Search

Over the past two decades, pediatric intensive care research networks have been formed across North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia/New Zealand. The U.K. Paediatric Critical Care Society Study Group (PCCS-SG) has over a 20-year tradition of fostering collaborative research, leading to the design and successful conduct of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). To date, the PCCS-SG network has delivered 13 different multicenter RCTs, covering a spectrum of study designs, methodologies, and scale. Lessons from the early years have led PCCS-SG to now focus on the entire process needed for developing an RCT, starting from robust preparatory steps such as surveys, data analysis, and feasibility work through to a definitive RCT. Pilot RCTs have been an important part of this process as well. Facilitators of successful research have included the presence of a national registry to facilitate efficient data collection; close partnerships with established Clinical Trials Units to bring together clinicians, methodologists, statisticians, and trial managers; greater involvement of transport teams to recruit patients early in trials of time-sensitive interventions; and the funded infrastructure of clinical research staff within the National Health Service to integrate research within the clinical service. The informal nature of PCCS-SG has encouraged buy-in from clinicians. Greater international collaboration and development of embedded trial platforms to speed up the generation and dissemination of trial findings are two key future strategic goals for the PCCS-SG research network.

BACKGROUND: Common, operational definitions are crucial to assess interventions and outcomes related to pediatric mechanical ventilation. These definitions can reduce unnecessary variability amongst research and quality improvement efforts, to ensure findings are generalizable and can be pooled to establish best practices.RESEARCH QUESTION: Can we establish operational definitions for key elements related to pediatric ventilator liberation using a combination of detailed literature review and consensus-based approaches?STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A panel of 26 international experts in pediatric ventilator liberation, two methodologists and two librarians conducted systematic reviews on eight topic areas related to pediatric ventilator liberation. Through a series of virtual meetings, we established draft definitions which were voted upon using an anonymous web-based process. Definitions were revised by incorporating extracted data gathered during the systematic review and discussed in another consensus meeting. A second round of voting was conducted to confirm the final definitions.RESULTS: In eight topic areas identified by the experts, 16 preliminary definitions were established. Based on initial discussion and the first round of voting, modifications were suggested for 11 of the 16 definitions. There was significant variability in how these items were defined in the literature reviewed. The final round of voting achieved ≥80% agreement for all 16 definitions in the following areas: what constitutes respiratory support (invasive mechanical ventilation and non-invasive respiratory support), liberation and failed attempts to liberate from invasive mechanical ventilation, liberation from respiratory support, duration of non-invasive respiratory support, total duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, spontaneous breathing trials, extubation readiness testing, 28-ventilator free days, and planned vs rescue use of post-extubation non-invasive respiratory support.INTERPRETATION: We propose these consensus-based definitions for elements of pediatric ventilator liberation, informed by evidence, be used for future quality improvement initiatives and research studies to improve generalizability, and facilitate comparison.

RATIONALE: Pediatric specific ventilator liberation guidelines are lacking despite the many studies exploring elements of extubation readiness testing. The lack of clinical practice guidelines has led to significant and unnecessary variation in methods used to assess pediatric patients' readiness for extubation.METHODS: Twenty-six international experts comprised a multi-professional panel to establish pediatric specific ventilator liberation clinical practice guidelines, focusing on acutely hospitalized children receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours. Eleven key questions were identified and first prioritized using the Modified Convergence of Opinion on Recommendations and Evidence. Systematic review was conducted for questions which did not meet an a-priori threshold of ≥80% agreement, with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodologies applied to develop the guidelines. The panel evaluated the evidence, drafted, and voted on the recommendations.MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Three questions related to systematic screening, using an extubation readiness testing bundle and use of a spontaneous breathing trial as part of the bundle met Modified Convergence of Opinion on Recommendations criteria of ≥80% agreement. For the remaining 8 questions, 5 systematic reviews yielded 12 recommendations related to the methods and duration of spontaneous breathing trials; measures of respiratory muscle strength; assessment of risk of post-extubation upper airway obstruction and its prevention; use of post-extubation non-invasive respiratory support; and sedation. Most recommendations were conditional and based on low to very low certainty of evidence.CONCLUSION: This clinical practice guideline provides a conceptual framework with evidence-based recommendations for best practices related to pediatric ventilator liberation.

Editorial.

