Impact of a discharge prescription for dexamethasone on outcomes of children treated in the emergency department for acute asthma exacerbations.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate dexamethasone prescribing practices, patient adherence, and outcomes by dosing regimen in children with acute asthma discharged from the emergency department (ED). STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study of children 2-18 years treated with dexamethasone for acute asthma prior to discharge from an urban, tertiary care ED between 2018 and 2022. Demographics, clinical characteristics, ED treatment, and discharge prescriptions were collected via chart review. The exposure was discharge prescription (additional dose) versus no discharge prescription for dexamethasone. The primary outcome was treatment failure, defined as return ED visit, unplanned primary care visit, and/or ongoing bronchodilator use. Secondary outcomes included medication adherence, symptom persistence, quality-of-life, and school/work absenteeism. Outcomes were assessed by telephone 7-10 days after discharge. RESULTS: 564 subjects were enrolled; 338 caregivers (60%) completed follow-up. Children were a median age 7 years, 30% Black or African American, 49% Hispanic, and 79% had public insurance. A discharge prescription for dexamethasone was written for 482 (86%) children and was significantly associated with exacerbation severity, number of combined albuterol/ipratropium treatments, and longer length of stay. There was no difference in treatment failure between the discharge prescription and no discharge prescription groups (RR 0.87; 0.67, 1.12), including after adjusting for potential confounders; there was no difference between groups in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Prescription for an additional dexamethasone dose was not associated with reduced treatment failure or improved outcomes for children with acute asthma discharged from the ED. Single, ED-dose of dexamethasone prior to discharge may be sufficient for children with mild to moderate asthma exacerbations.

Emergency management and asthma risk in young Medicaid-enrolled children with recurrent wheeze.

OBJECTIVES: To describe clinical characteristics of young children presenting to the emergency department (ED) for early recurrent wheeze, and determine factors associated with subsequent persistent wheeze and risk for early childhood asthma. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of Medicaid-enrolled children 0-3 years old with an index ED visit for wheeze (e.g. bronchiolitis, reactive airway disease) from 2009 to 2013, and at least one prior documented episode of wheeze at an ED or primary care visit. The primary outcome was persistent wheeze between 4 and 6 years of age. Demographics and clinical characteristics were collected from the index ED visit. Logistic regression was used to estimate the association between potential risk factors and subsequent persistent wheeze. RESULTS: During the study period, 41,710 children presented to the ED for recurrent wheeze. Mean age was 1.3 years; 59% were male, 42% Black, and 6% Hispanic. At index ED visits, the most common diagnosis was acute bronchiolitis (40%); 77% of children received an oral corticosteroid prescription. Between 4 and 6 years of age, 11,708 (28%) children had persistent wheeze. A greater number of wheezing episodes was associated with an increased odds of ED treatment with asthma medications. Subsequent persistent wheeze was associated with male sex, Black race, atopy, prescription for bronchodilators or corticosteroids, and greater number of visits for wheeze. CONCLUSIONS: Young children with persistent wheeze are at risk for childhood asthma. Thus, identification of risk factors associated with persistent wheeze in young children with recurrent wheeze might aid in early detection of asthma and initiation of preventative therapies.

