Search

OBJECTIVEEvidence shows mixed efficacy of applying guidelines for the treatment of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in children. A multidisciplinary team at a children’s health system standardized intensive care unit–based TBI care using guidelines and best practices. The authors sought to investigate the impact of guideline implementation on outcomes.METHODSA multidisciplinary group developed a TBI care protocol based on published TBI treatment guidelines and consensus, which was implemented in March 2011. The authors retrospectively compared preimplementation outcomes (May 2009 to March 2011) and postimplementation outcomes (April 2011 to March 2014) among patients < 18 years of age admitted with severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤ 8) and potential survivability who underwent intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. Measures included mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), ventilator LOS, critical ICP elevation time (percentage or total time that ICP was > 40 mm Hg), and survivor functionality at discharge (measured by the WeeFIM score). Data were analyzed using Student t-tests.RESULTSA total of 71 and 121 patients were included pre- and postimplementation, respectively. Mortality (32% vs 19%; p < 0.001) and length of critical ICP elevation (> 20 mm Hg; 26.3% vs 15%; p = 0.001) decreased after protocol implementation. WeeFIM discharge scores were not statistically different (57.6 vs 58.9; p = 0.9). Hospital LOS (median 19.6 days; p = 0.68) and ventilator LOS (median 10 days; p = 0.24) were unchanged.CONCLUSIONSA multidisciplinary effort to develop, disseminate, and implement an evidence-based TBI treatment protocol at a children’s hospital was associated with improved outcomes, including survival and reduced time of ICP elevation. This type of ICP-based protocol can serve as a guide for other institutions looking to reduce practice disparity in the treatment of severe TBI.

Objective Communication and professionalism are often challenging to teach, and the impact of the use of a given approach is not known. We undertook this investigation to establish pediatric critical care medicine (PCCM) trainee perception of education in professionalism and communication and to compare their responses from those obtained from PCCM fellowship program directors. Methods The Education in Pediatric Intensive Care (E.P.I.C.) Investigators used the modified Delphi technique to develop a survey examining teaching of professionalism and communication. After piloting, the survey was sent to all 283 PCCM fellows in training in the United States. Results Survey response rate was 47% (133 of 283). Despite high rates of teaching overall, deficiencies were noted in all areas of communication and professionalism assessed. The largest areas of deficiency included not being specifically taught how to communicate: as a member of a nonclinical group (reported in 24%), across a broad range of socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds (19%) or how to provide consultation outside of the intensive care unit (17%). Only 50% of fellows rated education in communication as "very good/excellent." However, most felt confident in their communication abilities. For professionalism, fellows reported not being taught accountability (12%), how to conduct a peer review (12%), and how to handle potential conflict between personal beliefs, circumstances, and professional values (10%). Fifty-seven percent of fellows felt that their professionalism education was "very good/excellent," but nearly all expressed confidence in these skills. Compared with program directors, fellows reported more deficiencies in both communication and professionalism. Conclusions There are numerous components of communication and professionalism that PCCM fellows perceive as not being specifically taught. Despite these deficiencies, fellow confidence remains high. Substantial opportunities exist to improve teaching in these areas.

Objective: Pediatric early warning scores (PEWSs) have been used effectively in limited patient care areas. Children's Transport, at Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, transports approximately 5000 children annually. In an effort to consistently assess patient acuity and the impact of our team's interventions, we instituted a modified "transport PEWS" (TPEWS). Methods: The existing PEWS was modified to reflect the transport environment. A retrospective chart review was conducted of 100 consecutive children transported by Children's Transport in March 2009. Transport PEWS given during triage by the dispatch center (TPEWS tri ), TPEWS calculated at referring facility by the team (TPEWS ref ), and final TPEWS at the accepting institution (TPEWS acc ) were compared. Results: Eighty-six patients were transported by ground. The median age was 50.4 months. Sixty patients (60%) received some intervention from the transport team. Median TPEWS ref was 3 (0-9) upon initial assessment, and TPEWS acc was 2 (0-9) on arrival at the accepting facility (P = 0.0001). Seventy-three percent (73/100) of patients were transported to the emergency room; 15 (15%) of 100 to the general inpatient area, and 12 (12%) of 100 to the intensive care unit. In addition, a triage TPEWS (TPEWS tri ) was calculated from information given from the referring facility in 59 of the 100 patients. A significant difference in TPEWS tri and TPEWS ref was noted (P = 0.0001). Conclusions: In this cohort of pediatric transport patients, TPEWS appears to be a helpful additional assessment tool. Transport PEWS may function as a tool for assessing severity of illness, hence optimizing transport dispatch and patient disposition.

The continued growth in emergency department (ED) use combined with limited inpatient bed availability often leads to boarding of patients needing inpatient or intensive care unit admission in the ED. Emergency department personnel are experienced in the rapid assessment of trauma patients but may be less prepared or comfortable with providing ongoing management of trauma patients, especially critically injured pediatric patients. This article reviews management principles of traumatic brain injury, mechanical ventilation, and shock in the pediatric trauma patient and is intended to guide ED management of these patients until they can be transferred to an appropriate level of inpatient care.

Cardiac MRI has become widespread to characterize cardiac lesions in children. No study has examined the role of deep sedation performed by non-anesthesiologists for this investigation. We hypothesized that deep sedation provided by non-anesthesiologists can be provided with a similar safety and efficacy profile to general anesthesia provided by anesthesiologists. This is a retrospective chart review of children who underwent cardiac MRI over a 5-year period. The following data were collected from the medical records: demographic data, cardiac lesion, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status, sedation type, provider, medications, sedation duration and adverse events or interventions. Image and sedation adequacy were recorded. Of 1,465 studies identified, 1,197 met inclusion criteria; 43 studies (3.6%) used general anesthesia, 506 (42.3%) had deep sedation and eight (0.7%) required anxiolysis only. The remaining 640 studies (53.5%) were performed without sedation. There were two complications in the general anesthesia group (4.7%) versus 17 in the deep sedation group (3.4%). Sedation was considered inadequate in 22 of the 506 deep sedation patients (4.3%). Adequate images were obtained in 95.3% of general anesthesia patients versus 86.6% of deep sedation patients. There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events or cardiac MRI image adequacy for children receiving general anesthesia by anesthesiologists versus deep sedation by non-anesthesiologists. In summary, this study demonstrates that an appropriately trained sedation provider can provide deep sedation for cardiac MRI without the need for general anesthesia in selected cases.

Introduction Severe status asthmaticus (SA) in children may require intubation and mechanical ventilation with a subsequent increased risk of death. In the patient with SA and refractory hypercapnoeic respiratory failure, use of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) has been anecdotally reported for carbon dioxide removal and respiratory support. We aimed to review the experience of a single paediatric centre with the use of ECLS in children with severe refractory SA, and to compare this with international experience from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry. Methods All paediatric patients (aged from 1 to 17 years) with primary International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 diagnoses of SA receiving ECLS for respiratory failure from both the Children's Healthcare of Atlanta at Egleston (Children's at Egleston) database and the ELSO registry were reviewed. Results Thirteen children received ECLS for refractory SA at the Children's at Egleston from 1986 to 2007. The median age of the children was 10 years (range 1 to 16 years). Patients generally received aggressive use of medical and anaesthetic therapies for SA before cannulation with a median partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO2) of 130 mmHg (range 102 to 186 mmHg) and serum pH 6.89 (range 6.75 to 7.03). The median time of ECLS support was 95 hours (range 42 to 395 hours). All 13 children survived without neurological sequelae. An ELSO registry review found 64 children with SA receiving ECLS during the same time period (51 excluding the Children's at Egleston cohort). Median age, pre-ECLS PaCO2 and pH were not different in non-Children's ELSO patients. Overall survival was 60 of 64 (94%) children, including all 13 from the Children's at Egleston cohort. Survival was not significantly associated with age, pre-ECLS PaCO2, pH, cardiac arrest, mode of cannulation or time on ECLS. Significant neurological complications were noted in 3 of 64 (4%) patients; patients with neurological complications were not significantly more likely to die (P = 0.67). Conclusions Single centre and ELSO registry experience provide results of a cohort of children with refractory SA managed with ECLS support. Further study is necessary to determine if use of ECLS in this setting produces better outcomes than careful mechanical ventilation and medical therapy alone.