Objectives: To explore enteral feeding practices and the achievement of energy targets in children on noninvasive respiratory support, in four European PICUs. Design: A four-center retrospective cohort study. Setting: Four PICUs: Bristol, United Kingdom; Lyon, France; Madrid, Spain; and Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Patients: Children in PICU who required acute noninvasive respiratory support in the first 7 days. The primary outcome was achievement of standardized kcal/goal. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 325 children were included (Bristol 104; Lyon 99; Madrid 72; and Rotterdam 50). The median (interquartile range) age and weight were 3 months (1-16 mo) and 5 kg (4-10 mo), respectively, with 66% admitted with respiratory failure. There were large between-center variations in practices. Overall, 190/325 (58.5%) received noninvasive respiratory support in order to prevent intubation and 41.5% after extubation. The main modes of noninvasive respiratory support used were high-flow nasal cannula 43.6%, bilevel positive airway pressure 33.2%, and continuous positive airway pressure 21.2%. Most children (77.8%) were fed gastrically (48.4% continuously) and the median time to the first feed after noninvasive respiratory support initiation was 4 hours (interquartile range, 1-9 hr). The median percentage of time a child was nil per oral while on noninvasive respiratory support was 4 hours (2-13 hr). Overall, children received a median of 56% (25-82%) of their energy goals compared with a standardized target of 0.85 of the recommended dietary allowance. Patients receiving step-up noninvasive respiratory support (p = < 0.001), those on bilevel positive airway pressure or continuous positive airway pressure (compared with high-flow nasal cannula) (p = < 0.001), and those on continuous feeds (p = < 0.001) achieved significantly more of their kcal goal. Gastrointestinal complications varied from 4.8 - 20%, with the most common reported being vomiting in 54/325 (16.6%), other complications occurred in 40/325 (12.3%) children, but pulmonary aspiration was rare 5/325 (1.5%). Conclusions: Children on noninvasive respiratory support tolerated feeding well, with relatively few complications, but prospective trials are now required to determine the optimal timing and feeding method for these children.

Pediatric specific ventilator liberation guidelines are lacking despite the many studies exploring elements of extubation readiness testing. The lack of clinical practice guidelines has led to significant and unnecessary variation in methods used to assess pediatric patients' readiness for extubation.Twenty-six international experts comprised a multi-professional panel to establish pediatric specific ventilator liberation clinical practice guidelines, focusing on acutely hospitalized children receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours. Eleven key questions were identified and first prioritized using the Modified Convergence of Opinion on Recommendations and Evidence. Systematic review was conducted for questions which did not meet an a-priori threshold of ≥80% agreement, with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodologies applied to develop the guidelines. The panel evaluated the evidence, drafted, and voted on the recommendations.Three questions related to systematic screening, using an extubation readiness testing bundle and use of a spontaneous breathing trial as part of the bundle met Modified Convergence of Opinion on Recommendations criteria of ≥80% agreement. For the remaining 8 questions, 5 systematic reviews yielded 12 recommendations related to the methods and duration of spontaneous breathing trials; measures of respiratory muscle strength; assessment of risk of post-extubation upper airway obstruction and its prevention; use of post-extubation non-invasive respiratory support; and sedation. Most recommendations were conditional and based on low to very low certainty of evidence.This clinical practice guideline provides a conceptual framework with evidence-based recommendations for best practices related to pediatric ventilator liberation. This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Premature neonates often experience feeding difficulties during their hospital stay, and evidence-based interventions have been shown to improve feeding outcomes.This study investigated whether an infant-cue based nurse educational feeding bundle accelerates the achievement of independent oral feeding in neonates in a neonatal intensive care unit.A quality improvement study with a pre, during and post intervention test design. All premature neonates admitted to the unit were eligible. The feeding programme included a four-month nurse training module and nurse coaching.A hundred and twenty-five nurses or nurse assistants attended the programme and 706 neonates were included. The median time to independent oral feeding (IOF) was 40, 36 and 37 days, respectively, for pre, during and post intervention. The reduction in time to IOF observed during the post-intervention period compared with the baseline period was significant (HR = 1.32, CI 95%: 1.01-1.74). No difference was noted in the length of hospital stay between the three study periods.An infant-cue based nurse educational feeding bundle can promote earlier achievement of IOF in preterm neonates.This quality improvement study demonstrates the impact that a nurse-driven intervention in neonatal care can have on improving practice. Feeding interventions involve the early introduction of oral feeding, non-nutritive sucking (NNS), and oral motor stimulation, and should be individualized for each neonate. These individualized feeding interventions applied by all nurses and assistant nurses, can facilitate the achievement of earlier independent oral feeding in preterm infants and should be included in neonatal critical care nurse education programs.

OBJECTIVES: In children, coronavirus disease 2019 is usually mild but can develop severe hypoxemic failure or a severe multisystem inflammatory syndrome, the latter considered to be a postinfectious syndrome, with cardiac involvement alone or together with a toxic shock like-presentation. Given the novelty of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the causative agent of the recent coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, little is known about the pathophysiology and phenotypic expressions of this new infectious disease nor the optimal treatment approach.STUDY SELECTION: From inception to July 10, 2020, repeated PubMed and open Web searches have been done by the scientific section collaborative group members of the European Society of Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care.DATA EXTRACTION: There is little in the way of clinical research in children affected by coronavirus disease 2019, apart from descriptive data and epidemiology.DATA SYNTHESIS: Even though basic treatment and organ support considerations seem not to differ much from other critical illness, such as pediatric septic shock and multiple organ failure, seen in PICUs, some specific issues must be considered when caring for children with severe coronavirus disease 2019 disease.CONCLUSIONS: In this clinical guidance article, we review the current clinical knowledge of coronavirus disease 2019 disease in critically ill children and discuss some specific treatment concepts based mainly on expert opinion based on limited experience and the lack of any completed controlled trials in children at this time.