Parental perspective on penicillin allergy delabeling in a pediatric emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Penicillin (PCN) allergy is frequently mislabeled and inaccurately diagnosed in children. Successful implementation of pediatric emergency department (PED) delabeling efforts requires parental understanding and willingness for children to be delabeled as PCN-nonallergic. OBJECTIVE: To describe the parental perspective on allergy delabeling in the PED for children identified as low risk for true PCN allergy. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional survey of parents of children with documented PCN allergy presenting to a single tertiary-care PED. Parents were first approached to complete a PCN allergy identification questionnaire to stratify their child as high- or low-risk for true PCN allergy. Facilitators and barriers to PED-based oral challenge and delabeling were subsequently assessed by parents of low-risk children. RESULTS: A total of 198 participants completed the PCN identification questionnaire. Of 198 children, 49 (25%) screened low risk for true PCN allergy. Of the 49 low-risk children, 29 (59%) parents were uncomfortable with a PED-based PCN oral challenge. Reasons include fear of allergic reaction (72%), availability of adequate alternative antibiotics (45%), and longer PED stay (17%). Reasons for willingness to delabel included PCN's low adverse effect profile (65%) and avoidance of antimicrobial resistance from alternative antibiotics (74%). Participants without a family history (FH) of PCN allergy were more comfortable with PED-based PCN oral challenge (60% vs 11%; P = .001) and delabeling (67% vs 37%; P = .04) compared with those with FH. CONCLUSION: Most parents of children with low-risk PCN allergy are uncomfortable with oral challenge or delabeling in the PED. Before implementing oral challenges in PEDs, efforts should be made to highlight the safety of oral challenging low-risk children, the benefits and risks of alternative antibiotics, and the minimal impact that FH has on PCN allergy.

Variation in diagnosis and management of allergic reactions among emergency medicine and allergy immunology providers.

Background: Children with anaphylaxis often emergently present for treatment. Providers' adherence to the principles of optimal management according to the most recent national guidelines is unknown. Objective: To assess the variation in management approaches for allergic reactions and anaphylaxis between allergy/immunology (AI) and emergency medicine (EM) providers. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey study of AI and EM providers in the University of Colorado affiliated hospitals and Colorado Asthma and Allergy Society. The survey consisted of six cases of patients with allergic reactions, with four cases that represented patients with anaphylaxis that resolved by the time of discharge. For each vignette, the participants were asked about preferred initial therapy, adjunctive therapies, monitoring, outpatient prescription medications, and discharge instructions provided. Survey derivation and validation was accomplished by a multidisciplinary team of experts by using a modified Delphi process. Results: A total of 413 clinicians were contacted, of whom 194, (47%) responded, including 69 pediatric EM, 50 general EM, and 49 AI providers, and 26 did not identify a provider type. There were no statistically significant differences in correct recognition of anaphylaxis between the AI and EM providers. For each case, statistically significant differences were noted in the use of corticosteroids during and after resolution of anaphylaxis: AI providers reported giving fewer prescriptions than did the EM providers for corticosteroids in all cases of anaphylaxis (p < 0.001). The AI providers were less likely to prescribe scheduled antihistamines than were the EM providers in half of the cases (p < 0.02). Conclusion: Across the specialties, there were high rates of recognition of epinephrine as first-line treatment for anaphylaxis. The majority of the EM providers prescribed scheduled corticosteroids and antihistamines after resolution of anaphylaxis, whereas most of the AI providers did not prescribe scheduled corticosteroids. Analysis of the current data suggests against the routine use of corticosteroids in the management of anaphylaxis, particularly continued use after resolution of symptoms. AI involvement in the creation of EM and hospital protocols for allergic reactions could improve overall care.

Anaphylaxis knowledge gaps and future research priorities: A consensus report.

BACKGROUND: Despite a better understanding of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and management of patients with anaphylaxis, there remain knowledge gaps. Enumerating and prioritizing these gaps would allow limited scientific resources to be directed more effectively. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically describe and appraise anaphylaxis knowledge gaps and future research priorities based on their potential impact and feasibility. METHODS: We convened a 25-member multidisciplinary panel of anaphylaxis experts. Panelists formulated knowledge gaps/research priority statements in an anonymous electronic survey. Four anaphylaxis themed writing groups were formed to refine statements: (1) Population Science, (2) Basic and Translational Sciences, (3) Emergency Department Care/Acute Management, and (4) Long-Term Management Strategies and Prevention. Revised statements were incorporated into an anonymous electronic survey, and panelists were asked to rate the impact and feasibility of addressing statements on a continuous 0 to 100 scale. RESULTS: The panel generated 98 statements across the 4 anaphylaxis themes: Population Science (29), Basic and Translational Sciences (27), Emergency Department Care/Acute Management (24), and Long-Term Management Strategies and Prevention (18). Median scores for impact and feasibility ranged from 50.0 to 95.0 and from 40.0 to 90.0, respectively. Key statements based on median rating for impact/feasibility included the need to refine anaphylaxis diagnostic criteria, identify reliable diagnostic, predictive, and prognostic anaphylaxis bioassays, develop clinical prediction models to standardize postanaphylaxis observation periods and hospitalization criteria, and determine immunotherapy best practices. CONCLUSIONS: We identified and systematically appraised anaphylaxis knowledge gaps and future research priorities. This study reinforces the need to harmonize scientific pursuits to optimize the outcomes of patients with and at risk of anaphylaxis.

