The immunological response of patients with cryptococcal meningitis (CM), particularly those not known to be immunocompromised, has generated an increased interest recently. Although CM is an infection with significant rates of morbidity and mortality, its sequelae may also include a post-infectious inflammatory response syndrome (PIIRS) in patients who have already achieved microbiological control. PIIRS can cause substantial immune-mediated damage to the central nervous system resulting in long-term neurological disability or even death. Steroids have been used successfully in the management of PIIRS in adults. In this report, we present the case of a previously healthy adolescent male with Cryptococcus gattii meningitis who experienced neurological deterioration due to PIIRS after the initiation of antifungal therapy. Immunological workup did not demonstrate any frank underlying immunodeficiencies, and genetic primary immunodeficiency screening was unremarkable. He was treated with steroids and recovered clinically; however, intermittent inflammatory episodes needed to be managed through several flares of symptoms. In the setting of the current literature, we discuss the management and monitoring of PIIRS in a pediatric patient, along with considerations of targeted future therapies.

Objectives

The majority of newborns in the United States receive intramuscular (IM) vitamin K for prophylaxis against vitamin K deficiency bleeding (VKDB). Oral vitamin K is less effective than IM vitamin K in preventing VKDB but is widely used in Europe and by some in the United States when parents refuse IM vitamin K for their newborn. Our aim was to assess the practices, opinions, and knowledge of newborn clinicians regarding oral vitamin K prophylaxis when parents refuse IM vitamin K.

Methods

We conducted an electronic survey of newborn clinicians from 3 academic medical centers in California, Iowa, and Connecticut. Descriptive statistics and χ² tests were performed.

Results

Of 160 newborn clinicians at 3 sites, 110 (69%) completed the survey. Of respondents, 58 (53%) believed the incidence of IM vitamin K refusal is increasing and had prescribed or recommended oral vitamin K at least once. Regarding knowledge, 32 (28%) and 23 (20%) respondents did not know whether oral vitamin K decreases the risk of early- and late-onset VKDB, respectively. There were no significant differences in opinions, knowledge, or practices across institutions or practice settings (NICU, well-newborn nursery, or both) (P > .05).

Conclusions

Our study findings suggest that newborn clinicians may lack knowledge about the effectiveness of oral vitamin K in preventing VKDB. More information is needed about oral vitamin K regimens and outcomes of newborns who receive oral vitamin K.

Objective

Despite American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations, some parents refuse intramuscular (IM) vitamin K as prophylaxis against vitamin K deficiency bleeding for their newborns. The purpose of our study was to describe attitudes and perceptions of parents who choose to defer IM vitamin K for their newborns.

Methods

Using qualitative methodology, we conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with parents of newborns in 3 hospitals in Connecticut and California. We used the grounded theory approach and the constant comparative method until saturation was reached.

Results

Nineteen participants (17 mothers and 2 fathers) of 17 newborns were interviewed; 14 newborns did not receive IM vitamin K due to refusal by the parents, and for 3 newborns IM vitamin K administration was delayed due to initial hesitation by the parents. Four major themes emerged: 1) risk-to-benefit ratio, where parents refused IM vitamin K due to a perceived risk to their newborn from preservatives, for example; 2) "natural" approaches, which led to seeking oral vitamin K or increasing the mother's own prenatal dietary vitamin K intake; 3) placement of trust and mistrust, which involved mistrust of the medical and pharmaceutical community with overlapping concerns about vaccines and trust of self, like-minded allopathic and non-allopathic health care providers, the social circle, the internet, and social media; and 4) informed by experiences, reflecting hospital experiences with prior pregnancies and communication with health care providers.

Conclusions

Parents' perception of risk, preference for alternative options, trust, and communication with health care providers were pivotal factors when making decisions about IM vitamin K.

Objective

To increase understanding of current practices and perceptions of family-centered rounds (FCR) by providers for limited English-proficient (LEP) families relative to English-proficient families.

Methods

Using grounded theory methodology, we conducted ethnographic observations of FCR for LEP and English-proficient families on the pediatric wards at an urban teaching hospital. Focused coding of observation fieldnotes was performed independently, followed by regular group meetings to discuss discrepancies, refine codes, and identify theoretical direction. Data informed development of an interview guide used to conduct interviews with pediatric physicians, nurses, and interpreters. The iterative analysis process continued with interview transcriptions.

Results

FCR of 36 unique patient families were observed, of which 10 were LEP families. We conducted 20 interviews with 7 residents, 3 attendings, 5 nurses, and 5 interpreters. Major themes included: 1) standardization of FCR is needed to address equity issues for LEP families, 2) redefining the roles of medical interpreters would enhance the interpersonal interactions and relationships between families and health care providers, and 3) improving resources to allow interpreters to be used consistently will increase equity for LEP families.

Conclusions

Many differences exist in FCR for LEP versus English-proficient families. FCR for LEP families may be optimized with standardization and training, redefining the interpreters' roles, and improving access to interpreters.

Objectives

Low-income, first-time mothers generally breastfeed exclusively and, overall, for a shorter average duration than high-income, multiparous mothers. A potential barrier to breastfeeding success is access to a breast pump for home use. In this pilot study, we estimated the effect of providing a manual breast pump during birth hospitalization for home use on any/exclusive breastfeeding and investigated participant attitudes about manual pumps and their breastfeeding experiences.

Methods

Sixty low-income, first-time mothers were enrolled in a pilot randomized controlled trial. One-half received a manual breast pump and the other half received an attention control. Breastfeeding exclusivity, duration, and use of the manual pump were assessed at 6 and 12 weeks. Qualitative interviews regarding the breastfeeding experience were completed. Thirty-one women answered 13 questions that were then transcribed, coded, and grouped into themes.

Results

Participants who were randomized to manual breast pump receipt during birth hospitalization had increased manual pump use at 6 weeks (13/19 [68%] versus controls 5/17 [29%]), there was no effect of pump receipt on any nor exclusive breastfeeding at 12 weeks. In qualitative analysis of the overall breastfeeding experience, participants expressed a need for additional support and had conflicting attitudes regarding breastfeeding and the pumping experience.

Conclusions

Manual breast pump receipt in hospital among low-income, first-time mothers did not affect breastfeeding exclusivity or duration. Participants reported that early and ongoing lactation support is essential. Strategies to improve breastfeeding outcomes low-income, first-time mothers are needed.