Association of delayed adequate antimicrobial treatment and organ dysfunction in pediatric bloodstream infections.

BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are associated with significant mortality and morbidity, including multiple organ dysfunction. We explored if delayed adequate antimicrobial treatment for children with BSIs is associated with change in organ dysfunction as measured by PELOD-2 scores. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of critically ill children <18 years old with BSIs. The primary outcome was change in PELOD-2 score between days 1 (index blood culture) and 5. The exposure variable was delayed administration of adequate antimicrobial therapy by ≥3 h from blood culture collection. We compared PELOD-2 score changes between those who received early and delayed treatment. RESULTS: Among 202 children, the median (interquartile range) time to adequate antimicrobial therapy was 7 (0.8-20.1) hours; 124 (61%) received delayed antimicrobial therapy. Patients who received early and delayed treatment had similar baseline characteristics. There was no significant difference in PELOD-2 score changes from days 1 and 5 between groups (PELOD-2 score difference -0.07, 95% CI -0.92 to 0.79, p = 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find an association between delayed adequate antimicrobial therapy and PELOD-2 score changes between days 1 and 5 from detection of BSI. PELOD-2 score was not sensitive for clinical effects of delayed antimicrobial treatment. IMPACT: In critically ill children with bloodstream infections, there was no significant change in organ dysfunction as measured by PELOD-2 scores between patients who received adequate antimicrobial therapy within 3 h of their initial positive blood culture and those who started after 3 h. Higher PELOD-2 scores on day 1 were associated with larger differences in PELOD-2 scores between days 1 and 5 from index positive blood cultures. Further study is required to determine if PELOD-2 or alternative measures of organ dysfunction could be used as primary outcome measures in trials of antimicrobial interventions in pediatric critical care research.

Antimicrobial treatment duration for uncomplicated bloodstream infections in critically ill children: a multicentre observational study.

BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) cause significant morbidity and mortality in critically ill children but treatment duration is understudied. We describe the durations of antimicrobial treatment that critically ill children receive and explore factors associated with treatment duration. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study in six pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) across Canada. Associations between treatment duration and patient-, infection- and pathogen-related characteristics were explored using multivariable regression analyses. RESULTS: Among 187 critically ill children with BSIs, the median duration of antimicrobial treatment was 15 (IQR 11-25) days. Median treatment durations were longer than two weeks for all subjects with known sources of infection: catheter-related 16 (IQR 11-24), respiratory 15 (IQR 11-26), intra-abdominal 20 (IQR 14-26), skin/soft tissue 17 (IQR 15-33), urinary 17 (IQR 15-35), central nervous system 33 (IQR 15-46) and other sources 29.5 (IQR 15-55) days. When sources of infection were unclear, the median duration was 13 (IQR 10-16) days. Treatment durations varied widely within and across PICUs. In multivariable linear regression, longer treatment durations were associated with severity of illness (+ 0.4 days longer [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.1 to 0.7, p = 0.007] per unit increase in PRISM-IV) and central nervous system infection (+ 17 days [95% CI, 6.7 to 27.4], p = 0.001). Age and pathogen type were not associated with treatment duration. CONCLUSIONS: Most critically ill children with BSIs received at least two weeks of antimicrobial treatment. Further study is needed to determine whether shorter duration therapy would be effective for selected critically ill children.

Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Children: A Multicenter Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe current stress ulcer prophylaxis practice in Canadian PICUs. DESIGN: Multicenter cohort study. We defined stress ulcer prophylaxis as the use of a proton-pump inhibitor, histamine-2 receptor antagonist, or sucralfate within the first 2 PICU days among children who had not been on these medications at home and had no evidence of gastrointestinal bleeding. SETTING: Seven PICUs in Canada. PATIENTS: Three hundred seventy-eight children requiring mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Children were ventilated for a median (interquartile range) of 2 days (1-6 d) and stayed in the PICU for a median (interquartile range) of 4 days (2-10 d). The median (interquartile range) age was 1.3 years (0.3-6.7 yr). Seventy percent of all children received acid suppression during their PICU stay. One hundred sixty-seven (54%) of the 309 children eligible for stress ulcer prophylaxis received it. Histamine-2 receptor antagonists were the most frequently used class (66%), followed by proton-pump inhibitors (47%) and sucralfate (4%), and 20% received more than one class. Stress ulcer prophylaxis was continued on the PICU transfer orders for 34% of these children. Children who received prophylaxis were older and had a higher Pediatric Risk of Mortality III score, more often received nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and systemic corticosteroids and received less enteral nutrition. In multivariate analysis, age and invasive mechanical ventilation were independently associated with an increased likelihood of receiving stress ulcer prophylaxis and receiving feeds was independently associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving stress ulcer prophylaxis. Gastrointestinal bleeding was reported in 21 (6%) of 378 children; three (0.8%) were clinically important. Eighteen percent were treated for a new respiratory tract infection, and 1% developed Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: Stress ulcer prophylaxis is common in Canadian PICUs. Clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding and C. difficile-associated diarrhea are rare, and the utility of routine prophylaxis should be examined.

Dose derivation of once-daily dosing guidelines for gentamicin in critically ill pediatric patients.

OBJECTIVES: To determine dose and eligibility criteria for once-daily dosing (ODD) of gentamicin in critically ill pediatric patients. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of patients admitted to the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit or Cardiac Critical Care Unit at The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids) who received traditionally dosed intravenous (IV) gentamicin (January 2008 to June 2010). Statistically significant patient characteristics associated with gentamicin pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were determined by multiple linear regression. Binary partitioning was used to set critical values for these characteristics to derive dose for ODD of gentamicin. Feasibility of implementing ODD of gentamicin in critically ill children was assessed using individualized PK parameters to simulate area under the concentration-time curves and drug-free intervals while targeting a maximum concentration (C(max)) of 16-20 mg/L. Eligibility criteria were determined by patient characteristics that had a statistically significant impact on gentamicin PK. RESULTS: Volume of distribution (V(d)) and elimination rate constant (k(e)) were calculated for 140 patients. Weight and admission unit were significantly associated with weight-normalized V(d) (Vd/kg), whereas age and serum creatinine (SCr) were significantly associated with k(e). Weight <5 kg and SCr ≥20% over age-specific upper normal limit before gentamicin initiation were associated with prolonged gentamicin elimination. Gentamicin 6 mg/kg IV every 24 hours, the dose at which the highest percentage of patients achieved C(max), area under the curve, and drug-free interval within target ranges simultaneously, was selected as the proposed ODD regimen. CONCLUSIONS: A regimen of gentamicin 6 mg/kg IV every 24 hours for Pediatric Intensive Care Unit/Cardiac Critical Care Unit patients at SickKids weighing ≥5 kg with SCr <20% above age-specific upper normal limit before initiation of gentamicin is proposed.

Noninferiority Margin Size and Acceptance of Trial Results: Contingent Valuation Survey of Clinician Preferences for Noninferior Mortality.

