An 18-month-old girl is brought in to the ED by ambulance after her grandmother was unable to wake her from an unusually long nap. The grandmother reports that the child had not been ill that morning. After repeated questioning, she admits that the child was found earlier in the day holding her pillbox. She does not have the pillbox with her and does not remember the names of all of her medications. On examination, the child is breathing shallowly. In response to painful stimuli, the girl moans and withdraws, but does not open her eyes. The remainder of her physical examination is normal, without fever or evidence of trauma. The resident physician asks what initial testing should be performed. As the team applies monitor leads, obtains intravenous access, and administers oxygen to this lethargic toddler, you order a stat ECG and glucose level. As you prepare for possible intubation, you consider medications that could be fatal in a small dose, such as opioids, sedatives, cardiac drugs, and hypoglycemic agents. Could ingestion of a small amount of the grand-mother’s medication be fatal in this toddler? Is it appropriate to give activated charcoal at this time?
A 3-year-old boy is referred to the ED by his pediatrician. He arrives with an x-ray that was taken earlier in the day. The parents state that the child came to them holding his throat and saying that he had swallowed something, although they are not sure what it was. Soon afterward, he refused to eat and they took him to his doctor. On examination, the patient is afebrile, with normal vital signs, and no respiratory distress. His oropharynx and lungs are clear. You wonder what you should look for on the previous imaging. Should you obtain further radiographic studies? Is a surgical consultation indicated? Can he be safely discharged for observation at home?
A 15-year-old adolescent girl is brought in by her family for a possible suicide attempt. The patient’s friend received a text in which the patient reported taking “a whole bottle of pain pills.” The family reports that an old bottle of acetaminophen with hydrocodone that was in the bathroom cabinet is now empty. The patient does not know exactly how many pills she took or at what time, but says that it was just after sending that text, which you see from her phone, was 4 hours ago. She is tearful and tired, but answers questions appropriately, and her physical examination is normal. Are there any specific drug levels that should be checked and, if so, when? Should you give naloxone, activated charcoal, or N-acetylcysteine? When can the patient be medically cleared for transfer to a psychiatric facility?
Each year in the United States, more than 50,000 children aged < 5 years present to emergency departments (EDs) with concern for unintentional medication exposure.1 In 2013, United States poison control centers received reports of 1,341,862 exposures in patients aged < 20 years, which accounted for 61.33% of all exposures.2 Pediatric exposures demonstrate a bimodal pattern, with unintentional exposures in young children and exposures that are more likely to be intentional in adolescents.2 Although the number of pediatric exposures is large, fatal pediatric ingestions are rare. Children aged < 6 years account for only 1.8% of all toxicologic fatalities reported to United States poison control centers, and patients aged < 20 years account for 6.1%.2 According to the most recent annual report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers, the most common pediatric ingestions reported to the National Poison Data System include cosmetics/personal care products (13.8%), household cleaning substances (10.4%), analgesics (9.8%), foreign bodies/ toys/miscellaneous (6.9%), and topical preparations (6.1%).2 Prescription medications most responsible for injury and fatality in children are opioids, sedative/hypnotics, and cardiovascular drugs.3 Certain medications and household substances are known for a high risk of fatality upon ingestion, even if only a small amount is ingested by a small child.4 (See Table 1.) In addition, ingestions of magnetic objects and button batteries have become an increasing source of morbidity and mortality.5
Ingestion cases pose several challenges to the emergency clinician. Even when a potentially toxic ingestion has been reported, the exact agent, formulation, quantity, or time of ingestion may be unknown. More often, occult ingestion is only one item on an extensive list of differential diagnoses for a critically ill child who presents with altered mental status, respiratory distress, cardiovascular instability, or metabolic derangement. Although physical examination findings and information gleaned by electrocardiographic, laboratory, and radiologic testing may suggest a specific ingestion, timely identification of many substances remains unavailable. In addition to these diagnostic challenges, the management of many ingested agents is controversial and remains the subject of further study and evolving recommendations. Fortunately, many resources are available to clinicians, providing general guidelines as well as individual recommendations. (See Table 2.)
This review presents an evidence-based approach to common pediatric ingestions, with a focus on initial ED stabilization, diagnosis, and management of a selection of the most common and hazardous ingestions, including foreign bodies and medications that may be fatal to children in small doses.
A literature search was performed in PubMed using the search terms pediatric toxicology epidemiology, poison control, prehospital, toxidrome, electrocardiography, urine drug screen, ipecac, activated charcoal, whole-bowel irrigation, hemodialysis, magnet, battery, acetaminophen, salicylate, anticholinergic, cholinergic, alcohol, digoxin, calcium-channel blocker, beta blocker, and lipid emulsion. A search of the Cochrane Library for pediatric ingestion resulted in 5 relevant randomized controlled trials. References cited in review articles were further evaluated. A total of 304 articles were reviewed, 112 of which have been included here. Guidelines released by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American Academy of Clinical Toxicology (AACT), and the European Association of Poisons Centres and Clinical Toxicologists (EAPCCT) were reviewed.
