm pressure with a cooled (but not frozen), clean washcloth or teething ring may provide some relief. Although it’s hard to know exactly how these work, they are unlikely to lead to serious problems. Teething can be a difficult time, but it will eventually pass. In the meantime, it is important that parents avoid falling prey to supposed cures that are not only unproven, but are also potentially dangerous. Mihiri Silva, Paediatric dentist, Senior Lecturer and Post-doctoral Research Fellow, Murdoch Children's Research Institute This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Katie Marks
Monographs iconMonographs

This article provides a framework for assessing a child’s nutrition and intake, identifying if there are problems and practical strategies to help manage these.

Expert/s: Katie Marks
Dr David Kanowski
Clinical Articles iconClinical Articles

Short or tall stature is considered to be height below or above the 3rd or 97th percentile respectively. Abnormal growth velocity, showing on serial height measurements, is also an important finding. Growth charts based on the US NHANES study are available from www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/charts.htm. Copies of growth charts, together with height velocity and puberty charts are available at the Australasian Paediatric Endocrine Group (APEG) website, https://apeg.org.au/clinical-resources-links/growth-growth-charts/. Local Australian growth charts are currently not available. The height of the parents should be considered in evaluating the child. Expected final height can be calculated from the parents’ heights as follows: For boys: Expected final height = mean parental height + 6.5cm For girls: Expected final height = mean parental height – 6.5cm Assessment of bone age (hand/wrist) is also useful. With familial short or tall stature, bone age matches chronological age. Conversely, in a child with pathological short stature, bone age is often well behind chronological age, and may continue to fall if the disease is untreated. The stage of puberty is relevant, as it will affect the likely final height. A short child who is still pre-pubertal (with unfused epiphyses) is more likely to achieve an adequate final height than one in late puberty.

Short stature

Causes to consider include:
  • Malnutrition, the commonest cause worldwide
  • Chronic disease, for example, liver/renal failure, chronic inflammatory diseases
  • Growth hormone deficiency, with/without other features of hypopituitarism
  • Other endocrinopathies, for example, hypothyroidism, (rarely) Cushing’s syndrome
  • Genetic/syndromic causes, for example, Down, Turner, Noonan, Prader-Willi syndromes
  • Depression or social deprivation should also be considered
  • Idiopathic short stature is a diagnosis of exclusion
Appropriate initial screening investigations can include liver and renal function tests, blood count, iron studies, thyroid function tests, coeliac disease screen, thyroid function tests, urinalysis (including pH) and karyotype. Other specialised tests may be needed, based on suspicion. In the lower range, IGF-1 shows considerable overlap between normal and abnormal levels, especially in the setting of poor nutrition. Small children tend to have low levels, regardless of whether growth hormone deficiency is the underlying cause. Random growth hormone levels vary widely because of pulsatile secretion and are also not a reliable test. Therefore, unless there is a clear underlying genetic or radiological diagnosis associated with clearly low IGF-1, stimulation testing is typically required to formally diagnose growth hormone deficiency and may be essential for funding of growth hormone treatment.

Tall stature

Causes include:
  • Chromosomal abnormalities, for example, Klinefelter syndrome (qv), XYY syndrome
  • Marfan syndrome
  • Homocystinuria
  • Hyperthyroidism
  • Growth hormone excess (see Acromegaly; Growth hormone; Insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1))
  • Precocious puberty
  • Other syndromic causes, for example, Sotos, Beckwith-Wiedemann syndromes
  • Familial tall stature (predicted final height should match mid-parental height)
Investigation of stature is a specialised area and early discussion with a paediatric endocrinologist is indicated if there is clinical concern, for example, height below the 3rd percentile at age five, slow growth (crossing two percentile lines away from the median), significant height/ weight discrepancy (more than two centile lines), suspected/confirmed metabolic or genetic abnormality, or clinical evidence of malnutrition or marked obesity.