Clinical characteristics and illness course based on pathogen among children with respiratory illness presenting to an emergency department.

Upper respiratory illnesses due to viruses are the most common reason for pediatric emergency department (ED) visits in the United States. We explored the clinical characteristics, hospitalization risk, and symptom duration of children in an ED setting by respiratory pathogen including coinfections. A retrospective analysis was conducted from a randomized controlled trial evaluating a rapid molecular pathogen panel among 931 children 1 month to 18 years of age with acute respiratory illness. We assessed hospitalization risk by pathogen using multivariable Poisson regression with robust variance. Symptom duration was assessed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Among 931 children, 702 (75%) were aged 0-5 years and 797 (85%) tested positive for a respiratory pathogen. Children with respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), human metapneumovirus (hMPV), and human rhinovirus/enterovirus (HRV/EV) had higher hospitalization risk compared with influenza (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]: 2.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.17-7.45; 3.56, 95% CI: 1.05-12.02; aRR: 2.58, 95% CI: 1.05-6.35, respectively). Children with RSV, parainfluenza and atypical bacterial pathogens had longer illness duration compared with influenza (adjusted hazards ratio [aHR]: 2.16 95% CI: 1.41-3.29; aHR: 1.67, 95% CI:1.06-2.64; aHR: 2.60 95% CI: 1.30-5.19, respectively). Children with RSV, hMPV, and atypical bacterial pathogens had higher illness severity and duration compared with other respiratory pathogens. Coinfection was not associated with increased illness severity.

Facilitators and barriers for parental consent to pediatric emergency research.

BACKGROUND: Obtaining informed consent for clinical research in the pediatric emergency department (ED) is challenging. Our objective was to understand the factors that influence parental consent for ED studies. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey assessing parents' willingness to enroll their children into an ED research study. Parents reporting a willingness to enroll in ED studies were presented with two hypothetical scenarios, a low-risk and a high-risk study, and then asked about decision influencers affecting consent. Parents expressing a lack of willingness to enroll were asked which decision influencers impacted their consent decision. RESULTS: Among 118 parents, 90 (76%) stated they would be willing to enroll their child into an ED study; of these, 86 (96%) would consent for a low-risk study and 54 (60%) would consent for a high-risk study. Caucasian parents, and those with previous research exposure, were more likely to report willingness to participate. Those who would consent to the high-risk study cited "benefits that research would provide to future children" most strongly influenced their decision to agree. CONCLUSIONS: ED investigators should highlight the benefits for future children and inquire about parents' previous exposure to research to enhance ED research enrollment. Barriers to consent in non-Caucasian families should be further investigated. IMPACT: Obtaining consent for pediatric emergency research is challenging and this study identified factors influencing parental consent for research in EDs. Benefits for future children and parents' previous research experience were two of the most influential factors in parents' willingness to consent to ED research studies. These findings will help to improve enrollment in ED research studies and better our understanding of how to promote the health and well-being of pediatric patients.

