<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_433"
                     title="Household Routines Linked to Lower Childhood Obesity (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.012"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/Parenting/tb/18340?impressionId=1265818752617"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Want to protect your preschooler from obesity?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Eat dinner as a family six or seven times a week, limit the time the child watches TV to less than two hours a day, and make sure he or she gets more than 10.5 hours of sleep a night.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Those three simple household routines are associated with an&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;almost 40% reduction in the risk of childhood obesity, according to Sarah Anderson, PhD, of Ohio State University College of Public Health in Columbus, and Robert Whitaker, MD, of Temple University in Philadelphia.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The association remained significant even in the face of other predictors of childhood obesity, such as maternal obesity or being in a single-parent family, the authors said in the March issue of &lt;em&gt;Pediatrics&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;I imagine people are going to want to know which of the routines is most important: Is it limited TV, is it dinner, is it adequate sleep?&quot; Anderson said in a statement.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;What this suggests is that you can&apos;t point to any one of these routines,&quot; she said. &quot;Each one appears to be associated with a lower risk of obesity, and having more of these routines appears to lower the risk further.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The findings are based on data collected in 2005 on 8,550 children born in the U.S. in 2001 who were part of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For the study, the 4-year-olds were considered to be obese if they were at or above the 95th percentile in weight for their age and sex.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, the authors reported, 18% of children were obese by that measure.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers found that 14.5% of the children in the study lived in families where all three of the routines were observed, and 12.4% in families where none took place.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Among children exposed to all three, 14.3% were obese, compared with 24.5% among those exposed to none of the routines, they found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In a multivariate analysis, children used to all three routines had an odds ratio for obesity of 0.63, compared with those who were exposed to none, the researchers found. (The 95% confidence interval was 0.46 to 0.87.)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Any two routines, again compared with none, had an odds ratio for obesity of 0.64, with a 95% confidence interval from 0.47 to 0.85.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A similar pattern was seen for one routine compared with none, but in the multivariate analysis the benefit was no longer statistically significant.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, in a univariate analysis, any single routine, compared with none, reduced the odds of obesity by between 23% and 25%, the authors found, and the odds did not change much when the presence or absence of the other two was factored in.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That finding suggests an &quot;independent association of each routine with obesity,&quot; the researchers wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The study is limited by elements of its design, the researchers said. The study was unable to account for differences in diet or physical activity, and the prevalence of the three routines was assessed by parent report, which might have introduced bias.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Information on types of foods served, how many people were present at dinner, concomitant television viewing along with the meal, advertising viewed on television, and quality of sleep was not available.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They also noted that the study is cross-sectional and can&apos;t be used to establish any causal relations between the three routines and obesity.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Nonetheless, they concluded, the three routines &quot;may be promising behavioral targets for counseling, given their association with obesity and their potential benefits beyond obesity prevention.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors said they had no disclosures.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_392"
                     title="Parents Often Err in Dosing Kids (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.011"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/Parenting/tb/18290?impressionId=1265818752617"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Adults tasked with giving their children liquid medications often gave them too much, especially when the dosing device was a cup instead of a spoon or oral syringe, researchers said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Asked to prepare a 5-mL dose for a child, adult caregivers in a study were almost always within 20% of the target when using a 5-mL syringe, according to a report in the February &lt;em&gt;Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But about 70% of the 302 parents in the trial put more than 6 mL in cups that were packaged with the medication, H. Shonna Yin, MD, of New York University, in New York City, and colleagues reported.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Cups with etched markings gave the adults nearly as much trouble, the researchers found, but droppers and dosing spoons were more accurate.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Yin and colleagues also found that dosing errors were nearly twice as common among caregivers who tested poorly for health literacy (adjusted OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.8).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Given that many liquid medications come with cups, it may be necessary to reconsider how products intended for young children are packaged, the researchers suggested.