Jana A. Stockwell

The Management of Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Infants and Children Older Than 3 Months of Age: Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society and the Infectious Diseases Society of America

Abstract Evidenced-based guidelines for management of infants and children with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) were prepared by an expert panel comprising clinicians and investigators representing community pediatrics, public health, and the pediatric specialties of critical care, emergency medicine, hospital medicine, infectious diseases, pulmonology, and surgery. These guidelines are intended for use by primary care and subspecialty providers responsible for the management of otherwise healthy infants and children with CAP in both outpatient and inpatient settings. Site-of-care management, diagnosis, antimicrobial and adjunctive surgical therapy, and prevention are discussed. Areas that warrant future investigations are also highlighted.

Ultrasound-guided central venous catheter placement decreases complications and decreases placement attempts compared with the landmark technique in patients in a pediatric intensive care unit*

Objective:To determine whether ultrasound (US) increases successful central venous catheter (CVC) placement, decreases site attempts, and decreases CVC placement complications. Design and Setting:A prospective observational cohort study evaluating a transition by the Pediatric Critical Care Medicine service to US-guided CVC placement. Medical and surgical patients in a 21-bed quaternary multidisciplinary pediatric intensive care unit had CVCs placed by attendings, fellows, residents, and a nurse practitioner. Patients:Ninety-three patients were prospectively enrolled into the landmark (LM) group and 119 into the US group. Interventions:After collection of prospective LM data, training with US guidance was provided. CVCs were subsequently placed with US guidance. Measurements and Main Results:Operator information, disease process, emergent/routine, sites attempted, and complications were recorded. Procedure time was from initial skin puncture to guidewire placement. There was no difference overall in success rates (88.2% LM vs. 90.8% US, p = 0.54) or time to successful placement (median seconds 269 LM vs. 150 US, p = 0.14) between the two groups. Median number of attempts were fewer with US for all CVCs attempted (3 vs. 1, p < 0.001) as were attempts at >1 anatomical site (20.7% LM vs. 5.9% US, p = 0.001). Use of US was associated with fewer inadvertent artery punctures (8.5% vs. 19.4%, p = 0.03). Time to successful placement by residents was decreased with US (median 919 seconds vs. 405 seconds, p = 0.02). More internal jugular CVCs were placed during the US period than during the LM period (13.4% vs. 2.1%). Conclusions:US-guided CVC placement in children is associated with decreased number of anatomical sites attempted and decreased number of attempts to gain placement. Time to placement by residents was decreased with US, but not the time to placement by other operators. US guidance increased the use of internal jugular catheter placement and decreased artery punctures. US guidance did not improve success rates.

Pediatric critical care physician-administered procedural sedation using propofol: a report from the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium Database.

Objective: Increasing demand for pediatric procedural sedation has resulted in a marked increase in provision of pediatric procedural sedation by pediatric critical care physicians both inside and outside of the ICU. Reported experience of pediatric critical care physicians–administered pediatric procedural sedation is limited. We used the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium database to evaluate a multicenter experience with propofol by pediatric critical care physicians in all settings. Setting: Review of national Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium database to identify pediatric procedural sedation provided by pediatric critical care physicians from 2007 to 2012. Demographic and clinical data were collected to describe pediatric procedural sedation selection, location, and delivery. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors associated with pediatric procedural sedation–related adverse events and complications. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 91,189 pediatric procedural sedation performed by pediatric critical care physicians using propofol were included in the database. Median age was 60.0 months (range, 0–264 months; interquartile range, 34.0–132.0); 81.9% of patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists class I or II. Most sedations were performed in dedicated sedation or radiology units (80.9%). Procedures were successfully completed in 99.9% of patients. A propofol bolus alone was used in 52.8%, and 41.7% received bolus plus continuous infusion. Commonly used adjunctive medications were lidocaine (35.3%), opioids (23.3%), and benzodiazepines (16.4%). Overall adverse event incidence was 5.0% (95% CI, 4.9–5.2%), which included airway obstruction (1.6%), desaturation (1.5%), coughing (1.0%), and emergent airway intervention (0.7%). No deaths occurred; a single cardiac arrest was reported in a 13-month-old child receiving propofol and ketamine, with no untoward neurologic sequelae. Risk factors associated with adverse event included: location of sedation, number of adjunctive medications, upper and lower respiratory diagnosis, prematurity diagnosis, weight, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, and painful procedure. Conclusions: Pediatric procedural sedation using propofol can be provided by pediatric critical care physicians effectively and with a low incidence of adverse events.

Incidence of adrenal insufficiency and impact of corticosteroid supplementation in critically ill children with systemic inflammatory syndrome and vasopressor-dependent shock.