Association between secondhand marijuana smoke and respiratory infections in children.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the effects of secondhand marijuana smoke on children. We aimed to determine caregiver marijuana use prevalence and evaluate any association between secondhand marijuana smoke, childhood emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) visitation, and several tobacco-related illnesses: otitis media, viral respiratory infections (VRIs), and asthma exacerbations. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional, convenience sample survey of 1500 subjects presenting to a pediatric ED. The inclusion criteria were as follows: caregivers aged 21-85 years, English- or Spanish-speaking. The exclusion criteria were as follows: children who were critically ill, medically complex, over 11 years old, or using medical marijuana. RESULTS: Of 1500 caregivers, 158 (10.5%) reported smoking marijuana and 294 (19.6%) reported smoking tobacco. Using negative-binomial regression, we estimated rates of reported ED/UC visits and specific illnesses among children with marijuana exposure and those with tobacco exposure, compared to unexposed children. Caregivers who used marijuana reported an increased rate of VRIs in their children (1.31 episodes/year) compared to caregivers with no marijuana use (1.04 episodes/year) (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our cohort did not report any difference with ED/UC visits, otitis media episodes, or asthma exacerbations, regardless of smoke exposure. However, caregivers of children with secondhand marijuana smoke exposure reported increased VRIs compared to children with no smoke exposure. IMPACT: Approximately 10% of caregivers in our study were regular users of marijuana. Prior studies have shown that secondhand tobacco smoke exposure is associated with negative health outcomes in children, including increased ED utilization and respiratory illnesses. Prior studies have shown primary marijuana use is linked to negative health outcomes in adults and adolescents, including increased ED utilization and respiratory illnesses. Our study reveals an association between secondhand marijuana smoke exposure and increased VRIs in children. Our study did not find an association between secondhand marijuana smoke exposure and increased ED or UC visitation in children.

Skin and Soft Tissue Infection Treatment and Prevention Practices by Pediatric Emergency Medicine Providers.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) treatment and prevention practices among pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) clinicians in the context of current clinical practice guidelines and contemporary evidence. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey of PEM clinicians belonging to the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Emergency Medicine Survey listserv. Four varying hypothetical clinical scenarios of children with SSTI were posed to respondents; subsequent items assessed SSTI treatment and prevention practices. Provider demographics were collected. RESULTS: Of 160 survey respondents, more than half stated that they would prescribe oral antibiotics for each clinical scenario, particularly for more complex presentations (small uncomplicated abscess, 51.8%; large uncomplicated abscess, 71.5%; recurrent abscess, 83.5%; febrile abscess, 90.3%; P < 0.001). Most commonly selected antibiotics were clindamycin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Across scenarios, more than 80% selected a duration of treatment 7 days or more. Of the 121 respondents who prescribe preventive measures, 85.1% recommend hygiene measures; 52.5% would prescribe decolonization with topical antibiotic ointment and 77.5% would recommend antiseptic body washes. Half of the respondents reported that their institution has standard guidance for SSTI management. CONCLUSIONS: Although current evidence supports adjuvant antibiotics for all drained SSTI and decolonization for the index patient and household contacts, PEM clinicians do not consistently adhere to these recommendations. In light of these findings, development and implementation of institutional guidelines are necessary to aid PEM clinicians' point-of-care decision making and improving evidence-based practice.

Anaphylaxis in Children.

ABSTRACT: Anaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening event in children, commonly encountered in the prehospital and emergency department settings. Recently published clinical guidelines emphasize early recognition of anaphylaxis and administration of epinephrine as the mainstay of management. Literature regarding adjuvant therapies, biphasic reactions, observation times, and disposition of patients with anaphylaxis remains controversial. In this article, we will review the background and pathophysiology of anaphylaxis, as well as the diagnostic approach, management, and future directions of anaphylaxis in children.

Pediatric Emergency Medicine Physicians' Perspectives on Emergency Care of Children With Medical Complexity: A Multi-institution Mixed-Methods Assessment.

