Douglas W. Carlson

Inadvertent ketamine overdose in children: Clinical manifestations and outcome

STUDY OBJECTIVE We sought to characterize the clinical manifestations, outcome, and etiology of inadvertent ketamine overdose in the emergency department. METHODS We investigated cases of inadvertent ketamine overdose in children seen in the ED solicited through electronic mail subscription lists or reported to the Institute for Safe Medication Practices. The clinical manifestations, outcome, and reported cause for each case are described. RESULTS We identified 9 cases of inadvertent ketamine overdose in children treated in the ED. Patients received either 5(n=3), 10(n=5), or 100(n=1) times the intended dose, either by the intramuscular (n=5) or intravenous (n=4) route. All 9 experienced prolonged sedation (3 to 24 hours). Four experienced brief respiratory depression shortly after administration, and assisted ventilation was performed in 2. Two children without respiratory difficulty or hypoxemia were intubated by their physicians as a precaution. In 5 children, the dosing error was not discovered until late in the sedation, often when the child was not waking at the expected time. No adverse outcomes were noted, and all children were normal neurologically on discharge and longer-term follow-up if available. CONCLUSION No adverse outcomes were noted in 9 healthy children treated in the ED who inadvertently received 5 to 100 times the intended dose of ketamine. Toxicity manifested as prolonged sedation in all 9 and brief respiratory depression in 4. The margin of safety in ketamine overdose may be wide, although less common and more serious outcomes cannot be excluded by this small, self-reported sample.

Development of a pediatric hospitalist sedation service: training and implementation.

OBJECTIVE There is growing demand for safe and effective procedural sedation in pediatric facilities nationally. Currently, these needs are being met by a variety of providers and sedation techniques, including anesthesiologists, pediatric intensivists, emergency medicine physicians, and pediatric hospitalists. There is currently no consensus regarding the training required by non-anesthesiologists to provide safe sedation. We will outline the training method developed at St. Louis Childrens Hospital. METHODS In 2003, the Division of Pediatric Anesthesia at St. Louis Childrens Hospital approached the Division of Pediatric Hospitalist Medicine as a resource to provide pediatric sedation outside of the operating room. Over the last seven years, Pediatric Hospitalist Sedation services have evolved into a three-tiered system of sedation providers. The first tier provides sedation services in the emergency unit (EU) and the Center for After Hours Referral for Emergency Services (CARES). The second tier provides sedation throughout the hospital including the EU, CARES, inpatient units, Ambulatory Procedure Center (APC), and Pediatric Acute Wound Service (PAWS); it also provides night/weekend sedation call for urgent needs. The third tier provides sedation in all of the second-tier locations, as well as utilizing propofol in the APC. RESULTS This training program has resulted in a successful pediatric hospitalist sedation service. Based on fiscal year 2009 billing data, the division performed 2,471 sedations. We currently have 43 hospitalists providing Tier-One sedation, 18 Tier-Two providers, and six Tier-Three providers. CONCLUSIONS A pediatric hospitalist sedation service with proper training and oversight can successfully augment sedation provided by anesthesiologists.

Update on pharmacological management of procedural sedation for children.

Purpose of review The review provides an update on pharmacological techniques for procedural sedation for children outside the operating room. Recent findings An increasing number of studies of propofol, ketamine, nitrous oxide, dexmedetomidine, and intranasal administration of drugs for procedural sedation of children continue to be reported. Summary Propofol and ketamine are commonly used for procedural sedation in children and the use of dexmedetomidine and nitrous oxide is increasing. Although the intravenous route remains the mainstay; intranasal drug administration is increasingly used for anxiolysis and moderate sedation.

Pediatric hospitalists fill varied roles in the care of newborns.

The use of hospitalists in the care of newborns appears to be increasing and may be advantageous for several reasons, including decreased cost, decreased length of stay, increased patient survival, increased availability, and greater experience among hospitalists. Research specific to the use of hospitalists in newborn medicine needs to be done to support this hypothesis. Non-clinical activities such as teaching, developing clinical guidelines, and taking an active role in hospital and academic leadership also may improve education and patient care. It is essential that hospitalists who provide care in nurseries work to smooth the transition to a PCP and not act as a barrier. Relatively speaking, the care provided by hospitalists is most often short-term, and the relationship between infants and their parents with the PCP should begin as soon as possible.