Literature regarding pediatric ingestions is largely comprised of case reports, case series, and retrospective studies. Several large retrospective studies have compared treatment modalities for safety and efficacy, and a few randomized controlled trials have evaluated newer treatment modalities. Clinical guidelines are based on expert consensus as well as the available literature, and many have been updated recently to reflect greater emphasis on evidence-based medicine. Data are available through the National Poison Data System, a repository of all calls to United States poison control centers, and the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, a United States Consumer Product Safety Commission database of ED visits.6
Evidence-based medicine requires a critical appraisal of the literature based upon study methodology and number of subjects. Not all references are equally robust. The findings of a large, prospective, randomized, and blinded trial should carry more weight than a case report. To help the reader judge the strength of each reference, pertinent information about the study, such as the type of study and the number of patients in the study are included in bold type following the references, where available. The most informative references cited in this paper, as determined by the authors, are noted by an asterisk (*) next to the number of the reference.
Stacy M. Tarango, MD; Deborah R. Liu, MD;
April 2, 2016
May 2, 2019
Upon completion of this article, you should be able to:
Physician CME Information
Date of Original Release: April 1, 2016. Date of most recent review: March 15, 2016. Termination date: April 1, 2019.
Accreditation: EB Medicine is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing medical education for physicians. This activity has been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and Policies of the ACCME.
Credit Designation: EB Medicine designates this enduring material for a maximum of 4 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
ACEP Accreditation: Pediatric Emergency Medicine Practice is also approved by the American College of Emergency Physicians for 48 hours of ACEP Category I credit per annual subscription.
AAP Accreditation: This continuing medical education activity has been reviewed by the American Academy of Pediatrics and is acceptable for a maximum of 48 AAP credits per year. These credits can be applied toward the AAP CME/CPD Award available to Fellows and Candidate Fellows of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
AOA Accreditation: Pediatric Emergency Medicine Practice is eligible for up to 48 American Osteopathic Association Category 2A or 2B credit hours per year.
Other Specialty CME: Included as part of the 4 hours, this CME activity is eligible for 3 hours of Pharmacology credits, subject to your state and institutional requirements.
Needs Assessment: The need for this educational activity was determined by a survey of medical staff, including the editorial board of this publication; review of morbidity and mortality data from the CDC, AHA, NCHS, and ACEP; and evaluation of prior activities for emergency physicians.
Target Audience: This enduring material is designed for emergency medicine physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and residents.
Goals: Upon completion of this activity, you should be able to: (1) demonstrate medical decision-making based on the strongest clinical evidence; (2) cost-effectively diagnose and treat the most critical ED presentations; and (3) describe the most common medicolegal pitfalls for each topic covered.
Discussion of Investigational Information: As part of the journal, faculty may be presenting investigational information about pharmaceutical products that is outside Food and Drug Administration approved labeling. Information presented as part of this activity is intended solely as continuing medical education and is not intended to promote off-label use of any pharmaceutical product.
Faculty Disclosure: It is the policy of EB Medicine to ensure objectivity, balance, independence, transparency, and scientific rigor in all CME-sponsored educational activities. All faculty participating in the planning or implementation of a sponsored activity are expected to disclose to the audience any relevant financial relationships and to assist in resolving any conflict of interest that may arise from the relationship. Presenters must also make a meaningful disclosure to the audience of their discussions of unlabeled or unapproved drugs or devices. In compliance with all ACCME Essentials, Standards, and Guidelines, all faculty for this CME activity were asked to complete a full disclosure statement. The information received is as follows: Dr. Tarango, Dr. Liu, Dr. Levine, Dr. Sue, Dr. Vella, Dr. Wang, and their related parties report no significant financial interest or other relationship with the manufacturer(s) of any commercial product(s) discussed in this educational presentation. Commercial Support: This issue of Pediatric Emergency Medicine Practice did not receive any commercial support.
Earning Credit: Two Convenient Methods: (1) Go online to www.ebmedicine.net/CME and click on the title of this article. (2) Mail or fax the CME Answer And Evaluation Form with your June and December issues to Pediatric Emergency Medicine Practice.
Hardware/Software Requirements: You will need a Macintosh or PC with internet capabilities to access the website.
Additional Policies: For additional policies, including our statement of conflict of interest, source of funding, statement of informed consent, and statement of human and animal rights, visit https://www.ebmedicine.net/policies.