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Redesign of dosing devices as well as instructions for their use, with a focus on standardization and consistency, has the potential to decrease medication errors and improve safety and efficacy,&quot; Yin and colleagues wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers recruited adults who brought children to a pediatric clinic in New York&apos;s Bellevue Hospital in late 2008. Participants were given each of six dosing instruments in random order and asked to fill it with one teaspoon (5 mL) of acetaminophen suspension.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Some 95% of participants were the children&apos;s mothers, with the remaining 5% split between fathers and legal guardians. Most were Hispanic, foreign-born, and poor, and 56% spoke Spanish as their first language. Half were not high school graduates.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The instruments included the cup packaged with Children&apos;s Tylenol Suspension Liquid, which has printed markings on the side; a cup with etched markings bought from a local drugstore; a 5-mL dropper; a 10-mL dosing spoon; a 5-mL syringe; and a 5-mL syringe with bottle adapter.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Mean doses actually put into the cups were 6.7 mL (SD 1.7) for those with printed markings and 7.0 (SD 3.2) for those with etched markings.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Although the mean doses were similar with these devices, fewer parents made errors when using the etched cup. Some 50% of doses measured with it were in the range of 4 to 6 mL, compared with only 30.5% of doses put into the cup with printed markings.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Small errors (20% to 40% more or less than the target) were also less common with the etched cup: 26.6% of doses, versus 43.7% of doses measured with the printed cup. But the rate of large errors was nearly the same with the two cups, at about 25%.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;With the other instruments, mean doses were close to the target, ranging from 4.6 for the oral syringe with bottle adapter to 5.5 for the spoon.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;From 86% to 94% of doses prepared with these devices were within 20% of the 5-mL target. When errors were made, they were usually small and on the low side of the target, Yin and colleagues found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Adjusted odds ratios for making large errors, with the oral syringe as reference, were: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;Cup with printed markings: 7.3 (95% CI 4.1 to 13.2)&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Cup with etched markings: 6.3 (95% CI 3.5 to 11.2)&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Dropper: 0.8 (95% CI 0.5 to 1.5)&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Dosing spoon: 0.3 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.9)&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Oral syringe with bottle adapter: 0.8 (95% CI 0.5 to 1.5)&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But the spoon was more often associated with dosing errors, both small and large, than the syringe, with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.7 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.7).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Adjustments included caregivers&apos; age, relationship to child, marital status, language, ethnicity, U.S. birth, socioeconomic status, presence of young child, and presence of child with a chronic medical problem.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Caregivers were given the Newest Vital Sign test to evaluate their health literacy, which turned out to be a factor in dosing errors, the researchers found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Scores of 0 or 1 reflected a high likelihood of limited literacy, 2 or 3 was considered &quot;possible limited literacy,&quot; and 4 to 6 was deemed adequate literacy.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;About 40% of participants had scores of 0 or 1 and 38% scored in the range of 2 to 3.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Both levels of low health literacy predicted dosing errors, and poor literacy was also significantly associated with increased risk of large errors.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Adjusted odds ratios for any dosing error and large errors associated with poor literacy were 1.7 (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.02) and 2.3 (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.01), respectively.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Possible limited literacy predicted any dosing error and large errors with adjusted odds ratios of 1.6 (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.04) and 1.9 (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.07), respectively.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;These findings on health literacy and medication errors have important implications for the design of dosing instruments, Yin and colleagues indicated.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Provision of instruments designed to place fewer literacy demands on families is one strategy to decrease dosing errors,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Limitations to the study included its setting in a clinic, which may not reflect parents&apos; performance at home; the largely Hispanic immigrant sample with low socioeconomic status; and the use of a written test to assess health literacy, which does not measure verbal comprehension and other skills that may contribute to health literacy.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was funded from internal sources. Yin received partial support from the Pfizer Fellowship in Health Literacy/Clear Health Communication.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;No potential conflicts of interest were reported.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20090101_1_187"
                     title="Kids&apos; May Have Psychological Upheaval During Mother&apos;s Cancer"
                     score="-0.005"
                     href="