corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 6395

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Balit CR, Lynch AM, Gilmore SP, Murray L, Isbister GK.
Lignocaine and chlorhexidine toxicity in children resulting from mouth paint ingestion: a bottling problem.
J Paediatr Child Health 2006 Jun 01; 42:(6):350-3
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1440-1754.2006.00871.x


Abstract:

BACKGROUND: A pharmaceutical product was marketed in Australia for ‘teething’ in an almost identical container to a popular paediatric paracetamol preparation. The product contained lignocaine and chlorhexidine. The similarity of the packaging resulted in large number of therapeutic errors in which the ‘teething’ preparation was given in error for paracetamol. As the exact dose of the erroneously administered mouth paint was known this provided an opportunity for outcome assessment of lignocaine ingestion. METHODS: Calls to two state poison information centres regarding this product were prospectively followed up. Information collected included: demographics, type of exposure, details of the exposure and adverse effects. A systematic review of the literature was used to identify all previous reported cases of lignocaine and chlorhexidine ingestion. RESULTS: There were 28 cases with complete follow up where the product was given in therapeutic errors (10 girls and 18 boys; median age 11 months; range 2 months-4 years). The mean ingested dose of lignocaine was 2.7 mg/kg (standard deviation 1.3 mg) and chlorhexidine was 0.06 mg/kg (standard deviation 0.03 mg). The largest ingested lignocaine dose was 5.9 mg/kg. Two children developed minor symptoms: one vomited twice and the other was reported to have increased salivation and difficulty with solid food for 20 min. No other adverse effects were reported. The literature review suggested that severe effects occurred with doses more than 15 mg/kg. CONCLUSION: No major adverse effects occurred with lignocaine ingestions of less than 6 mg/kg and it would be appropriate to observe these patients at home. Chlorhexidine did not appear to cause clinical effects in this low concentration.

Keywords:
Administration, Oral Anesthetics, Local/administration & dosage Anesthetics, Local/poisoning* Child, Preschool Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage Chlorhexidine/poisoning* Drug Labeling Drug Packaging* Female Humans Infant Lidocaine/administration & dosage Lidocaine/poisoning* Male Medication Errors/statistics & numerical data* Mouthwashes/administration & dosage Mouthwashes/poisoning* Poison Control Centers/statistics & numerical data South Australia

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909