Variation in Procedural Sedation Practices Among Children’s Hospitals

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Children often need procedural sedation for painful procedures. There are few data on type of provider, site of sedation, and agents used for procedural sedation in hospitals across the nation. The objective was to determine procedural sedation practices for hospitalized children outside the PICU and emergency department. METHODS Surveys were sent to 89 pediatric hospitalist (PH) leaders in hospitals belonging to the Child Health Corporation of America or the National Association of Childrens Hospitals and Related Institutions. RESULTS We received responses from 56 PHs (63%), of whom 49 (55%) completed the survey. PHs provided sedation in 18 hospitals. Provider, setting, and agents used for procedural sedation varied. The primary providers of procedural sedation for abscess incision and drainage, renal biopsy, joint aspiration, computed tomography, and MRI were anesthesiologists. A significantly greater percentage of hospitals where PHs did not provide procedural sedation used the operating room for abscess incision and drainage compared with hospitals where PHs provided procedural sedation (63% vs 28%, respectively). Postoperative/abscess dressing change, vesicocystourethrogram, and ≥1 painful procedure were performed without sedation in significantly greater percentage of hospitals where PHs did not provide procedural sedation compared with hospitals where PHs provided procedural sedation. CONCLUSIONS There is variability in sedation practices in hospitals across the nation, which affects patient care and use of resources such as the operating room. In hospitals where PHs provide procedural sedation, there is less operating room use and fewer painful procedures for which no sedation is provided.

Evaluating Patient-Centered Outcomes in Clinical Trials of Procedural Sedation, Part 1 Efficacy: Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research Recommendations

The Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research, established by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks public–private partnership with the US Food and Drug Administration, convened a meeting of sedation experts from a variety of clinical specialties and research backgrounds with the objective of developing recommendations for procedural sedation research. Four core outcome domains were recommended for consideration in sedation clinical trials: (1) safety, (2) efficacy, (3) patient-centered and/or family-centered outcomes, and (4) efficiency. This meeting identified core outcome measures within the efficacy and patient-centered and/or family-centered domains. Safety will be addressed in a subsequent meeting, and efficiency will not be addressed at this time. These measures encompass depth and levels of sedation, proceduralist and patient satisfaction, patient recall, and degree of pain experienced. Consistent use of the recommended outcome measures will facilitate the comprehensive reporting across sedation trials, along with meaningful comparisons among studies and interventions in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Survey of academic pediatric hospitalist programs in the US: organizational, administrative, and financial factors.

BACKGROUND Many pediatric academic centers have hospital medicine programs. Anecdotal data suggest that variability exists in program structure. OBJECTIVE To provide a description of the organizational, administrative, and financial structures of academic pediatric hospital medicine (PHM). METHODS This online survey focused on the organizational, administrative, and financial aspects of academic PHM programs, which were defined as hospitalist programs at US institutions associated with accredited pediatric residency program (n = 246) and identified using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database. PHM directors and/or residency directors were targeted by both mail and the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Hospital Medicine LISTSERV. RESULTS The overall response rate was 48.8% (120/246). 81.7% (98/120) of hospitals reported having an academic PHM program, and 9.1% (2/22) of hospitals without a program reported plans to start a program in the next 3 years. Over a quarter of programs provide coverage at multiple sites. Variability was identified in many program factors, including hospitalist workload and in-house coverage provided. Respondents reported planning increased in-house hospitalist coverage coinciding with the 2011 ACGME work-hour restrictions. Few programs reported having revenues greater than expenses (26% single site, 4% multiple site). CONCLUSIONS PHM programs exist in the majority of academic centers, and there appears to be variability in many program factors. This study provides the most comprehensive data on academic PHM programs and can be used for benchmarking as well as program development.