OBJECTIVE: Children with medical complexity (CMC) compose 1% of the pediatric population but account for 20% of pediatric emergency department (ED) visits. Previous descriptions of challenges and interventions to ensure quality of care are limited. Our objective was to elicit pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physicians' perspectives on challenges and opportunities for improvement of emergency care of CMC, with a focus on emergency information forms (EIFs). METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey of PEM physicians participating the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Emergency Medicine Survey listserv. The survey was designed using an expert panel, and subsequently piloted and revised to an 18-item survey. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one of 495 respondents (30%) completed the survey. Most respondents (62.9%) reported caring for >10 CMC per month. Whereas overall medical fragility and time constraints were major contributors to the challenges of caring for CMC in the ED, communication with known providers and shared care plans were identified as particularly helpful. Most respondents did not report routine use of EIFs. Anticipated emergencies/action plan was deemed the most important component of EIFs. CONCLUSIONS: Most PEM physicians view the care for CMC in the ED as challenging despite practicing in high-resource environments. Further research is needed to develop and implement strategies to improve care of CMC in the ED. Understanding experiences of providers in general ED settings is also an important next step given that 80% of CMC present for emergency care outside of major children's hospitals.

Severity grading system for acute allergic reactions: A multidisciplinary Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: There is no widely adopted severity grading system for acute allergic reactions, including anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions, thus limiting the ability to optimize and standardize management practices and advance research. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a severity grading system for acute allergic reactions for use in clinical care and research. METHODS: From May to September 2020, we convened a 21-member multidisciplinary panel of allergy and emergency care experts; 9 members formed a writing group to critically appraise and assess the strengths and limitations of prior severity grading systems and develop the structure and content for an optimal severity grading system. The entire study panel then revised the grading system and sought consensus by utilizing Delphi methodology. RESULTS: The writing group recommended that an optimal grading system encompass the severity of acute allergic reactions on a continuum from mild allergic reactions to anaphylactic shock. Additionally, the severity grading system must be able to discriminate between clinically important differences in reaction severity to be relevant in research while also being intuitive and straightforward to apply in clinical care. Consensus was reached for all elements of the proposed severity grading system. CONCLUSION: We developed a consensus severity grading system for acute allergic reactions, including anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions. Successful international validation, refinement, dissemination, and application of the grading system will improve communication among providers and patients about the severity of allergic reactions and will help advance future research.

Primary care provider preferences for glucocorticoid management of acute asthma exacerbations in children.

OBJECTIVE: Primary care providers (PCP) frequently care for children with acute asthma exacerbations in the outpatient setting. The objective of this study is to evaluate PCP preferences and perceptions regarding oral glucocorticoids prescribed from both outpatient primary care and ED settings for the treatment of children with acute asthma exacerbations. METHODS: PCPs belonging to the Colorado Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics were surveyed between February and May 2019. Survey items were generated by a multidisciplinary team and underwent content and criteria validation and pilot testing. Survey items evaluated PCP preferred oral glucocorticoid and dosing regimen for children with acute asthma exacerbations, provider- and patient-level factors contributing to glucocorticoid preferences, and perception of glucocorticoid regimens in terms of treatment failure, resolution of symptoms and adherence. RESULTS: A total of 109 of 600 (18.2%) PCPs responded. Equal proportions of PCPs reported preferring oral prednisone/prednisolone (50.5%) and oral dexamethasone (49.5%) for children with acute asthma exacerbations. Forty-four percent of PCPs reported no preference in type of glucocorticoid utilized by surrounding emergency departments (EDs). However, for children receiving dexamethasone in the ED but with persistent symptoms on PCP follow-up, 50.5% of PCPs would switch patients to prednisone/prednisolone. PCPs did not perceive more treatment failure or rapid resolution of symptoms with dexamethasone but reported better adherence with dexamethasone. CONCLUSION: There is variability in PCP glucocorticoid management of pediatric acute asthma exacerbations. There is a need for further investigations to evaluate for differences in clinical outcomes based on PCP glucocorticoid treatment choices.

