RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Recognizing the inconsistencies in sedation practices, the Society for Pediatric Sedation convened this meeting to begin the process of defining quality as it relates to the field of pediatric sedation. SCOPE: Millions of procedures are performed each year on children. Caring for children, even for routine procedures, can be challenging. Children may not have the ability to follow commands, tolerate painful stimuli, or even lie still for a diagnostic study. Therefore, pharmacologic sedation with medications designed to blunt the awareness of the patient and provide relief of pain and anxiety is necessary. METHODS: A multidisciplinary group of sedation providers and quality methodology experts met in November 2011. Through 2 days of didactics, small workgroups, and consensus discussions, the attendees met the objectives of exploring quality in pediatric sedation around the Institute of Medicine's () six aims of quality: Safe, Effective, Patient Centered, Timely, Efficient, and Equitable. RESULTS: The conference findings outlined in this document address the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ) mission of improving quality healthcare for all Americans, especially for underrepresented groups such as children. The conference outlines a key next step in defining and achieving quality in pediatric procedural sedation.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: No standardized educational curriculum exists for pediatric sedation practitioners. We sought to describe the curriculum and implementation of a pediatric sedation provider course and assess learner satisfaction with the course curriculum. DESCRIPTION: The course content was determined by formulating a needs assessment using published sedation guidelines, reports of sedation related adverse events, and a survey of sedation practitioners. Students provided feedback regarding satisfaction with the course immediately following the course and 6 months later. EVALUATION: The course consisted of 5 didactic lectures, 1 small-group session, 6 simulation scenarios, a course syllabus, and a written examination. The course was conducted over 1 day at 3 different locations. Sixty-nine students completed the course and were uniformly satisfied with the course curriculum. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized pediatric sedation provider course was developed for sedation practitioners and consisted of a series of lectures and simulation scenarios. Overall satisfaction with the course was positive.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

IMPORTANCE: Resuscitation training programs use simulation and debriefing as an educational modality with limited standardization of debriefing format and content. Our study attempted to address this issue by using a debriefing script to standardize debriefings. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether use of a scripted debriefing by novice instructors and/or simulator physical realism affects knowledge and performance in simulated cardiopulmonary arrests. DESIGN Prospective, randomized, factorial study design. SETTING: The study was conducted from 2008 to 2011 at 14 Examining Pediatric Resuscitation Education Using Simulation and Scripted Debriefing (EXPRESS) network simulation programs. Interprofessional health care teams participated in 2 simulated cardiopulmonary arrests, before and after debriefing. PARTICIPANTS: We randomized 97 participants (23 teams) to nonscripted low-realism; 93 participants (22 teams) to scripted low-realism; 103 participants (23 teams) to nonscripted high-realism; and 94 participants (22 teams) to scripted high-realism groups. INTERVENTION Participants were randomized to 1 of 4 arms: permutations of scripted vs nonscripted debriefing and high-realism vs low-realism simulators. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Percentage difference (0%-100%) in multiple choice question (MCQ) test (individual scores), Behavioral Assessment Tool (BAT) (team leader performance), and the Clinical Performance Tool (CPT) (team performance) scores postintervention vs preintervention comparison (PPC). RESULTS: There was no significant difference at baseline in nonscripted vs scripted groups for MCQ (P = .87), BAT (P = .99), and CPT (P = .95) scores. Scripted debriefing showed greater improvement in knowledge (mean [95% CI] MCQ-PPC, 5.3% [4.1%-6.5%] vs 3.6% [2.3%-4.7%]; P = .04) and team leader behavioral performance (median [interquartile range (IQR)] BAT-PPC, 16% [7.4%-28.5%] vs 8% [0.2%-31.6%]; P = .03). Their improvement in clinical performance during simulated cardiopulmonary arrests was not significantly different (median [IQR] CPT-PPC, 7.9% [4.8%-15.1%] vs 6.7% [2.8%-12.7%], P = .18). Level of physical realism of the simulator had no independent effect on these outcomes. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The use of a standardized script by novice instructors to facilitate team debriefings improves acquisition of knowledge and team leader behavioral performance during subsequent simulated cardiopulmonary arrests. Implementation of debriefing scripts in resuscitation courses may help to improve learning outcomes and standardize delivery of debriefing, particularly for novice instructors.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Pentobarbital and propofol are commonly used to sedate children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium (PSRC) was created in 2003 to improve pediatric sedation process and outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To use PSRC records to compare the effectiveness, efficiency and adverse events of propofol vs pentobarbital for sedation of children undergoing MRI. METHODS: Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium records of children aged 6 months to 6 years who were primarily sedated with either i.v. pentobarbital or propofol were included. Participating PSRC investigators obtained institutional review board approval before data collection. RESULTS: Of 11 846 sedations for MRI, 7079 met inclusion criteria (propofol: n = 5072; pentobarbital: n = 2007). Demographic details were similar between the two groups. Ideal sedation was produced in 96.45% of the pentobarbital group and in 96.8% of the propofol group (P = 0.478), but pentobarbital was more likely to result in poor sedation cancelling the procedure (OR 5.88; CI 2.24, 15.40). Propofol resulted in physiologic changes more frequently than did pentobarbital (OR 5.69; CI 1.35, 23.97). Pentobarbital was associated with prolonged recovery (OR 16.82; CI 4.98, 56.8), unplanned admission (OR 5.60; CI 1.02, 30.82), vomiting (OR 36.76; CI 4.84, 279.2) and allergic complication (OR 9.15; CI 1.02, 82.34). The incidence of airway complications was not significantly different between the two. The median recovery time for patients receiving propofol was 30 min, whereas for pentobarbital it was 75 min (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Among institutions contributing data to the PSRC, it is found that propofol provides more efficient and effective sedation than pentobarbital for children undergoing MRI. Although apnea occurred with a greater frequency in patients who received propofol, the rate of apnea and airway complications for propofol was not statistically different from that seen in patients who received pentobarbital.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To describe resident acceptance of and comfort with family member presence (FMP) during pediatric invasive procedures and resuscitation in a large, multicenter pediatric residency program. To determine if increased level of training impacts on opinion toward FMP for procedures. DESIGN AND METHODS: Seventy-six residents of postgraduate levels 1-4 were administered a survey about FMP for procedures. The survey consisted of 4 Likert-scale questions and 1 multiple-choice question of resident acceptance of and comfort with FMP during procedures and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Statistical analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney U test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: Fifty-three residents (70%) responded. Residents were accepting of FMP during procedures, with a mean score of 3.9/5. However, residents were less accepting of FMP presence during CPR, with a mean score of 2.84/5. There was a trend toward increased comfort and acceptance of FMP with increased level of training; however, this was not statistically significant. In our study, nearly one half of residents (45%) reported that their major reservation toward FMP was that resident anxiety could result in procedure or resuscitation failure. CONCLUSION: The residents in our pediatric training program generally accept FMP for procedures. Residents were less accepting of FMP for CPR than for procedures. Residents most commonly oppose FMP for procedures because they believe this will make them anxious and lead to failure. This information provides insight into the implementation of FMP for procedures in a medical education setting.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)