Criteria for Critical Care Infants and Children: PICU Admission, Discharge, and Triage Practice Statement and Levels of Care Guidance.

OBJECTIVES: To update the American Academy of Pediatrics and Society of Critical Care Medicine's 2004 Guidelines and levels of care for PICU. DESIGN: A task force was appointed by the American College of Critical Care Medicine to follow a standardized and systematic review of the literature using an evidence-based approach. The 2004 Admission, Discharge and Triage Guidelines served as the starting point, and searches in Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and PubMed resulted in 329 articles published from 2004 to 2016. Only 21 pediatric studies evaluating outcomes related to pediatric level of care, specialized PICU, patient volume, or personnel. Of these, 13 studies were large retrospective registry data analyses, six small single-center studies, and two multicenter survey analyses. Limited high-quality evidence was found, and therefore, a modified Delphi process was used. Liaisons from the American Academy of Pediatrics were included in the panel representing critical care, surgical, and hospital medicine expertise for the development of this practice guidance. The title was amended to "practice statement" and "guidance" because Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology was not possible in this administrative work and to align with requirements put forth by the American Academy of Pediatrics. METHODS: The panel consisted of two groups: a voting group and a writing group. The panel used an iterative collaborative approach to formulate statements on the basis of the literature review and common practice of the pediatric critical care bedside experts and administrators on the task force. Statements were then formulated and presented via an online anonymous voting tool to a voting group using a three-cycle interactive forecasting Delphi method. With each cycle of voting, statements were refined on the basis of votes received and on comments. Voting was conducted between the months of January 2017 and March 2017. The consensus was deemed achieved once 80% or higher scores from the voting group were recorded on any given statement or where there was consensus upon review of comments provided by voters. The Voting Panel was required to vote in all three forecasting events for the final evaluation of the data and inclusion in this work. The writing panel developed admission recommendations by level of care on the basis of voting results. RESULTS: The panel voted on 30 statements, five of which were multicomponent statements addressing characteristics specific to PICU level of care including team structure, technology, education and training, academic pursuits, and indications for transfer to tertiary or quaternary PICU. Of the remaining 25 statements, 17 reached consensus cutoff score. Following a review of the Delphi results and consensus, the recommendations were written. CONCLUSIONS: This practice statement and level of care guidance manuscript addresses important specifications for each PICU level of care, including the team structure and resources, technology and equipment, education and training, quality metrics, admission and discharge criteria, and indications for transfer to a higher level of care. The sparse high-quality evidence led the panel to use a modified Delphi process to seek expert opinion to develop consensus-based recommendations where gaps in the evidence exist. Despite this limitation, the members of the Task Force believe that these recommendations will provide guidance to practitioners in making informed decisions regarding pediatric admission or transfer to the appropriate level of care to achieve best outcomes.

Executive Summary: Criteria for Critical Care of Infants and Children: PICU Admission, Discharge, and Triage Practice Statement and Levels of Care Guidance.

This is an executive summary of the 2019 update of the 2004 guidelines and levels of care for PICU. Since previous guidelines, there has been a tremendous transformation of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine with advancements in pediatric cardiovascular medicine, transplant, neurology, trauma, and oncology as well as improvements of care in general PICUs. This has led to the evolution of resources and training in the provision of care through the PICU. Outcome and quality research related to admission, transfer, and discharge criteria as well as literature regarding PICU levels of care to include volume, staffing, and structure were reviewed and included in this statement as appropriate. Consequently, the purposes of this significant update are to address the transformation of the field and codify a revised set of guidelines that will enable hospitals, institutions, and individuals in developing the appropriate PICU for their community needs. The target audiences of the practice statement and guidance are broad and include critical care professionals; pediatricians; pediatric subspecialists; pediatric surgeons; pediatric surgical subspecialists; pediatric imaging physicians; and other members of the patient care team such as nurses, therapists, dieticians, pharmacists, social workers, care coordinators, and hospital administrators who make daily administrative and clinical decisions in all PICU levels of care.

Case Report: Typhoid Fever Complicated by Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in a Pediatric Traveler.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is seldom described as a complication of typhoid fever (TF). Only 13 cases have hitherto been reported in the English and non-English literature since 1990. We report an 8-year-old boy with TF after return from India who developed pediatric ARDS (pARDS) despite adequate antibiotic treatment. Among patients with available information including this case, we noted that most not born or raised in a TF-endemic country (4/6) compared with none (0/6) of the domestic cases in a TF-endemic country developed ARDS within 48 hours of starting the antibiotic treatment. Our case raises important questions regarding the frequency, pathophysiology, and appropriate management of ARDS and pARDS in patients with TF.

The Impact and Statistical Analysis of a Multifaceted Anticoagulation Strategy in Children Supported on ECMO: Performance and Pitfalls.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine whether the introduction of a new anticoagulation protocol improved the frequency with which target anticoagulation parameters were met in children supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Additionally, we sought to correlate the results of various tests of anticoagulation with the heparin infusion dose (HID) for patients on ECMO and to evaluate the utility of these anticoagulation monitoring tests for the titration of the HID. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 18 patients who received ECMO at an academic tertiary care children's hospital. Nine patients who were managed using a new anticoagulation protocol were matched by age and diagnosis with 9 patients managed with the old protocol. We collected data relating to patient demographics, type of extracorporeal support, disease process, and incidence of bleeding or thrombosis. Anticoagulation parameters collected include the activated clotting time (ACT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), prothrombin time/international normalized ratio, anti-factor Xa level, and antithrombin 3 level along with the HID at each time point. Patient groups were compared using a Generalized Linear Mixed Model, a mixed model analysis of variance, and correlational studies. MAIN RESULTS: The percentage of in-range ACT values was not different between the 2 protocols, whereas the percentage of in-range aPTT values was higher in the new anticoagulation protocol (ACT: 37.7% vs 39.5%; aPTT: 25.1% vs 39.8%). After accounting for repeated and variable measures within patients, the probability of obtaining an in-range ACT and aPTT did not differ significantly between the 2 protocols (ACT: P = .3488; aPTT: P = .16). The mean HID did not differ between the 2 groups (35.0 unit/kg/h vs 37.6 unit/kg/h, P = .56). Correlation coefficients demonstrated a significant inverse correlation between the ACT and the HID in both the groups (old: r = -.22, P < .0001; new: r = -.26, P < .0001). We observed a significant positive correlation between the aPTT and the HID in the historical group (r = .25, P < .0001), but no correlation between the aPTT and the HID in the current group (r = -.02, P = .71). The anti-factor Xa level showed a significantly positive correlation with the HID in the current group (r = .62, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: A multipronged monitoring regimen slightly increased the amount of time that anticoagulation parameters were within range. Correlations between the HID and the aPTT differed based on anticoagulation protocol, with a positive correlation in the older protocol and no correlation in the new protocol. This may highlight a problem in study design and analysis that requires further examination. Further trials are needed to assess the most useful markers with which anticoagulation protocols for ECMO can be created, adjusted, and evaluated.