Exposure and confidence across critical airway procedures in pediatric emergency medicine: An international survey study.

BACKGROUND: Airway management procedures are critical for emergency medicine (EM) physicians, but rarely performed skills in pediatric patients. Worldwide experience with respect to frequency and confidence in performing airway management skills has not been previously described. OBJECTIVES: Our aims were 1) to determine the frequency with which emergency medicine physicians perform airway procedures including: bag-mask ventilation (BMV), endotracheal intubation (ETI), laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion, tracheostomy tube change (TTC), and surgical airways, and 2) to investigate predictors of procedural confidence regarding advanced airway management in children. METHODS: A web-based survey of senior emergency physicians was distributed through the six research networks associated with Pediatric Emergency Research Network (PERN). Senior physician was defined as anyone working without direct supervision at any point in a 24-h cycle. Physicians were queried regarding their most recent clinical experience performing or supervising airway procedures, as well as with hands on practice time or procedural teaching. Reponses were dichotomized to within the last year, or ≥ 1 year. Confidence was assessed using a Likert scale for each procedure, with results for ETI and LMA stratified by age. Response levels were dichotomized to "not confident" or "confident." Multivariate regression models were used to assess relevant associations. RESULTS: 1602 of 2446 (65%) eligible clinicians at 96 PERN sites responded. In the previous year, 1297 (85%) physicians reported having performed bag-mask ventilation, 900 (59%) had performed intubation, 248 (17%) had placed a laryngeal mask airway, 348 (23%) had changed a tracheostomy tube, and 18 (1%) had performed a surgical airway. Of respondents, 13% of physicians reported the opportunity to supervise but not provide ETI, 5% for LMA and 5% for BMV. The percentage of physicians reporting "confidence" in performing each procedure was: BMV (95%) TTC (43%), and surgical airway (16%). Clinician confidence in ETT and LMA varied by patient age. Supervision of an airway procedure was the strongest predictor of procedural confidence across airway procedures. CONCLUSION: BMV and ETI were the most commonly performed pediatric airway procedures by emergency medicine physicians, and surgical airways are very infrequent. Supervising airway procedures may serve to maintain procedural confidence for physicians despite infrequent opportunities as the primary proceduralist.

Guideline Adherence in Diagnostic Testing and Treatment of Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Children.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine emergency department (ED) physician adherence with the 2011 Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society (PIDS) and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines for outpatient management of children with mild-to-moderate community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of physicians on the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Emergency Medicine Survey listserv was conducted. We evaluated ED physicians' reported adherence with the PIDS/IDSA guidelines through presentation of 4 clinical vignettes representing mild-to-moderate CAP of presumed viral (preschool-aged child), bacterial (preschool and school-aged child), and atypical bacterial (school-aged child) etiology. RESULTS: Of 120 respondents with analyzable data (31.4% response rate), use of chest radiograph (CXR) was nonadherent to the guidelines in greater than 50% of respondents for each of the 4 vignettes. Pediatric emergency medicine fellowship training was independently associated with increased CXR use in all vignettes, except for school-aged children with bacterial CAP. Guideline-recommended amoxicillin was selected to treat bacterial CAP by 91.7% of the respondents for preschool-aged children and by 75.8% for school-aged children. Macrolide monotherapy for atypical CAP was appropriately selected by 88.2% and was associated with obtaining a CXR (adjusted odds ratio, 3.9 [95% confidence interval, 1.4-11.1]). Guideline-adherent antibiotic use for all vignettes was independently associated with congruence between respondent's presumed diagnosis and the vignette's intended etiologic diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Reported ED CXR use in the management of outpatient CAP was often nonadherent to the PIDS/IDSA guidelines. Most respondents were adherent to the guidelines in their use of antibiotics. Strategies to increase diagnostic test accuracy are needed to improve adherence and reduce variation in care.