Procedural sedation by pediatric hospitalists: analysis of the nature and incidence of complications during ketamine and nitrous oxide sedation.

OBJECTIVE The goal of this study was to determine the nature and rate of complications during procedural sedation by pediatric hospitalists (PH) using ketamine and nitrous oxide (N2O). METHODS This study was a retrospective review and analysis of a quality improvement database for sedations performed by PH at St Louis Childrens Hospital from February 2007 to February 2013. Information was obtained on sedations performed and reported in the quality improvement database by PH over this time period using ketamine and N2O. RESULTS PH performed 8870 sedations from 2007 to 2013, 60.2% using ketamine and 39.8% using N2O. Procedural completion rates were >99%; 0.12% of sedations were not completed due to inadequate sedation, and sedation level was not achieved in 1.71% of sedations. There were no occurrences of death, need for cardiopulmonary resuscitation, unplanned intubation, or emergency anesthesia consultation. The only major complications were 4 unplanned admissions, 2 each with ketamine and N2O. With ketamine, the 2 highest rates of complications were airway repositioning (3.99%) and nausea and/or vomiting (2.98%). With N2O, the 2 highest complication rates were nausea and/or vomiting (8.50%) and airway repositioning (1.10%). Respiratory and cardiovascular events were more frequently encountered with ketamine, whereas nausea/vomiting, sedation level not achieved, and inadequate sedation resulting in procedure not completed occurred more frequently with N2O. CONCLUSIONS PH at St Louis Childrens Hospital successfully provided sedation by using ketamine and N2O with low rates of complications for a variety of procedures.

Pediatric neurohospitalists An idea that has come of age

For close to 2 decades now, hospitalists have accounted for a growing number and increasingly specialized cohort of physicians in academic and community hospitals.1,2 The reasons for this are many and varied: decreasing availability of time for inpatient rounding among private practice physicians and physician-scientists and physician-educators in the academic sector; increasing complexity and technical requirements of inpatients and the care they require; increasing requirements for oversight of house staff and documentation of clinical teaching and care; requirement for mastery of electronic interfaces unique to the inpatient enterprise; and growing differences in priorities and philosophies between outpatient and inpatient medical care. Adult internal medicine around the United States and Canada has seen the expansion of programs in general hospitalist medicine, gastroenterology hospitalists, and neurohospitalists, to name but a few.3

A Proposed Mechanism to Assess Knowledge of Pediatric Hospitalists to Identify and Manage Rare Events During Procedural Sedation

OBJECTIVE The goal of this study was to assess the knowledge of pediatric hospitalists (PHs) in identifying and managing rare events during procedural sedation (PS) with ketamine and nitrous oxide (N2O). METHODS A Web-based survey with multiple choice questions and case scenarios was used to determine the knowledge of PHs in identifying infrequent contraindications and managing laryngospasm, a rare life-threatening complication during PS. The survey was sent to all PHs at St Louis Childrens Hospital. RESULTS Forty percent of experienced PHs (>50 sedation procedures performed) and 5% of inexperienced PHs (<50 sedation procedures performed) identified all 4 ketamine contraindications. Twenty-one percent of experienced PHs and 4% of inexperienced PHs identified all 6 N2O contraindications. Ninety-five percent of PHs identified presence of laryngospasm in a case scenario. As the patient in the case scenario progressed from partial to complete laryngospasm, 84% and 82% of PHs chose either the preferred or acceptable strategy to manage the patient. With further deterioration in the patients status in the scenario, 66% and 71% of PHs chose either the preferred or acceptable strategy to manage the patient. The preferred strategy at each step is one that attempted the least invasive maneuver to manage the patient. There was no significant difference between experienced and inexperienced PHs in the management of laryngospasm. CONCLUSIONS Knowledge gaps exist among PHs regarding contraindications for ketamine and N2O that are infrequently encountered in patients and for the management of laryngospasm, a rare adverse event with ketamine. Ongoing teaching tools are necessary to assess and maintain the knowledge of sedation providers regarding rare events during PS that can improve their proficiency.