Background Routine measurement of gastric residual volume to guide feeding is widespread in neonatal units but not supported by high-quality evidence. Outcome selection is critical to trial design. Objective To determine optimal outcome measures for a trial of not routinely measuring gastric residual volume in neonatal care. Design A focused literature review, parent interviews, modified two-round Delphi survey and stakeholder consensus meeting. Participants Sixty-one neonatal healthcare professionals participated in an eDelphi survey; 17 parents were interviewed. 19 parents and neonatal healthcare professionals took part in the consensus meeting. Results Literature review generated 14 outcomes, and parent interviews contributed eight additional outcomes; these 22 outcomes were then ranked by 74 healthcare professionals in the first Delphi round where four further outcomes were proposed; 26 outcomes were ranked in the second round by 61 healthcare professionals. Five outcomes were categorised as ‘consensus in’, and no outcomes were voted ‘consensus out’. ‘No consensus’ outcomes were discussed and voted on in a face-to-face meeting by 19 participants, where four were voted ‘consensus in’. The final nine consensus outcomes were: mortality, necrotising enterocolitis, time to full enteral feeds, duration of parenteral nutrition, time feeds stopped per 24 hours, healthcare-associated infection; catheter-associated bloodstream infection, change in weight between birth and neonatal discharge and pneumonia due to milk aspiration. Conclusions and relevance We have identified outcomes for a trial of no routine measurement of gastric residual volume to guide feeding in neonatal care. This outcome set will ensure outcomes are important to healthcare professionals and parents.

Background: Critically ill patients frequently need blood transfusions. For safety, blood must be delivered via syringe infusion pumps, yet this can cause red cell damage and increase the rate of haemolysis. \ud Aims and objectives: To evaluate biochemical and haemolytic markers of red blood cells transfused in three different, common type of syringe infusion pumps with two different infusion rates (10 and 100 ml/h).\ud Methods: A lab-based study using aliquots of 16 red blood cells bags was undertaken. Haemolysis markers (total haemoglobin(g/dl), haematocrit(%), free haemoglobin(g/dl), potassium(mmol/L), lactate dehydrogenase(U/L), osmolality(mOsm/kg), pH, degree of haemolysis(%)) were measured before and after red blood cells infusion and exposure. Three different syringe infusion pumps brands (A, B and C) were compared with two different infusion rates (10 and 100 ml/h). \ud Results: The total haemoglobin fell significantly in all red blood cells units during manipulation (Pre-infusion: 26.44±5.74; Post-exposure: 22.62±4.00; p=0.026). The degree of haemolysis significantly increased by 40% after manipulation of the red blood cells. Syringe infusion pump A caused a threefold increase in potassium levels (3.78±6.10) when compared to B (-0.14±1.46) and C (1.63± 1.98) (p=0.015). This pump also produced the worst changes, with an increase in free haemoglobin (0.05±0.05; p=0.038) and more haemolysis (0.08±0.07; p=0.033). There were significant differences and an increase in the degree of haemolysis (p=0.004) in the infusion rate of 100 mL/h. \ud Conclusions: Syringe infusion pumps may cause significant red blood cell damage during infusion, with increases in free haemoglobin, potassium and the degree of haemolysis. Some pumps types, with a cassette mechanism, caused more damage.\ud Relevance to clinical practice: In many ICUs, bedside nurses are able to consider infusion pump choice and understanding the impact of different pump types on RBC during a transfusion provides the nurses with more information to enhance decision-making and improve the quality of the transfusion.

Background\ud Choosing trial outcome measures is important. When outcomes are not clinically relevant or important to parents/patients, trial evidence is less likely to be implemented into practice. This study aimed to determine optimal outcome measures for a trial of no routine gastric residual volume measurement in critically ill children.\ud Methods: A mixed methods approach: a focused literature review, parent and clinician interviews, a modified two-round Delphi and a stakeholder consensus meeting.\ud Results: The review generated 13 outcomes. 14 Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) parents proposed 3 additional outcomes, these 16 were then rated by 28 clinicians in Delphi round 1. Six further outcomes were proposed, and 22 outcomes were rated in the second round. No items were voted ‘consensus out’. The 18 ‘no-consensus’ items were voted in a face-to-face meeting by 30 participants. The final 12 outcome measures were: Time to reach energy targets; ventilator associated pneumonia; vomiting; time enteral feeds withheld per 24 hour; necrotizing enterocolitis; length of invasive ventilation; PICU length of stay; mortality; change in weight and markers of feed intolerance: parenteral nutrition administered; feed formula altered and changing to post-pyloric feeds all secondary to feed intolerance.\ud Conclusion: We have identified 12 outcomes for a trial of no gastric residual volume measurement through a multi-stage process, seeking views of parents and clinicians.\ud Clinical Relevancy statement: Twelve relevant outcomes have been identified for a trial of no routine gastric residual volume measurement in critically ill children.