Pediatric Exposures Reported to the Toxicology Investigators Consortium, 2010-2015.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Poisoning is the leading cause of injury death in pediatric patients. Hospital and provider readiness, including pharmacy stocking, depends on reliable surveillance data describing local patterns of age-specific clinically significant exposures and the therapeutic modalities employed in their treatment. We aimed to characterize trends in clinically significant toxic exposures and their management. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients 18 years or younger in the American College of Medical Toxicology's Toxicology Investigators Consortium (ToxIC) Registry, a self-reporting database completed by bedside consulting medical toxicologists. We reviewed cases from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2015. In 2015, ToxIC included 101 health care facilities. Data collected included demographics, geographic region, encounter and exposure details, survival, and therapeutic modalities employed, including antidotes, antivenoms, gastric decontamination, enhanced elimination, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2015, 11,616 consults were recorded in ToxIC. Pediatric consultations increased from 934 (23.7%) in 2010 to 2425 (29.9%) in 2015 (P < 0.001). Exposures were most commonly reported in females (57.8%) and adolescents (59.4%). Intentional ingestions (55.5%) comprised the majority of cases. The most frequent agents of exposure were analgesics (21.0%). There were 38 deaths reported (0.9%). The antidote used most commonly was N-acetylcysteine (11.0%). Geographic variation was demonstrated in prevalence of envenomations and heavy metal exposures, their respective treatments, and overall use of decontamination. CONCLUSIONS: Toxicology consultations for pediatric exposures increased from 2010 to 2015. Understanding which pediatric exposures require toxicologist management, the therapies most frequently employed, and geographical patterns is paramount to facility-level planning, pharmacy stocking, and provider education.

Maintenance of Certification Pediatrics: Pediatric Emergency Medicine (PEM): The New Part 3 Maintenance of Certification Assessment Option.

ABSTRACT: Starting in 2022, the American Board of Pediatrics will launch the Maintenance of Certification Assessment for Pediatrics: Pediatric Emergency Medicine (MOCA-Peds: PEM) longitudinal assessment, which will provide an at-home alternative to the point-in-time examination. This longitudinal assessment will help engage PEM physicians participating in continuing certification in a more flexible and continuous lifelong, self-directed learning process while still providing a summative assessment of their knowledge. This commentary provides background information on MOCA-Peds and an introduction to MOCA-Peds: PEM and how it gives the PEM physician another option to participate in continuing certification.

Exposure and Confidence With Critical Nonairway Procedures: A Global Survey of Pediatric Emergency Medicine Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Children rarely experience critical illness, resulting in low exposure of emergency physicians (EPs) to critical procedures. Our primary objective was to describe senior EP confidence, most recent performance, and/or supervision of critical nonairway procedures. Secondary objectives were to compare responses between those who work exclusively in PEM and those who do not and to determine whether confidence changed for selected procedures according to increasing patient age. METHODS: Survey of senior EPs working in 96 emergency departments (EDs) affiliated with the Pediatric Emergency Research Networks. Questions assessed training, performance, supervision, and confidence in 11 nonairway critical procedures, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), vascular access, chest decompression, and cardiac procedures. RESULTS: Of 2446 physicians, 1503 (61%) responded to the survey. Within the previous year, only CPR and insertion of an intraosseous needle had been performed by at least 50% of respondents: over 20% had performed defibrillation/direct current cardioversion. More than 50% of respondents had never performed or supervised ED thoracotomy, pericardiocentesis, venous cutdown, or transcutaneous pacing. Self-reported confidence was high for all patient age groups for CPR, needle thoracocentesis, tube thoracostomy, intraosseous needle insertion, and defibrillation/DC cardioversion. Confidence levels increased with increasing patient age for central venous and arterial line insertion. Respondents working exclusively in PEM were more likely to report being at least somewhat confident in defibrillation/DC cardioversion, intraosseous needle insertion, and central venous line insertion in particular age groups; however, they were less likely to be at least somewhat confident in ED thoracotomy and transcutaneous pacing. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation and intraosseous needle insertion were the only critical nonairway procedures performed by at least half of EPs within the previous year. Confidence was higher for these procedures, and needle and tube thoracostomy. These data may inform the development of continuing medical education activities to maintain pediatric procedural skills for emergency physicians.