Introduction:Adrenal insufficiency may be common in adults and children with vasopressor-resistant shock. We developed a protocolized approach to low-dose adrenocorticotropin testing and empirical low-dose glucocorticoid/mineralocorticoid supplementation in children with systemic inflammatory response syndrome and persistent hypotension following fluid resuscitation and vasopressor infusion. Hypothesis:We hypothesized that absolute and relative adrenal insufficiency was common in children with systemic inflammatory response syndrome requiring vasopressor support and that steroid administration would be associated with decreased vasopressor need. Methods:Retrospective review of pediatric patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome and vasopressor-dependent shock receiving protocol-based adrenocorticotropin testing and low-dose steroid supplementation. The incidence of absolute and relative adrenal insufficiency was determined using several definitions. Vasopressor dose requirements were evaluated before, and following, initiation of corticosteroids. Results:Seventy-eight patients met inclusion criteria for systemic inflammatory response syndrome and shock; 40 had septic shock. Median age was 84 months (range, 0.5–295). By adrenocorticotropin testing, 44 (56%) had absolute adrenal insufficiency, 39 (50%) had relative adrenal insufficiency, and 69 (88%) had either form of adrenal insufficiency. Adrenal insufficiency incidence was significantly higher in children >2 yrs (p = .0209). Therapeutic interventions included median 80-mL/kg fluid resuscitation; 65% of patients required dopamine, 58% norepinephrine, and 49% dopamine plus norepinephrine. With steroid supplementation, median dopamine dose decreased from 10 to 4 &mgr;g/kg/min at 4 hrs (p = .0001), and median dose of norepinephrine decreased from 0.175 &mgr;g/kg/min to 0.05 &mgr;g/kg/min at 4 hrs (p = .039). Conclusions:Absolute and relative adrenal insufficiency was prevalent in this cohort of children with systemic inflammatory response syndrome and vasopressor-dependent shock and increased with age. Introduction of steroids produced a significant reduction in vasopressor duration and dosage. Use of low-dose adrenocorticotropin testing may help further delineate populations who require steroid supplementation.

Pediatric procedural sedation by a dedicated nonanesthesiology pediatric sedation service using propofol.

Objectives: To evaluate the success and dosing requirements of propofol in children for prolonged procedural sedation by a nonanesthesiology-based sedation service. Methods: The pediatric sedation service at this institution uses propofol as its preferred sedative, and the local guideline suggests using 3 mg/kg for induction and 5 mg kg−1 h−1 for maintenance sedation. Doses can be adjusted as needed to individualize successful sedation. A retrospective analysis of patients sedated for 30 minutes or longer was conducted. Patients were stratified into 4 cohorts based on age (<1 year [n = 16], 1-2 years [n = 85], 3-7 years [n = 54], and >7 years [n = 55]) and dosing patterns, success, and adverse effects were investigated. Results: Two hundred forty-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. Mean age was 4.8 years (SD, 4.1). The mean induction dose was 3.2 mg/kg (range, 0.9-9.7), and the mean maintenance infusion was 5.2 mg kg−1 h−1 (range, 0.14-21.3). No differences were seen in the induction doses in the different age cohorts, yet the SD was largest in the youngest cohort compared to any other. Although no differences were seen in maintenance rates by age, the greatest SD for dosing was seen in the oldest cohort. For all ages, all sedations were successful (100%) and unanticipated adverse effects rare (<1%). Conclusions: Although it seems that the mean dosing of propofol does not vary significantly with age, there is greater variability in induction dosage for those younger than 1 year and in maintenance dosing for those 7 years or older. The results and general dosing parameters may assist pediatric subspecialists in using propofol for prolonged procedural sedation.

Protocol-Driven Ventilator Management in Children: Comparison to Nonprotocol Care

The purpose of this study was to compare ventilator weaning time, time to spontaneous breathing, and overall ventilator hours duration with use of a ventilator management protocol (VMP) versus standard nonprotocol-based care in a pediatric intensive care unit. A multidisciplinary task force developed a comprehensive protocol for ventilator management with four specific phases: initial ventilator set up and adjustment, weaning, minimal settings, and spontaneous mode prior to extubation. Medical records of ventilated patients both before and after protocol implementation were reviewed. A total of 187 patients were studied (89 nonprotocol and 98 VMP patients). No differences were seen between groups in PRISM scores, Murray scores, or oxygenation indices, but VMP patients were significantly younger (P= .03). Ventilator weaning times (P= .005) and time to spontaneous breathing modes (P= .006) were significantly decreased in VMP patients compared to nonprotocol patients, but overall ventilator duration was not significantly different. No significant differences were seen in extubation failure, use of corticosteroids, or use of racemic epinephrine between groups. Use of an institution-specific VMP developed by a multidisciplinary team was associated with significantly reduced ventilator weaning time and time to spontaneous breathing. Further studies are needed.

