Sedation protocols in the pediatric intensive care unit: fact or fiction?

Delivery of a novel intervention to facilitate liberation from mechanical ventilation in paediatric intensive care: A process evaluation

BACKGROUND

Prolonged mechanical ventilation increases the risk of mortality and morbidity. Optimising sedation and early testing for possible liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) has been shown to reduce time on the ventilator. Alongside a multicentre trial of sedation and ventilation weaning, we conducted a mixed method process evaluation to understand how the intervention content and delivery was linked to trial outcomes.

METHODS

10,495 children admitted to 18 paediatric intensive care units (ICUs) in the United Kingdom participated in a stepped-wedge, cluster randomised controlled trial, with 1955 clinical staff trained to deliver the intervention. The intervention comprised assessment and optimisation of sedation levels, and bedside screening of respiratory parameters to indicate readiness for a spontaneous breathing trial prior to liberation from ventilation. 193 clinical staff were interviewed towards the end of the trial. Interview data were thematically analysed, and quantitative adherence data were analysed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

The intervention led to a reduced duration of IMV (adjusted median difference- 7.1 hours, 95% CI -9.6 to -5.3, p = 0.01). Overall intervention adherence was 75% (range 59-85%). Ease and flexibility of the intervention promoted it use; designated responsibilities, explicit pathways of decision-making and a shared language for communication fostered proactivity and consistency towards extubation. Delivery of the intervention was hindered by established hospital and unit organisational and patient care routines, clinician preference and absence of clinical leadership.

CONCLUSIONS

The SANDWICH trial showed a significant, although small, reduction in duration of IMV. Findings suggest that greater direction in decision-making pathways, robust embedment of new practice in unit routine, and capitalising on the skills of Advanced Nurse Practitioners and physiotherapists would have contributed to greater intervention effect.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN16998143.

Effectiveness, quality and implementation of pain, sedation, delirium, and iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome algorithms in pediatric intensive care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Pain, sedation, delirium, and iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome are conditions that often coexist, algorithms can be used to assist healthcare professionals in decision making. However, a comprehensive review is lacking. This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness, quality, and implementation of algorithms for the management of pain, sedation, delirium, and iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome in all pediatric intensive care settings.

Methods

A literature search was conducted on November 29, 2022, in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, and Google Scholar to identify algorithms implemented in pediatric intensive care and published since 2005. Three reviewers independently screened the records for inclusion, verified and extracted data. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias using the JBI checklists, and algorithm quality was assessed using the PROFILE tool (higher % = higher quality). Meta-analyses were performed to compare algorithms to usual care on various outcomes (length of stay, duration and cumulative dose of analgesics and sedatives, length of mechanical ventilation, and incidence of withdrawal).

Results

From 6,779 records, 32 studies, including 28 algorithms, were included. The majority of algorithms (68%) focused on sedation in combination with other conditions. Risk of bias was low in 28 studies. The average overall quality score of the algorithm was 54%, with 11 (39%) scoring as high quality. Four algorithms used clinical practice guidelines during development. The use of algorithms was found to be effective in reducing length of stay (intensive care and hospital), length of mechanical ventilation, duration of analgesic and sedative medications, cumulative dose of analgesics and sedatives, and incidence of withdrawal. Implementation strategies included education and distribution of materials (95%). Supportive determinants of algorithm implementation included leadership support and buy-in, staff training, and integration into electronic health records. The fidelity to algorithm varied from 8.2% to 100%.

Conclusions

The review suggests that algorithm-based management of pain, sedation and withdrawal is more effective than usual care in pediatric intensive care settings. There is a need for more rigorous use of evidence in the development of algorithms and the provision of details on the implementation process.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021276053, PROSPERO [CRD42021276053].

Modified ABCDEF-Bundles for Critically Ill Pediatric Patients - What Could They Look Like?

BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE

Advances in pediatric intensive care have led to markedly improved survival rates in critically ill children. Approximately 70% of those children survive with varying forms of complex chronic diseases or impairment/disabilities. Length of stay, length of mechanical ventilation and number of interventions per patient are increasing with rising complexity of underlying diseases, leading to increasing pain, agitation, withdrawal symptoms, delirium, immobility, and sleep disruption. The ICU-Liberation Collaborative of the Society of Critical Care Medicine has developed a number of preventative measures for prevention, early detection, or treatment of physical and psychiatric/psychological sequelae of oftentimes traumatic intensive care medicine. These so called ABCDEF-Bundles consist of elements for (A) assessment, prevention and management of pain, (B) spontaneous awakening and breathing trials (SAT/SBT), (C) choice of analgesia and sedation, (D) assessment, prevention and management of delirium, (E) early mobility and exercise and (F) family engagement and empowerment. For adult patients in critical care medicine, research shows significant effects of bundle-implementation on survival, mechanical ventilation, coma, delirium and post-ICU discharge disposition. Research regarding PICS in children and possible preventative or therapeutic intervention is insufficient as yet. This narrative review provides available information for modification and further research on the ABCDEF-Bundles for use in critically ill children.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A narrative review of existing literature was used.

RESULTS

One obvious distinction to adult patients is the wide range of different developmental stages of children and the even closer relationship between patient and family. Evidence for pediatric ABCDEF-Bundles is insufficient and input can only be collected from literature regarding different subsections and topics.

CONCLUSION

In addition to efforts to improve analgesia, sedation and weaning protocols with the aim of prevention, early detection and effective treatment of withdrawal symptoms or delirium, efforts are focused on adjusting ABCDEF bundle for the entire pediatric age group and on strengthening families' decision-making power, understanding parents as a resource for their child and involving them early in the care of their children.