The Pediatric Emergency Research Network: A Decade of Global Research Cooperation in Pediatric Emergency Care.

OBJECTIVES: The Pediatric Emergency Research Network (PERN) was launched in 2009 with the intent for existing national and regional research networks in pediatric emergency care to organize globally for the conduct of collaborative research across networks. METHODS: The Pediatric Emergency Research Network has grown from 5- to 8-member networks over the past decade. With an executive committee comprising representatives from all member networks, PERN plays a supportive and collaborative rather than governing role. The full impact of PERN's facilitation of international collaborative research, although somewhat difficult to quantify empirically, can be measured indirectly by the observed growth of the field, the nature of the increasingly challenging research questions now being addressed, and the collective capacity to generate and implement new knowledge in treating acutely ill and injured children. RESULTS: Beginning as a pandemic response with a high-quality retrospective case-controlled study of H1N1 influenza risk factors, PERN research has progressed to multiple observational studies and ongoing global randomized controlled trials. As a recent example, PERN has developed sufficient network infrastructure to enable the rapid initiation of a prospective observational study in response to the current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. In light of the ongoing need for translation of research knowledge into equitable clinical practice and to promote health equity, PERN is committed to a coordinated international effort to increase the uptake of evidence-based management of common and treatable acute conditions in all emergency department settings. CONCLUSIONS: The Pediatric Emergency Research Network's successes with global research, measured by prospective observational and interventional studies, mean that the network can now move to improve its ability to promote the implementation of scientific advances into everyday clinical practice. Achieving this goal will involve focus in 4 areas: (1) expanding the capacity for global randomized controlled trials; (2) deepening the focus on implementation science; (3) increasing attention to healthcare disparities and their origins, with growing momentum toward equity; and (4) expanding PERN's global reach through addition of sites and networks from resource-restricted regions. Through these actions, PERN will be able to build on successes to face the challenges ahead and meet the needs of acutely ill and injured children throughout the world.

Persistent, refractory, and biphasic anaphylaxis: A multidisciplinary Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: The use of inconsistent definitions for anaphylaxis outcomes limits our understanding of the natural history and epidemiology of anaphylaxis, hindering clinical practice and research efforts. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to develop consensus definitions for clinically relevant anaphylaxis outcomes by utilizing a multidisciplinary group of clinical and research experts in anaphylaxis. METHODS: Using Delphi methodology, we developed agenda topics and drafted questions to review during monthly conference calls. Through online surveys, a 19-member panel consisting of experts in allergy and/or immunology and emergency medicine rated their level of agreement with the appropriateness of statements on a scale of 1 to 9. A median value of 1.0 to 3.4 was considered inappropriate, a median value of 3.5 to 6.9 was considered uncertain, and a median value of 7.0 to 9.0 was considered appropriate. A disagreement index was then calculated, with values less than 1.0 categorized as "consensus reached." If consensus was not reached after the initial survey, subsequent surveys incorporating the aggregate de-identified responses from prior surveys were sent to panel members. This process was repeated until consensus was reached or 4 survey rounds had been completed, after which the question was categorized as "no consensus reached." RESULTS: The panel developed outcome definitions for persistent, refractory, and biphasic anaphylaxis, as well as for persistent and biphasic nonanaphylactic reactions. There was also consensus among panel members regarding the need to develop an anaphylaxis severity grading system. CONCLUSION: Dissemination and application of these definitions in clinical care and research will help standardize the terminology used to describe anaphylaxis outcomes and serve as the foundation for future research, including research aimed at development of an anaphylaxis severity grading system.