References

  1. Cohen P, Rogol AD, Deal CL, Saenger P, Reiter EO, Ross JL, et al. Consensus statement on the diagnosis and treatment of children with idiopathic short stature: a summary of the Growth Hormone Research Society, the Lawson Wilkins Pediatric Endocrine Society, and the European Society for Paediatric Endocrinology workshop. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008 Nov; 93(11): 4210-7. DOI: [10.1210/jc.2008-0509]
  2. Nwosu BU, Lee MM. Evaluation of short and tall stature in children. Am Fam Physician. 2008 Sep 1; 78(5): 597-604. Available from: www.aafp.org/afp/2008/0901/p597.pdf.
  General Practice Pathology is a regular column each authored by an Australian expert pathologist on a topic of particular relevance and interest to practising GPs. The authors provide this editorial free of charge as part of an educational initiative developed and coordinated by Sonic Pathology.
Dr Rupert Hinds
Monographs iconMonographs

This article discusses the General Practice management of gastro-oesophageal reflux in infants.

Dr Rupert Hinds
Monographs iconMonographs

This article discusses the diagnosis and management of infantile colic.

Dr Linda Calabresi
Clinical Articles iconClinical Articles

New study findings confirm what many parents already believe, introducing solids early helps babies sleep through the night. The UK randomised trial, published in JAMA Pediatrics showed the early introduction of solids into an infant’s diet (from three months of age) was associated with longer sleep duration, less frequent waking at night and a reduction in parents reporting major sleep problems in their child. Researchers analysed data collected as part of the Enquiring About Tolerance study, which included on-going parent-reported assessments on over 1300 infants from England and Wales who were exclusively breastfed to three months of age. At baseline, there were no significant differences in sleeping patterns between those infants who were then introduced to solids early and those who remained exclusively breastfed to six months, as per the World Health Organisation recommendation. However, at six months the difference between was significant. “At age six months,..[those babies who had started solids] were sleeping 17 minutes longer at night, equating to two hours of extra sleep per week, and were waking two fewer times at night per week,” the study authors said. “Most significantly, at this point, [early introduction group] families were reporting half the rate of very serious sleep problems,” they added, saying the results confirm the link between poor infant sleep and parental quality of life. And the findings contradict previous claims that a baby’s poor sleep habits and frequent waking has nothing to do with hunger. The study found that those babies with the highest weight gain between birth and three months (when they were enrolled in the study) were the most likely to be waking at night. “This is consistent with the idea that their rapid weight gain was leading to an enhanced caloric and nutritional requirement, resulting in hunger and disrupted sleep,” they said. Overall, it seems that the study has simply proved what many parents had already suspected. The study authors referred to previous research that showed that, despite WHO and British guidelines recommending babies be exclusively breastfed to six months, three quarters of British mothers introduce solids before five months and 26% report night waking as influencing this decision. Interestingly, recent evidence with regard reducing the risk of allergy and atopy has seen some organisations including our own Australian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy, recommending infants be introduced to solids earlier than six months. The authors of this study suggest that parents following these newer guidelines might find they get the added benefit of more sleep. “With recent guidelines advocating introducing solids from age four to six months in some or all infants, our results suggest that improved sleep may be a concomitant benefit,” they concluded. Ref: JAMA Pediatr. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.0739

Dr Linda Calabresi
Clinical Articles iconClinical Articles

It seemed such a godsend, didn’t it? Omeprazole for severe infant reflux. A massive improvement on the previous advice to elevate the head of the cot and nurse upright. But since it first appeared in guidelines, there have been studies, reports and opinions cautioning against the overuse of PPIs citing everything from them being ineffectual to their potential to predispose the child to allergy. Now it looks like there is yet another reason why we need to think again before prescribing a PPI for the distressed infant with reflux and their exhausted parents. According to an article recently appearing in a JAMA network publication, recent study findings cast more doubt on the safety of this treatment option, suggesting that giving PPIs to infants less than six months of age is associated with a higher risk of bone fractures later in childhood. The US researchers analysed data, including pharmacy outpatient data from over 850,000 children born within the Military Health Care System over a 12 year period. According to findings presented at a Pediatric Academic Societies Meeting earlier this year, children given a PPI in the first six months of their life had a 22% increased risk of fracture in the following 5-6 years. And if, for some reason they were also given a H2 blocker the risk jumped to 31%. Interestingly if they only received the H2 blocker there was no significant increase in fracture risk. The study also showed the longer the duration of PPI use the greater the risk of fracture. It is thought that the mechanism behind the increased fracture risk relates to the PPI-induced decrease in gastric acid causing a reduction in calcium absorption. While the study is still going through the process of peer-review and is yet to be published, the study’s lead author, US Air Force Capt Laura Malchodi (MD) said the findings suggest increased caution should be exercised with regard these drugs. “Our study adds to the growing body of evidence suggesting [acid-reducing] medications are not safe for children, especially very young children,” she told delegates. “[PPIs] should only be prescribed to treat confirmed serious cases of more severe, symptomatic, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and for the shortest length of time needed.” Ref: JAMA published online Sept 29, 2017. Doi:10.1001/jama.2017.12160

Prof Wendy Hall
Clinical Articles iconClinical Articles

How much sleep, and what type of sleep, do our children need to thrive? In parenting, there aren’t often straightforward answers, and sleep tends to be contentious. There are questions about whether we are overstating children’s sleep problems. Yet we all know from experience how much better we feel, and how much more ready we are to take on the day, when we have had an adequate amount of good quality sleep. I was one of a panel of experts at the American Academy of Sleep Medicine to review over 800 academic papers examining relationships between children’s sleep duration and outcomes. Our findings suggested optimal sleep durations to promote children’s health. These are the optimal hours (including naps) that children should sleep in every 24-hour cycle. And yet these types of sleep recommendations are still controversial. Many of us have friends or acquaintances who say that they can function perfectly on four hours of sleep, when it is recommended that adults get seven to nine hours per night.

Optimal sleep hours: The science

We look for science to support our recommendations. Yet we cannot deprive young children of sleep for prolonged periods to see whether they have more problems than those sleeping the recommended amounts. Some experiments have been conducted with teenagers when they have agreed to short periods of sleep deprivation followed by regular sleep durations. In one example, teenagers who got inadequate sleep time had worse moods and more difficulty controlling negative emotions. Those findings are important because children and adolescents need to learn how to regulate their attention and manage their negative emotions and behaviour. Being able to self-regulate can enhance school adjustment and achievement. With younger children, our studies have had to rely on examining relationships between their sleep duration and quality of their sleep and negative health outcomes. For example, when researchers have followed the same children over time, behavioural sleep problems in infancy have been associated with greater difficulty regulating emotions at two to three years of age. Persistent sleep problems also predicted increased difficulty for the same children, followed at two to three years of age, to control their negative emotions from birth to six or seven years and for eight- to nine-year-old children to focus their attention.

Optimal sleep quality: The science

Not only has the duration of children’s sleep been demonstrated to be important but also the quality of their sleep. Poor sleep quality involves problems with starting and maintaining sleep. It also involves low satisfaction with sleep and feelings of being rested. It has been linked to poorer school performance. Kindergarten children with poor sleep quality (those who take a long time to fall asleep and who wake in the night) demonstrated more aggressive behaviour and were represented more negatively by their parents. Infants’ night waking was associated with more difficulties regulating attention and difficulty with behavioural control at three and four years of age.

From diabetes to self-harm

The Consensus Statement of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine suggested that children need enough sleep on a regular basis to promote optimal health. The expert panel linked inadequate sleep duration to children’s attention and learning problems and to increased risk for accidents, injuries, hypertension, obesity, diabetes and depression. Insufficient sleep in teenagers has also been related to increased risk of self-harm, suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts.

Parent behaviours

Children’s self-regulation skills can be developed through self-soothing to sleep at settling time and back to sleep after any night waking. Evidence has consistently pointed to the importance of parents’ behaviours not only in assisting children to achieve adequate sleep duration but also good sleep quality. Parents can introduce techniques such as sleep routines and consistent sleep schedules that promote healthy sleep. They can also monitor children to ensure that bedtime is actually lights out without electronic devices in their room. The ConversationIn summary, there are recommended hours of sleep that are associated with better outcomes for children at all ages and stages of development. High sleep quality is also linked to children’s abilities to control their negative behaviour and focus their attention — both important skills for success at school and in social interactions. Wendy Hall, Professor, Associate Director Graduate Programs, UBC School of Nursing, University of British Columbia This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
Dr Robyn Littlewood
Monographs iconMonographs

This article discusses the proper identification and management of overweight and obese children in general practice.