Search

This article reviews the various settings in which infants, children, and adolescents experience pain during acute medical procedures and issues related to referral of children to pain management teams. In addition, self-report, reports by others, physiological monitoring, and direct observation methods of assessment of pain and related constructs are discussed and recommendations are provided. Pharmacological, other medical approaches, and empirically supported cognitive behavioral interventions are reviewed. Salient features of the interventions are discussed, and recommendations are made for necessary components of effective treatment interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To summarize studies testing the efficacy and safety of single-dose acetaminophen and ibuprofen for treating children's pain or fever. Data Sources Reports were gathered by searching computerized databases (from their inception through May 2002) and registries, relevant journals, and bibliographies of key articles. Study Selection Seventeen blinded, randomized controlled trials with children (<18 years) receiving either drug to treat fever or moderate to severe pain. Data Extraction Under a fixed-effects model, outcome measures for an initial single dose of ibuprofen vs acetaminophen were the risk ratio for achieving more than 50% of maximum pain relief, effect size for febrile temperature reduction, and risk ratio for minor and major harm. Data Synthesis Ibuprofen (4-10 mg/kg) and acetaminophen (7-15 mg/kg) showed comparable efficacy (3 pain relief trials; 186 children). The risk ratio point estimates was 1.14 (95%confidence interval [CI], 0.82-1.58) at 2 hours after receiving the dose, and 1.11 (95% CI, 0.89-1.38) at 4 hours. Ibuprofen (5-10 mg/kg) reduced temperature more than acetaminophen (10-15 mg/kg) at 2, 4, and 6 hours after treatment (respective weighted-effect sizes: 0.19 [95% CI, 0.05-0.33], 0.31 [95% CI, 0.19-0.44], and 0.33 [95% CI, 0.19-0.47]) (9 fever trials; 1078 children). For ibuprofen 10 mg/kg (acetaminophen, 10-15 mg/kg), corresponding effect sizes were 0.34 (95% CI, 0.12-0.56), 0.81 (95% CI, 0.56-1.03), and 0.66 (95% CI, 0.44-0.87). There was no evidence the drugs differed from each other (or placebo) in incidence of minor or major harm (17 safety trials; 1820 children). Conclusions In children, single doses of ibuprofen (4-10 mg/kg) and acetaminophen (7-15 mg/kg) have similar efficacy for relieving moderate to severe pain, and similar safety as analgesics or antipyretics. Ibuprofen (5-10 mg/kg) was a more effective antipyretic than acetaminophen (10-15 mg/kg) at 2, 4, and 6 hours posttreatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This paper describes the development and the psychometric properties of a new measure designed to assess dieting-related competitiveness among adolescent girls. Method: Three samples of girls completed the DPC and several other scales. Data analyses examined scale content and structure, and reliability and validity of the DPC. Results: The Dieting Peer Competitiveness (DPC) scale has a coherent and easily interpretable 2-factor structure. The measure has good reliability (internal consistency, test–retest, and split-half) and validity (convergent, divergent, and discriminant). In addition, with increasing commitment to dieting, competitiveness scores significantly increased. Conclusions: The new 2-Factor Dieting Peer Competitiveness (DPC) scale assesses the degree to which an individual compares her appearance, and what she eats (or avoids) with that of her friends. DPC scores are useful for distinguishing between serious and non-serious dieters. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and Eating Disorders Association. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Provides information on a study which examined the direct effects of patient health factors and carer cognitive factors on carer negative affect. Method used in the study; Results and discussion.

Presents a study that discussed the findings from the structural equations modeling that was carried out to evaluate the validity and the usefulness of the model of dieting proposed by G.F. Huon and K.G. Strong in 1998. Discussion on social influence; Variables of vulnerability disposition; Pattern of responses.