Inadequate nutrition can lead to increased morbidity and mortality for mechanically ventilated children in the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Enteral feeding can either be delivered by gravity bolus (intermittent) feeding or continuously via a pump and in UK PICUs variable practice exists. This evidence-based review therefore aimed to examine the evidence surrounding the two feeding methods for ventilated children, to determine whether one provides better enteral nutrition. Four papers were included, three randomized controlled trials and a systematic review, which provide conflicting evidence. There is some suggestion that bolus feeding may be superior in medical children on PICU to achieve their energy and protein goals faster, however, the clinical significance of the results is questionable and further research is needed to identify whether one method of feeding can impact on patient outcomes.

Background Daily assessment of patient readiness for liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation can reduce the duration of ventilation. However, there is uncertainty about the effectiveness of this in a paediatric population. Objectives To determine the effect of a ventilation liberation intervention in critically ill children who are anticipated to have a prolonged duration of mechanical ventilation (primary objective) and in all children (secondary objective). Design A pragmatic, stepped-wedge, cluster randomised trial with economic and process evaluations. Setting Paediatric intensive care units in the UK. Participants Invasively mechanically ventilated children (aged Interventions The intervention incorporated co-ordinated multidisciplinary care, patient-relevant sedation plans linked to sedation assessment, assessment of ventilation parameters with a higher than usual trigger for undertaking an extubation readiness test and a spontaneous breathing trial on low levels of respiratory support to test extubation readiness. The comparator was usual care. Hospital sites were randomised sequentially to transition from control to intervention and were non-blinded. Main outcome measures The primary outcome measure was the duration of invasive mechanical ventilation until the first successful extubation. The secondary outcome measures were successful extubation, unplanned extubation and reintubation, post-extubation use of non-invasive ventilation, tracheostomy, post-extubation stridor, adverse events, length of intensive care and hospital stay, mortality and cost per respiratory complication avoided at 28 days. Results The trial included 10,495 patient admissions from 18 paediatric intensive care units from 5 February 2018 to 14 October 2019. In children with anticipated prolonged ventilation (n = 8843 admissions: control, n = 4155; intervention, n = 4688), the intervention resulted in a significantly shorter time to successful extubation [cluster and time-adjusted median difference –6.1 hours (interquartile range –8.2 to –5.3 hours); adjusted hazard ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.20; p = 0.02] and a higher incidence of successful extubation (adjusted relative risk 1.01, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.02; p = 0.03) and unplanned extubation (adjusted relative risk 1.62, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 2.51; p = 0.03), but not reintubation (adjusted relative risk 1.10, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.36; p = 0.38). In the intervention period, the use of post-extubation non-invasive ventilation was significantly higher (adjusted relative risk 1.22, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.49; p = 0.04), with no evidence of a difference in intensive care length of stay or other harms, but hospital length of stay was longer (adjusted hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 0.97; p = 0.01). Findings for all children were broadly similar. The control period was associated with lower, but not statistically significantly lower, total costs (cost difference, mean £929.05, 95% confidence interval –£516.54 to £2374.64) and significantly fewer respiratory complications avoided (mean difference –0.10, 95% confidence interval –0.16 to –0.03). Limitations The unblinded intervention assignment may have resulted in performance or detection bias. It was not possible to determine which components were primarily responsible for the observed effect. Treatment effect in a more homogeneous group remains to be determined. Conclusions The intervention resulted in a statistically significant small reduction in time to first successful extubation; thus, the clinical importance of the effect size is uncertain. Future work Future work should explore intervention sustainability and effects of the intervention in other paediatric populations. Trial registration This trial is registered as ISRCTN16998143. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

We aimed to (i) describe current weaning and extubation practices in children (protocols to identify weaning candidates, spontaneous breathing trials, and other aspects of care such as sedation weaning) and (ii) understand responsibilities for ventilation weaning decisions across Australia and New Zealand (ANZ).A cross-sectional survey of ANZ intensive care units who routinely intubate and ventilate children (18 years) was conducted. We worked with the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Paediatric Study Group to identify units and potential respondents (senior nurse representative per unit) and to administer questionnaires. Survey questions (n = 35) examined current protocols, practices, unit staffing, and decision-making responsibilities for ventilation weaning and extubation. Open-ended questions examined respondents' experiences of weaning and extubation.A senior nursing respondent from 18/22 intensive care units (82%) completed the survey. Across units, most used sedation assessment tools (88%), and less often, sedation weaning tools (55%). Spontaneous awakening protocols were not used; one unit (5%) reported the use of a spontaneous breathing protocol. Two respondents reported that ventilation weaning protocols (11%) were in use, with 44% of units reporting the use of extubation protocols. Weaning and extubation practices were largely perceived as medically driven, with qualitative data demonstrating a desire from most respondents for greater shared decision-making.In ANZ, ventilation weaning and extubation practices are largely medically driven with variation in the use of protocols to support mechanical ventilation weaning and extubation in children. Our findings highlight the importance of future research to determine the impact of greater collaboration of the multidisciplinary team on weaning practices.

Editorial.

Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation (MI-E) is traditionally used in the neuromuscular popula-tion. There is growing interest of MI-E use in invasively ventilated critically ill adults. We aimed to map current evidence on MI-E use in invasively ventilated critically ill adults. Two authors independently searched electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL via the Ovid platform; PROSPERO; Cochrane Library; ISI Web of Science; and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform between January 1990–April 2021. Inclusion criteria were (1) adult critically ill invasively ventilated subjects, (2) use of MI-E, (3) study design with original data, and (4) published from 1990 onward. Data were extracted by 2 authors independently using a bespoke extraction form. We used Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to appraise risk of bias. Theoretical Domains Framework was used to interpret qualitative data. Of 3,090 citations identi-fied, 28 citations were taken forward for data extraction. Main indications for MI-E use during invasive ventilation were presence of secretions and mucus plugging (13/28, 46%). Perceived contraindications related to use of high levels of positive pressure (18/28, 68%). Protocolized MI-E settings with a pressure of ±40 cm H2O were most commonly used, with detail on timing, flow, and frequency of prescription infrequently reported. Various outcomes were re-intubation rate, wet sputum weight, and pulmonary mechanics. Only 3 studies reported the occurrence of adverse events. From qualitative data, the main barrier to MI-E use in this subject group was lack of knowledge and skills. We concluded that there is little consistency in how MI-E is used and reported, and therefore, recommendations about best practices are not possible.

The ideal fluid for intravenous maintenance fluid therapy (IV-MFT) in acutely and critically ill children is controversial, and evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are lacking and current prescribing practices remain unknown. We aimed to describe the current practices in prescribing IV-MFT in the context of acute and critically ill children with regard to the amount, tonicity, composition, use of balanced fluids, and prescribing strategies in various clinical contexts. A cross-sectional electronic 27-item survey was emailed in April-May 2021 to pediatric critical care physicians across European and Middle East countries. The survey instrument was developed by an expert multi-professional panel within the European Society of Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC). A total of 154 respondents from 35 European and Middle East countries participated (response rate 64%). Respondents were physicians in charge of acute or critically ill children. All respondents indicated they routinely use a predefined formula to prescribe the amount of IV-MFT and considered fluid balance monitoring very important in the management of acute and critically ill children. The use of balanced solution was preferred if there were altered serum sodium and chloride levels or metabolic acidosis. Just under half (42%, 65/153) of respondents believed balanced solutions should always be used. Respondents considered the use of isotonic IV solutions as important for acute and critically ill children. In terms of the indication and the composition of IV-MFT prescribed, responses were heterogeneous among centers. Almost 70% (107/154) respondents believed there was a gap between current practice and what they considered ideal IV-MFT due to a lack of guidelines and inadequate training of healthcare professionals. Conclusions: Our study showed considerable variability in clinical prescribing practice of IV-MFT in acute pediatric settings across Europe and the Middle East. There is an urgent need to develop evidence-based guidelines for IV-MFT prescription in acute and critically ill children. What is Known: • The administration of maintenance intravenous fluid therapy is a standard of care for a lot of hospitalized children • Maintenance intravenous fluid therapy prescriptions are often based on Holliday and Segar's historical guidelines even if this practice has been associated with several complications. What is New: • This study provided information on the prescribing practice regarding fluid restriction, fluid tonicity, and balance. • This study showed considerable variability in clinical prescribing practice of intravenous maintenance fluid therapy across Europe and the Middle East.

Background: Generating robust evidence within Pediatric Intensive Care (PIC) can be challenging because of low patient numbers and patient heterogeneity. Systematic reviews may overcome small study biases but are limited by lack of standardisation in outcome measures and their definition. Trials of nutritional interventions in PIC are increasing, thus we wanted to examine the outcome measures being used in these trials.\ud Objective: To systematically describe outcome measures used when a nutritional intervention has been evaluated in a PIC randomized controlled trial. \ud Methods: A systematic literature review of all studies involving a PIC trial of a nutritional intervention was undertaken from 1 January 1996 until 20 February 2018. \ud Results: Thirty-one trials met the criteria and were reviewed. They included a total of 3346 patients across all trials. Thirty-nine primary outcomes and 93 secondary outcomes were found. These were categorized into PIC-related outcomes (infection, intensive care dependency, organ dysfunction / long-term functional and mortality) and nutritional outcomes (energy targets, nutritional parameters and feeding tolerance). We found large variation in the outcome measures used. Outcome domains of energy targets, feeding tolerance and infection were not adequately defined. \ud Conclusions: Large variations in the outcome measures chosen and their definitions exist within PIC nutritional trials. Optimal nutritional outcomes for PIC must be agreed and defined, specifically domains of nutrition efficiency, nutrition tolerance and non-nutritional PIC outcomes. The next step is to conduct an International Delphi study to gain expert consensus and develop a core outcome set to be reported in future pediatric nutrition trials.

