Recognizing Pediatric ARDS: Provider Use of the PALICC Recommendations in a Tertiary Pediatric ICU.


Journal

Respiratory care
ISSN: 1943-3654
Titre abrégé: Respir Care
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7510357

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 2022
Historique:
pubmed: 22 6 2022
medline: 29 7 2022
entrez: 21 6 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

For almost 50 years, pediatricians used adult guidelines to diagnose ARDS. In 2015, specific criteria for pediatric ARDS were defined. However, it remains unclear how frequently providers recognize pediatric ARDS and whether recognition affects adherence to consensus recommendations. This was a mixed-method, retrospective study of mechanically ventilated pediatric subjects after the release of the pediatric ARDS recommendation statement. Pediatric ARDS cases were identified according to the new criteria. Provider recognition was defined by documentation in the medical record. Pediatric ARDS subjects with and without provider recognition were compared quantitatively according to clinical characteristics, adherence to lung-protective ventilation (LPV), adjunctive therapies, and outcomes. A qualitative document analysis (QDA) was performed to evaluate knowledge and beliefs surrounding the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference recommendations. Of 1,983 subject encounters, pediatric ARDS was identified in 321 (16%). Provider recognition was present in 97 (30%) cases and occurred more often in subjects who were older, had worse oxygenation deficits, or were bone marrow transplant recipients. Recognition rates increased each studied year. LPV practices did not differ based on provider recognition; however, subjects who received it were more likely to experience permissive hypoxemia and adherence to extrapulmonary recommendations. Ultimately, there was no differences in outcomes between the provider recognition and non-provider recognition groups. Three themes emerged from the QDA: (1) pediatric ARDS presents within a complex, multidimensional context, with potentially competing organ system failures; (2) similar to historical conceptualizations, pediatric ARDS was often considered a visual diagnosis, with measures of oxygenation unreferenced; and (3) emphasis was placed on non-evidence-based interventions, such as pulmonary clearance techniques, rather than on consensus recommendations. Among mechanically ventilated children, pediatric ARDS was common but recognized in a minority of cases. Potential opportunities, such as an opt-out approach to LPV, may exist for improved dissemination and implementation of recommended best practices.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
For almost 50 years, pediatricians used adult guidelines to diagnose ARDS. In 2015, specific criteria for pediatric ARDS were defined. However, it remains unclear how frequently providers recognize pediatric ARDS and whether recognition affects adherence to consensus recommendations.
METHODS
This was a mixed-method, retrospective study of mechanically ventilated pediatric subjects after the release of the pediatric ARDS recommendation statement. Pediatric ARDS cases were identified according to the new criteria. Provider recognition was defined by documentation in the medical record. Pediatric ARDS subjects with and without provider recognition were compared quantitatively according to clinical characteristics, adherence to lung-protective ventilation (LPV), adjunctive therapies, and outcomes. A qualitative document analysis (QDA) was performed to evaluate knowledge and beliefs surrounding the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference recommendations.
RESULTS
Of 1,983 subject encounters, pediatric ARDS was identified in 321 (16%). Provider recognition was present in 97 (30%) cases and occurred more often in subjects who were older, had worse oxygenation deficits, or were bone marrow transplant recipients. Recognition rates increased each studied year. LPV practices did not differ based on provider recognition; however, subjects who received it were more likely to experience permissive hypoxemia and adherence to extrapulmonary recommendations. Ultimately, there was no differences in outcomes between the provider recognition and non-provider recognition groups. Three themes emerged from the QDA: (1) pediatric ARDS presents within a complex, multidimensional context, with potentially competing organ system failures; (2) similar to historical conceptualizations, pediatric ARDS was often considered a visual diagnosis, with measures of oxygenation unreferenced; and (3) emphasis was placed on non-evidence-based interventions, such as pulmonary clearance techniques, rather than on consensus recommendations.
CONCLUSIONS
Among mechanically ventilated children, pediatric ARDS was common but recognized in a minority of cases. Potential opportunities, such as an opt-out approach to LPV, may exist for improved dissemination and implementation of recommended best practices.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35728822
pii: respcare.09806
doi: 10.4187/respcare.09806
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

985-994

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 by Daedalus Enterprises.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest.

Auteurs

Avi J Kopstick (AJ)

Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Science Center, El Paso, Texas. avi.kopstick@ttuhsc.edu.

Christina R Rufener (CR)

Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, University of California, San Diego, California.

Adrian O Banerji (AO)

Division of General Pediatrics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.

Matthew R Hudkins (MR)

Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.

Aileen L Kirby (AL)

Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.

Sheila Markwardt (S)

Biostatistics and Design Program, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.

Benjamin E Orwoll (BE)

Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, and Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH