JoVE Visualize What is visualize?
Stop Reading. Start Watching.
Advanced Search
Stop Reading. Start Watching.
Regular Search
Find video protocols related to scientific articles indexed in Pubmed.
A Structured End-of-Life Curriculum for Neonatal-Perinatal Postdoctoral Fellows.
Am J Hosp Palliat Care
PUBLISHED: 04-19-2014
Show Abstract
Hide Abstract
Death in tertiary care neonatal intensive care units is a common occurrence. Despite recent advances in pediatric palliative education, evidence indicates that physicians are poorly prepared to care for dying infants and their families. Numerous organizations recommend increased training in palliative and end-of-life care for pediatric physicians. The purpose of this study is to develop a structured end-of-life curriculum for neonatal-perinatal postdoctoral fellows based on previously established principles and curricular guidelines on end-of-life care in the pediatric setting. Results demonstrate statistically significant curriculum effectiveness in increasing fellow knowledge regarding patient qualification for comfort care and withdrawal of support (P = .03). Although not statistically significant, results suggest the curriculum may have improved fellows' knowledge of appropriate end-of-life medical management, comfort with addressing the family, and patient pain assessment and control.
Related JoVE Video
The history of ethical decision making in neonatal intensive care.
J Intensive Care Med
PUBLISHED: 05-23-2011
Show Abstract
Hide Abstract
Neonatal ethics has focused on 2 questions: is withholding potentially live-saving treatment from neonates ethically justified? and if so, who has the authority to decide? This article details how these questions developed and provides a description of the possible answers. In the first section, we review a selection of seminal articles by noted authors in the fields of ethics, medicine, and law. The second section provides a detailed account of the development of the Baby Doe Regulations and the impact they had on neonatal ethics, with particular attention to the emergence of the Best Interest Standard as a guideline for decision making. In the last section, we review the landmark position statements by the American Academy of Pediatric (AAP), and the focus on evidence-based decision making. We conclude that forgoing life-saving treatment is ethically justified. However, this requires a rigorous evidence-based process and is limited by the Best Interest Standard. The second question is more difficult to answer, but we feel that in light of legal limitations, physicians acting as both the infant advocate and a proxy for the state, decide what falls in the range of acceptable treatment options, with the parents free to choose within that range.
Related JoVE Video
Antibiotic prophylaxis improves Ureaplasma-associated lung disease in suckling mice.
Pediatr. Res.
PUBLISHED: 04-25-2009
Show Abstract
Hide Abstract
Ureaplasma infection is associated with increased lung disease in high-risk neonates. Our goal was to determine the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on Ureaplasma and oxygen-induced lung disease in newborn mice. In animal model development and prophylaxis experiments, pups were randomly assigned to either 0.8 or 0.21 inspired oxygen concentration [fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2)] from 1 to 14 d of age and either Ureaplasma or 10 B media daily from 1 to 3 d. All pups were observed for growth and survival. Surviving pups had culture and PCR evaluated for blood, bronchoalveolar lavage, and lung, and lung weights, pathology, morphometry, histology, and immunohistochemistry were determined. In prophylaxis experiments, erythromycin, azithromycin, or normal saline was given for the first 3 d, and minimum inhibitory concentration and pharmacokinetics were determined. In model development, 0.8 FiO2 and Ureaplasma infection survival and growth were significantly decreased and lung edema and inflammation were significantly increased. In prophylaxis experiments, we observed significantly improved survival and growth with azithromycin versus normal saline controls, whereas erythromycin was not significantly different from controls, and decreased inflammatory response with azithromycin versus normal saline and erythromycin. In a neonatal mouse model of Ureaplasma and oxygen-induced lung disease, appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis improves survival and morbidity and decreases lung inflammation.
Related JoVE Video
Treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in neonatal mice: lysostaphin versus vancomycin.
Pediatr. Res.
PUBLISHED: 01-08-2009
Show Abstract
Hide Abstract
S. aureus is a significant cause of late-onset sepsis in neonates. Increasing antibiotic resistance, however, requires additional treatment options. Lysostaphin, an endopeptidase, has that potential. The objective of this study is to compare lysostaphin versus vancomycin against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in a neonatal mouse model. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) against MRSA strain USA300 were determined using standard methods. To determine pharmacokinetics, neonatal pups received either vancomycin or lysostaphin intraperitoneal and serum samples were obtained. To evaluate efficacy, pups were infected s.c. and littermates randomized to receive either saline, vancomycin, or lysostaphin intraperitoneal. Pups were observed for survival and growth. Quantitative blood cultures were obtained 24 h after infection. The MIC/MBC for vancomycin and lysostaphin were 0.71/1.19 microg/mL and <0.008/0.015 microg/mL, respectively. Mean lysostaphin concentrations ranged from 2.34 to 8.92 microg/mL. Mean vancomycin concentrations ranged from 1.72 to 11.2 microg/mL. Lysostaphin improved survival compared with placebo (p < 0.00001) and vancomycin (p < 0.03). There was no significant difference in growth among the groups. All treatment regimens resulted in less bacteremia compared with placebo (p < 0.0001). Lysostaphin appears to be more effective than vancomycin in treating MRSA in a neonatal model.
Related JoVE Video

What is Visualize?

JoVE Visualize is a tool created to match the last 5 years of PubMed publications to methods in JoVE's video library.

How does it work?

We use abstracts found on PubMed and match them to JoVE videos to create a list of 10 to 30 related methods videos.

Video X seems to be unrelated to Abstract Y...

In developing our video relationships, we compare around 5 million PubMed articles to our library of over 4,500 methods videos. In some cases the language used in the PubMed abstracts makes matching that content to a JoVE video difficult. In other cases, there happens not to be any content in our video library that is relevant to the topic of a given abstract. In these cases, our algorithms are trying their best to display videos with relevant content, which can sometimes result in matched videos with only a slight relation.