Objective\ud To explore the perceived barriers by pediatric intensive care healthcare professionals (nurses, dieticians and physicians) in delivering enteral nutrition (EN) to critically ill children across the world.\ud Design\ud Cross-sectional international online survey adapted for use in pediatric settings.\ud Setting and subjects\ud Pediatric Intensive Care physicians, nurses and dietitians across the world\ud Interventions\ud The 20-item adult intensive care ‘Barriers to delivery of enteral nutrition’ survey was modified for pediatric settings, tested and translated into ten languages. The survey was distributed online to pediatric intensive care nurses, physicians and dieticians via professional networks in March – June 2019. Professionals were asked to rate each item indicating the degree to which they perceived it hinders the provision of EN in their pediatric intensive care unit (PICUs) with a 7-point Likert scale from 0 ‘‘not at all a barrier’’ to 6 ‘‘an extreme amount’’. \ud Measurement and Main Results\ud 920 pediatric intensive care professionals responded from 57 countries; 477/920 (52%) nurses, 407/920 (44%) physicians and 36/920 (4%) dieticians. Sixty-two percent had more than five years PICU experience and 49% worked in general PICUs, with 35% working in combined cardiac and general PICUs. The top three perceived barriers across all professional groups were: (1) enteral feeds being withheld in advance of procedures or operating department visits, (2) none or not enough dietitian coverage on weekends or evenings, (3) not enough time dedicated to education and training on how to optimally feed patients.\ud Conclusions\ud This is the largest survey that has explored perceived barriers to the delivery of enteral nutrition across the world by physicians, nurses and dietitians. There were some similarities with adult intensive care barriers. In all professional groups, the perception of barriers reduced with years PICU experience. This survey highlights implications for PICU practice around more focussed nutrition education for all PICU professional groups.

There are reports of children COVID-19 or COVID-19 like symptoms with hyperinflammatory multisystem syndrome, ARDS, gastrointestinal and atypical Kawasaki disease presenting to PICU worldwide temporally associated with COVID-19, for which there are important nutrition support considerations. As a result, the European Society of Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care - Metabolism, Endocrine and Nutrition group (ESPNIC-MEN) and paediatric nutritionists working in PICUs are being consulted regarding nutrition management of critically ill children with COVID-19 or COVID-19 like symptoms. Therefore, the aim of this short report is to provide a summary of nutrition support recommendations for critically ill children with COVID-19. They are based on the ESPNIC-MEN section recommendations published in January 2020 and surviving sepsis recommendations from February 2020.

OBJECTIVES: Malnutrition and faltering growth at PICU admission have been related to suboptimal outcomes. However, little is known about nutritional status deterioration during PICU stay, as critical illness is characterized by a profound and complex metabolism shift, which affects energy requirements and protein turnover. We aim to describe faltering growth occurrence during PICU stay. DESIGN: Single-center prospective observational study. SETTING: Twenty-three-bed general PICU, Lyon, France. PATIENTS: All critically ill children 0-18 years old with length of stay longer than 5 days were included (September 2013-December 2015). INTERVENTIONS: Weight and height/length were measured at admission, and weight was monitored during PICU stay, in order to calculate body mass index for age z score. Faltering growth was defined as body mass index z score decline over PICU stay. Children admitted during the first year of the study and who presented with faltering growth were followed after PICU discharge for 3 months. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We analyzed 579 admissions. Of them, 10.2% presented a body mass index z score decline greater than 1 SD and 27.8% greater than 0.5. Admission severity risk scores and prolonged PICU stay accounted for 4% of the variability in nutritional status deterioration. Follow-up of post-PICU discharge nutritional status showed recovery within 3 months in most patients. CONCLUSIONS: Nutritional deterioration is frequent and often intense in critically ill children with length of stay greater than 5 days. Future research should focus on how targeted nutritional therapies can minimize PICU faltering growth and improve post-PICU rehabilitation.

Objectives: Despite little evidence, the practice of routine measurement\ud of gastric residual volume to guide both the initiation and\ud delivery of enteral feeding in PICUs is widespread internationally.\ud In light of increased scrutiny of the evidence surrounding this\ud practice, and as part of a trial feasibility study, we aimed to determine\ud enteral feeding and gastric residual volume measurement\ud practices in U.K. PICUs.\ud Design: An online survey to 27 U.K. PICUs.\ud Setting: U.K. PICUs.\ud Subjects: A clinical nurse, senior doctor, and dietician were invited\ud to collaboratively complete one survey per PICU and send a copy of\ud their unit guidelines on enteral feeding and gastric residual volume.\ud Interventions: None.\ud Measurement and Main Results: Twenty-four of 27 units (89%)\ud approached completed the survey. Twenty-three units (95.8%;23/24) had written feeding guidelines, and 19 units (19/23;\ud 83%) sent their guidelines for review. More units fed continuously\ud (15/24; 62%) than intermittently (9/24; 37%) via the gastric route\ud as their primary feeding method. All but one PICU routinely measured\ud gastric residual volume, regardless of the method of feeding.\ud Eighteen units had an agreed definition of feed tolerance, and all\ud these included gastric residual volume. Gastric residual volume\ud thresholds for feed tolerance were either volume based (mL/kg\ud body weight) (11/21; 52%) or a percentage of the volume of\ud feed administered (6/21; 29%). Yet only a third of units provided\ud guidance about the technique of gastric residual volume measurement.\ud Conclusions: Routine gastric residual volume measurement is part\ud of standard practice in U.K. PICUs, with little guidance provided\ud about the technique which may impact the accuracy of gastric\ud residual volume. All PICUs that defined feed tolerance included\ud gastric residual volume in the definition. This is important to know\ud when proposing a standard practice arm of any future trial of no routine gastric residual volume measurement in critically ill children.