Nosocomial infections in the pediatric intensive care unit: Affecting the impact on safety and outcome

Objective: To define the most common types of nosocomial infections in critically ill children and to summarize the effect of methods to reduce their prevalence. Design: Review of published literature. Results: While in the pediatric intensive care unit, 16% of children develop a nosocomial infection. Processes affecting modifiable factors of care can reduce the prevalence of hospital-acquired infections. Conclusions: The occurrence of a nosocomial infection represents failure and is not an acceptable outcome of treating critically ill children. Evidence-based process improvement can lead to significant reductions in hospital-acquired infections in children. Most of the processes and practices discussed are not novel or intriguing but, when performed routinely and appropriately, can lead to reductions in hospital-acquired infections.

Risk factors leading to failed procedural sedation in children outside the operating room.

Objectives Deep sedation enables effective performance of imaging or procedures in children, but failed sedation still occurs. We desired to determine the factors that were associated with failed sedation in children receiving deep sedation by a dedicated nonanesthesia sedation service and hypothesized that the presence of an upper respiratory infection (URI) and/or other risk factors would increase the probability of failing sedation. Methods Patient sedation records from January 2007 to December 2011 were reviewed to identify 83 failed sedations. A convenience sample of 523 patients with successful sedation from January 2009 to February 2009 was identified for comparison. Results Seven of the 13 predictors were significantly associated with failed sedation; these are as follows: (1) URI (P = 0.008); (2) congenital heart disease (P = 0.021); (3) obstructive sleep apnea (OSA)/snoring (P < 0.001); (4) the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class of above II (P < 0.001); (5) obesity (P < 0.001); (6) increased weight (P < 0.001); and (7) older age (P < 0.001). Sex, prematurity, asthma, gastroesophageal reflux, and cerebral palsy/developmental delay were not associated with failure. Pulmonary hypertension was not able to be assessed because only 1 patient with pulmonary hypertension was sedated. A forward stepwise regression identified 5 variables that could be considered useful predictors of failed sedation, which are as follows: (1) URI (odds ratio [OR], 2.73 [range, 1.58–4.73]); (2) OSA/snoring (OR, 2.06 [range, 1.22–3.48]); (3) ASA class III (OR, 2.31 [range, 1.40–3.84]); (4) obesity (OR, 1.95 [range, 1.01–3.75]); and (5) older age (OR, 1.15 [range, 1.08–1.21). Conclusions Presence of a URI, a history of OSA/snoring, ASA class III, obesity, and older age are associated with increased probability of failed sedation. A prospective, multicenter observational study would allow for the robust modeling of comorbidities to guide pediatric sedation management.

The use of a modified pediatric early warning score to assess stability of pediatric patients during transport.

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 (TPEWStri), TPEWS calculated at referring facility by the team (TPEWSref), and final TPEWS at the accepting institution (TPEWSacc) 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 TPEWSref was 3 (0–9) upon initial assessment, and TPEWSacc 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 (TPEWStri) was calculated from information given from the referring facility in 59 of the 100 patients. A significant difference in TPEWStri and TPEWSref 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.

Procedural Sedation Outside of the Operating Room Using Ketamine in 22,645 Children: A Report From the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium

Objective: Most studies of ketamine administered to children for procedural sedation are limited to emergency department use. The objective of this study was to describe the practice of ketamine procedural sedation outside of the operating room and identify risk factors for adverse events. Design: Observational cohort review of data prospectively collected from 2007 to 2015 from the multicenter Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium. Setting: Sedation services from academic, community, free-standing children’s hospitals and pediatric wards within general hospitals. Patients: Children from birth to 21 years old or younger. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Describe patient characteristics, procedure type, and location of administration of ketamine procedural sedation. Analyze sedation-related adverse events and severe adverse events. Identify risk factors for adverse events using multivariable logistic regression. A total of 22,645 sedations performed using ketamine were analyzed. Median age was 60 months (range, < 1 mo to < 22 yr); 72.0% were American Society of Anesthesiologists-Physical Status less than III. The majority of sedations were performed in dedicated sedation or radiology units (64.6%). Anticholinergics, benzodiazepines, or propofol were coadministered in 19.8%, 57.9%, and 35.4%, respectively. The overall adverse event occurrence rate was 7.26% (95% CI, 6.92–7.60%), and the frequency of severe adverse events was 1.77% (95% CI, 1.60–1.94%). Procedures were not completed in 39 of 19,747 patients (0.2%). Three patients experienced cardiac arrest without death, all associated with laryngospasm. Conclusions: This is a description of a large prospectively collected dataset of pediatric ketamine administration predominantly outside of the operating room. The overall incidence of severe adverse events was low. Risk factors associated with increased odds of adverse events were as follows: cardiac and gastrointestinal disease, lower respiratory tract infection, and the coadministration of propofol and anticholinergics.