Search

BackgroundCommon, operational definitions are crucial to assess interventions and outcomes related to pediatric mechanical ventilation. These definitions can reduce unnecessary variability among research and quality improvement efforts, to ensure findings are generalizable, and can be pooled to establish best practices.Research questionCan 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 methodsA 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 that 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.ResultsIn 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 noninvasive respiratory support), liberation and failed attempts to liberate from invasive mechanical ventilation, liberation from respiratory support, duration of noninvasive 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 noninvasive respiratory support.InterpretationWe propose that 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 multiprofessional panel to establish pediatrics-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. A systematic review was conducted for questions that 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 and drafted and voted on the recommendations. Measurements and Main Results: Three questions related to systematic screening using an extubation readiness testing bundle and a spontaneous breathing trial as part of the bundle met Modified Convergence of Opinion on Recommendations criteria of ⩾80% agreement. For the remaining eight questions, five systematic reviews yielded 12 recommendations related to the methods and duration of spontaneous breathing trials, measures of respiratory muscle strength, assessment of risk of postextubation upper airway obstruction and its prevention, use of postextubation noninvasive respiratory support, and sedation. Most recommendations were conditional and based on low to very low certainty of evidence. Conclusions: This clinical practice guideline provides a conceptual framework with evidence-based recommendations for best practices related to pediatric ventilator liberation.

BACKGROUND: A protocolized extubation readiness test (ERT), including a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT), is recommended for patients who are intubated. This quality-improvement project aimed to improve peri-extubation outcomes by using a high-risk ERT protocol in intubated cardiac patients in addition to a standard-risk protocol. METHODS: After baseline data collection, we implemented a standard-risk ERT protocol (pressure support plus PEEP), followed by a high-risk ERT protocol (PEEP alone) in cardiac subjects who were intubated. The primary outcome, a composite of extubation failure and rescue noninvasive respiratory support, was compared between phases. Ventilator duration and use of postextubation respiratory support were balancing measures. RESULTS: A total of 213 cardiac subjects who were intubated were studied, with extubation failure and rescue noninvasive respiratory support occurring in 10 of 213 (4.7%) and 8 of 213 (3.8%), respectively. We observed a reduction in the composite outcome among the 3 consecutive phases (5/29 [17.2%], 10/110 [9.1%] vs 3/74 [4.1%]; P = .10), but this did not reach statistical significance. In the logistic regression model when adjusting for admission type, the high-risk ERT protocol was associated with a significant reduction of the composite outcome (adjusted odds ratio 0.20, 95% CI 0.04-0.091; P = .037), whereas the standard-risk ERT protocol was not (adjusted odds ratio 0.48, 95% CI 0.15-1.53; P = .21). This was not accompanied by a longer ventilator duration (2.0 [1.0, 3.0], 2.0 [1.0-4.0], vs adjusted odds ratio 2.0 [95% [1.0-6.0]; P = .99) or an increased use of planned noninvasive respiratory support (10/29 [35.5%], 35/110 [31.8%], vs 25/74 [33.8%]; P > .99). CONCLUSIONS: In this quality-improvement project, a high-risk ERT protocol was implemented with improvement in peri-extubation outcomes among cardiac subjects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background As global travel resumed in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) endemicity, the potential of aircraft wastewater monitoring to provide early warning of disease trends for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants and other infectious diseases, particularly at international air travel hubs, was recognized. We therefore assessed and compared the feasibility of testing wastewater from inbound aircraft and airport terminals for 18 pathogens including SARS-CoV-2 in Singapore, a popular travel hub in Asia. Methods Wastewater samples collected from inbound medium- and long-haul flights and airport terminals were tested for SARS-CoV-2. Next Generation Sequencing was carried out on positive samples to identify SARS-CoV-2 variants. Airport and aircraft samples were further tested for 17 other pathogens through quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. Results The proportion of SARS-CoV-2-positive samples and the average virus load was higher for wastewater samples from aircraft as compared with airport terminals. Cross-correlation analyses indicated that viral load trends from airport wastewater led local COVID-19 case trends by 2–5 days. A total of 10 variants (44 sub-lineages) were successfully identified from aircraft wastewater and airport terminals, and four variants of interest and one variant under monitoring were detected in aircraft and airport wastewater 18–31 days prior to detection in local clinical cases. The detection of five respiratory and four enteric viruses in aircraft wastewater samples further underscores the potential to expand aircraft wastewater to monitoring pathogens beyond SARS-CoV-2. Conclusion Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of aircraft wastewater testing for monitoring infectious diseases threats, potentially detecting signals before clinical cases are reported. The triangulation of similar datapoints from aircraft wastewater of international travel nodes could therefore serve as a useful early warning system for global health threats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Postextubation respiratory support in pediatric ARDS may be used to support the recovering respiratory system and promote timely, successful liberation from mechanical ventilation. This study's aims were to (1) describe the use of postextubation respiratory support in pediatric ARDS from the time of extubation to hospital discharge, (2) identify potential risk factors for post-extubation respiratory support, and (3) provide preliminary data for future larger studies. METHODS: This pilot single-center prospective cohort study recruited subjects with pediatric ARDS. Subjects' respiratory status up to hospital discharge, the use of postextubation respiratory support, and how it changed over time were recorded. Analysis was performed comparing subjects who received postextubation respiratory support versus those who did not and compared its use among pediatric ARDS severity categories. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine variables associated with the use of postextubation respiratory support and included oxygenation index (OI), ventilator duration, and weight. RESULTS: Seventy-three subjects with pediatric ARDS, with median age and OI of 4 (0.6-10.5) y and 7.3 (4.9-12.7), respectively, were analyzed. Postextubation respiratory support was provided to 54/73 (74%) subjects: 28/45 (62.2%), 19/21 (90.5%), and 7/7 (100%) for mild, moderate, and severe pediatric ARDS, respectively, (P < .01). OI and mechanical ventilation duration were higher in subjects who received postextubation respiratory support (8.7 [5.4-14] vs 4.6 [3.7-7], P < .001 and 10 [7-17] d vs 4 [2-7] d, P < .001) compared to those who did not. At hospital discharge, 12/67 (18.2%) survivors received home respiratory support (6 subjects died prior to hospital discharge). In the multivariable model, ventilator duration (adjusted odds ratio 1.3 [95% CI 1.0-1.7], P 5 .050) and weight (adjusted odds ratio 0.95 [95% CI 0.91-0.99], P 5 .02) were associated with the use of postextubation respiratory support. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of intubated subjects with pediatric ARDS received respiratory support postextubation, and a substantial proportion continued to require it up to hospital discharge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]