Background Fever improves pathogen control at a significant metabolic cost. No randomized clinical trials (RCT) have compared fever treatment thresholds in critically ill children. We performed a pilot RCT to determine whether a definitive trial of a permissive approach to fever in comparison to current restrictive practice is feasible in critically ill children with suspected infection. Methods An open, parallel-group pilot RCT with embedded mixed methods perspectives study in four UK paediatric intensive care units (PICUs) and associated retrieval services. Participants were emergency PICU admissions aged > 28 days to

Importance There is limited evidence on the optimal strategy for liberating infants and children from invasive mechanical ventilation in the pediatric intensive care unit.Objective To determine if a sedation and ventilator liberation protocol intervention reduces the duration of invasive mechanical ventilation in infants and children anticipated to require prolonged mechanical ventilation.Design, Setting, and Participants A pragmatic multicenter, stepped-wedge, cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted that included 17 hospital sites (18 pediatric intensive care units) in the UK sequentially randomized from usual care to the protocol intervention. From February 2018 to October 2019, 8843 critically ill infants and children anticipated to require prolonged mechanical ventilation were recruited. The last date of follow-up was November 11, 2019.Interventions Pediatric intensive care units provided usual care (n = 4155 infants and children) or a sedation and ventilator liberation protocol intervention (n = 4688 infants and children) that consisted of assessment of sedation level, daily screening for readiness to undertake a spontaneous breathing trial, a spontaneous breathing trial to test ventilator liberation potential, and daily rounds to review sedation and readiness screening and set patient-relevant targets.Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the duration of invasive mechanical ventilation from initiation of ventilation until the first successful extubation. The primary estimate of the treatment effect was a hazard ratio (with a 95% CI) adjusted for calendar time and cluster (hospital site) for infants and children anticipated to require prolonged mechanical ventilation.Results There were a total of 8843 infants and children (median age, 8 months [interquartile range, 1 to 46 months]; 42% were female) who completed the trial. There was a significantly shorter median time to successful extubation for the protocol intervention compared with usual care (64.8 hours vs 66.2 hours, respectively; adjusted median difference, −6.1 hours [interquartile range, −8.2 to −5.3 hours]; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.02 to 1.20], P = .02). The serious adverse event of hypoxia occurred in 9 (0.2%) infants and children for the protocol intervention vs 11 (0.3%) for usual care; nonvascular device dislodgement occurred in 2 (0.04%) vs 7 (0.1%), respectively.Conclusions and Relevance Among infants and children anticipated to require prolonged mechanical ventilation, a sedation and ventilator liberation protocol intervention compared with usual care resulted in a statistically significant reduction in time to first successful extubation. However, the clinical importance of the effect size is uncertain.Trial Registration isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN16998143

Background Endotracheal suction (ETS) is essential in intubated patients to prevent tube occlusion and is one of the most common nursing interventions performed in intensive care. Aims and objectives To explore how paediatric ETS practices reflect evidence-based practice (EBP) recommendations in paediatric intensive care units (PICU) worldwide. Study design and methods A cross-sectional electronic survey linked to a real patient suction episode. Nurses completed the survey following a recent ETS episode. Evidence-based practice (EBP) was defined based on four of the American Association for Respiratory Care (AARC) best evidence recommendations: pre-oxygenation before suction, use of a suction catheter no more than half the diameter of the tracheal tube, shallow depth of suction, and the continuous suction applied upon withdrawal of the catheter. Participants included PICU nurses who performed ETS in children (0-17 years) excluding preterm neonates. Results Four hundred forty-six complete surveys were received from 20 countries. Most nurses (80%, 367/446) reported that their units had local guidelines for ETS. The most common reason for suctioning (44%) was audible/visible secretions. Over half of ETS episodes (57%) used closed suction. When exploring the individual components of suction, 63% (282/446) of nurses pre-oxygenated their patient prior to suction, 71% (319/446) suctioned no further than 0.5 cm past end of the endotracheal tube (ETT), 59% (261/446) used a catheter no more than half the diameter of the ETT, and 78% (348/446) used continuous negative pressure. 24% of nurses gave patients an additional bolus of sedative, analgesic, and/or muscle-relaxant medication prior to suction; this decision was not related to the child's history of instability with suction, as there was no significant difference in those who reported patients had a history of being unstable with suction (P = .80). 26% (117/446) of nurses complied with all four EBP components in the reported suctioning episode. Conclusions Considerable variation in paediatric endotracheal suctioning practices exists internationally. Although most nurses applied single components of evidence-based recommendations during ETT suctioning, just a quarter applied all four elements. Relevance to clinical practice Nurses' need to consider and strive to apply EBP principles to common nursing interventions such as ETS.

Background: The European Society of Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC) published 32 clinical recommendations\ud around supporting nutrition in critically ill children following an extensive review of the literature\ud online in January 2020. The challenge now is to engage with paediatric intensive care unit teams to implement\ud these into their practice.\ud Objective: This practical implementation guide uses a recognised implementation model to guide pediatric intensive\ud care professionals to implement these evidence-based clinical recommendations into clinical practice.\ud Results and conclusions: We use the Pronovost implementation of evidence into practice model to provide a practical\ud framework with associated documents to facilitate PICU healthcare professional's implementation of these\ud clinical recommendations into PICU practice. The paper is structured around the four steps in this model: summarising\ud the evidence, identifying local barriers to implementation, measuring performance and ensuring all patients\ud receive the intervention and useful checklists for implementation and compliance monitoring are provided,\ud in addition to tables outlining key professional roles and responsibilities around nutrition in the paediatric intensive\ud care unit.

ObjectiveTo explore parent and staff views on the acceptability of a randomised controlled trial investigating temperature thresholds for antipyretic intervention in critically ill children with fever and infection (the FEVER trial) during a multi-phase pilot study.DesignMixed methods study with data collected at three time points: (1) before, (2) during and (3) after a pilot trial.SettingEnglish, Paediatric Intensive Care Units (PICUs).Participants(1) Pre-pilot trial focus groups with pilot site staff (n=56) and interviews with parents (n=25) whose child had been admitted to PICU in the last 3 years with a fever and suspected infection, (2) Questionnaires with parents of randomised children following pilot trial recruitment (n=48 from 47 families) and (3) post-pilot trial interviews with parents (n=19), focus groups (n=50) and a survey (n=48) with site staff. Analysis drew on Sekhon et al’s theoretical framework of acceptability.ResultsThere was initial support for the trial, yet some held concerns regarding the proposed temperature thresholds and not using paracetamol for pain or discomfort. Pre-trial findings informed protocol changes and training, which influenced views on trial acceptability. Staff trained by the FEVER team found the trial more acceptable than those trained by colleagues. Parents and staff found the trial acceptable. Some concerns about pain or discomfort during weaning from ventilation remained.ConclusionsPre-trial findings and pilot trial experience influenced acceptability, providing insight into how challenges may be overcome. We present an adapted theoretical framework of acceptability to inform future trial feasibility studies.Trial registration numbersISRCTN16022198 and NCT03028818.

IMPORTANCE: The optimal first-line mode of noninvasive respiratory support for acutely ill children is not known. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the noninferiority of high-flow nasal cannula therapy (HFNC) as the first-line mode of noninvasive respiratory support for acute illness, compared with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), for time to liberation from all forms of respiratory support. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Pragmatic, multicenter, randomized noninferiority clinical trial conducted in 24 pediatric critical care units in the United Kingdom among 600 acutely ill children aged 0 to 15 years who were clinically assessed to require noninvasive respiratory support, recruited between August 2019 and November 2021, with last follow-up completed in March 2022. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to commence either HFNC at a flow rate based on patient weight (n = 301) or CPAP of 7 to 8 cm H(2)O (n = 299). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was time from randomization to liberation from respiratory support, defined as the start of a 48-hour period during which a participant was free from all forms of respiratory support (invasive or noninvasive), assessed against a noninferiority margin of an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.75. Seven secondary outcomes were assessed, including mortality at critical care unit discharge, intubation within 48 hours, and use of sedation. RESULTS: Of the 600 randomized children, consent was not obtained for 5 (HFNC: 1; CPAP: 4) and respiratory support was not started in 22 (HFNC: 5; CPAP: 17); 573 children (HFNC: 295; CPAP: 278) were included in the primary analysis (median age, 9 months; 226 girls [39%]). The median time to liberation in the HFNC group was 52.9 hours (95% CI, 46.0-60.9 hours) vs 47.9 hours (95% CI, 40.5-55.7 hours) in the CPAP group (absolute difference, 5.0 hours [95% CI –10.1 to 17.4 hours]; adjusted hazard ratio 1.03 [1-sided 97.5% CI, 0.86-∞]). This met the criterion for noninferiority. Of the 7 prespecified secondary outcomes, 3 were significantly lower in the HFNC group: use of sedation (27.7% vs 37%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.39-0.88]); mean duration of critical care stay (5 days vs 7.4 days; adjusted mean difference, −3 days [95% CI, −5.1 to −1 days]); and mean duration of acute hospital stay (13.8 days vs 19.5 days; adjusted mean difference, −7.6 days [95% CI, −13.2 to −1.9 days]). The most common adverse event was nasal trauma (HFNC: 6/295 [2.0%]; CPAP: 18/278 [6.5%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among acutely ill children clinically assessed to require noninvasive respiratory support in a pediatric critical care unit, HFNC compared with CPAP met the criterion for noninferiority for time to liberation from respiratory support. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.org Identifier: ISRCTN60048867