Accuracy of Pancreatic Stone Protein for diagnosis of sepsis in children admitted to pediatric intensive care or high-dependency care: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic Stone Protein (PSP) is one of the most promising diagnostic and prognostic markers. The aim of the study was to assess the accuracy of PSP, compared to C-Reactive Protein (CRP), and Procalcitonin (PCT) for sepsis diagnosis in pediatric patients. Furthermore, we explored the correlation of PSP levels with sepsis severity and organ failure measured with PELOD-2 score.

METHODS

Forty pediatric patients were enrolled following admission to pediatric intensive care, high dependency care or pediatric ward. PSP blood levels were measured in Emergency Department (nanofluidic point-of-care immunoassay; abioSCOPE, Abionic SA, Switzerland) on day 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 from the onset of the clinical signs and symptoms of sepsis or SIRS. Inclusion criteria were: 1) patient age (1 month to 18 years old), 2) signs and symptoms of SIRS, irrespective of association with organ dysfunction. Exclusion criteria were: 1) hemato-oncological diseases and/or immunodeficiencies, 2) pancreatic diseases.

RESULTS

Septic patients showed higher PSP levels than those with non-infectious systemic inflammation. The optimal cut-off in diagnosis of sepsis for PSP at day 1 was 167 ng/ml resulted in a sensitivity of 59% (95% IC 36%-79%) and a specificity of 83% (95% IC 58%-96%) with an AUC of 0.636 for PSP in comparison to AUC of 0.722 for PCT and 0.503 for C-RP. ROC analysis for outcome (survival versus no survival) has showed AUC 0.814 for PSP; AUC 0.814 for PCT; AUC of 0.657 for C-RP.

CONCLUSIONS

PSP could distinguish sepsis from non-infectious systemic inflammation; however, our results need to be confirmed in larger pediatric population.

Pediatric sepsis survival in pediatric and general emergency departments

OBJECTIVE

Understanding differences in mortality rate secondary to sepsis between pediatric and general emergency departments (EDs) would help identify strategies to improve pediatric sepsis care. We aimed to determine if pediatric sepsis mortality differs between pediatric and general EDs.

METHODS

We performed a nationally representative, retrospective cohort study using the 2008-2017 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS) to examine visits by patients less than 19 years old with a diagnostic code of severe sepsis or septic shock. We generated national estimates of study outcomes using NEDS survey weights. We compared pediatric to general EDs on the outcomes of ED mortality and hospital mortality. We determined adjusted mortality risk using logistic regression, controlling for age, gender, complex care code, and geographic region.

RESULTS

There were 54,129 weighted pediatric ED visits during the study period with a diagnosis code of severe sepsis or septic shock. Of these visits, 285 died in the ED (0.58%) and 5065 died during their hospital stay (9.8%). Mortality risk prior to ED disposition in pediatric and general EDs was 0.31% and 0.72%, respectively (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36 (0.14-0.93)). Mortality risk prior to hospital discharge in pediatric and general EDs was 7.5% and 10.9%, respectively (aOR, 95% CI: 0.55 (0.41-0.72)).

CONCLUSIONS

In a nationally representative sample, pediatric mortality from severe sepsis or septic shock was lower in pediatric EDs than in general EDs. Identifying features of pediatric ED care associated with improved sepsis mortality could translate into improved survival for children wherever they present with sepsis.

Learning to Beat the Shock Clock: A Low-Fidelity Simulation Board Game for Pediatric and Emergency Medicine Residents

INTRODUCTION

Resident physicians may have difficulty with identifying and managing pediatric septic shock due to limited patient encounters. Simulation-based interventions can enhance competency. We developed a low-fidelity tabletop simulation game to teach pediatric septic shock and compared residents' knowledge of and comfort with recognition and management of septic shock.

METHODS

Pediatric and emergency medicine residents participated in an education session involving a low-fidelity, tabletop simulation in which they managed two simulated pediatric patients with septic shock. The two patients were a 12-year-old healthy male with cold shock due to a urinary tract infection and a 5-year-old female with a history of leukemia who developed warm shock due to pneumonia. Because this session was presented as a board game rather than high-fidelity simulation, learners focused on decision making rather than the mechanics of procedures. Residents completed a survey and a knowledge-based test before and after this session.

RESULTS

Twenty-three pediatric and nine emergency medicine residents participated. Correct responses for the preintervention test were 71%, compared with 83% postintervention. The difference in rates was 12% (95% confidence interval, -0.17 to -0.07; p < .0001). Residents rated this modality as being more useful than lectures or reading and as equivalent to bedside teaching and high-fidelity simulation.

DISCUSSION

Our pilot low-fidelity simulation improved resident knowledge and comfort with pediatric septic shock care. Further studies are needed to address the impact of low-fidelity simulations on patient outcomes.