OBJECTIVES: We used modified contingent valuation methodology to determine how noninferiority margin sizes influence clinicians' willingness to accept clinical trial results that compare mortality in critically ill children. METHODS: We surveyed pediatric infectious diseases and critical care clinicians in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand and randomized respondents to review 1 of 9 mock abstracts describing a noninferiority trial of bacteremic critically ill children assigned to 7 or 14 d of antibiotics. Each scenario showed higher mortality in the 7-d group but met noninferiority criterion. We explored how noninferiority margins and baseline mortality rates influenced respondent acceptance of results. RESULTS: There were 106 survey respondents: 65 (61%) critical care clinicians, 28 (26%) infectious diseases physicians, and 13 (12%) pharmacists. When noninferiority margins were 5% and 10%, 73% (24/33) and 79% (27/33) respondents would accept shorter treatment, compared with 44% (17/39) when the margin was 20% (P = 0.003). Logistic regression adjusted for baseline mortality showed 5% and 10% noninferiority margins were more likely to be associated with acceptance of shorter treatment compared with 20% margins (odds ratio [OR] 3.5, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-9.6, P = 0.013; OR 5.1, 95% CI: 1.8-14.6, P = 0.002). Baseline mortality was not a significant predictor of acceptance of shorter treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians are more likely to accept shorter treatment when noninferiority margins are ≤10%. However, nearly half of respondents who reviewed abstracts with 20% margins were still willing to accept shorter treatment. This is a novel application of contingent valuation methodology to elicit acceptance of research results among end users of the medical literature. HIGHLIGHTS: Clinicians are more likely to accept shorter treatment durations based on noninferior mortality results when the noninferiority margin is 5% or 10% than if the margin is 20%.However, nearly half of clinicians would still accept shorter-duration treatment as noninferior with margins of 20%.Baseline mortality does not independently predict acceptance of shorter-duration treatment.Contingent valuation is a novel approach to elicit the acceptance of research design parameters from the perspective of endusers of the medical literature.

Antibiotic treatment duration for bloodstream infections in critically ill children-A survey of pediatric infectious diseases and critical care clinicians for clinical equipoise.

OBJECTIVE: To describe antibiotic treatment durations that pediatric infectious diseases (ID) and critical care clinicians usually recommend for bloodstream infections in critically ill children. DESIGN: Anonymous, online practice survey using five common pediatric-based case scenarios of bloodstream infections. SETTING: Pediatric intensive care units in Canada, Australia and New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: Pediatric intensivists, nurse practitioners, ID physicians and pharmacists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Recommended treatment durations for common infectious syndromes associated with bloodstream infections and willingness to enrol patients into a trial to study treatment duration. RESULTS: Among 136 survey respondents, most recommended at least 10 days antibiotics for bloodstream infections associated with: pneumonia (65%), skin/soft tissue (74%), urinary tract (64%) and intra-abdominal infections (drained: 90%; undrained: 99%). For central vascular catheter-associated infections without catheter removal, over 90% clinicians recommended at least 10 days antibiotics, except for infections caused by coagulase negative staphylococci (79%). Recommendations for at least 10 days antibiotics were less common with catheter removal. In multivariable linear regression analyses, lack of source control was significantly associated with longer treatment durations (+5.2 days [95% CI: 4.4-6.1 days] for intra-abdominal infections and +4.1 days [95% CI: 3.8-4.4 days] for central vascular catheter-associated infections). Most clinicians (73-95%, depending on the source of bloodstream infection) would be willing to enrol patients into a trial of shorter versus longer antibiotic treatment duration. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of clinicians currently recommend at least 10 days of antibiotics for most scenarios of bloodstream infections in critically ill children. There is practice heterogeneity in self-reported treatment duration recommendations among clinicians. Treatment durations were similar across different infectious syndromes. Under appropriate clinical conditions, most clinicians would be willing to enrol patients into a trial of shorter versus longer treatment for common syndromes associated with bloodstream infections.

Testing for non-inferior mortality: a systematic review of non-inferiority margin sizes and trial characteristics.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the size and variability of non-inferiority margins used in non-inferiority trials of medications with primary outcomes involving mortality, and to examine the association between trial characteristics and non-inferiority margin size. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Medline In Process, Medline Epub Ahead of Print and Embase Classic+Embase databases from January 1989 to December 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Prospective non-inferiority randomised controlled trials comparing pharmacological therapies, with primary analyses for non-inferiority and primary outcomes involving mortality alone or as part of a composite outcome. Trials had to prespecify non-inferiority margins as absolute risk differences or relative to risks of outcome and provide a baseline risk of primary outcome in the control intervention. RESULTS: 3992 records were screened, 195 articles were selected for full text review and 111 articles were included for analyses. 82% of trials were conducted in thrombosis, infectious diseases or oncology. Mortality was the sole primary outcome in 23 (21%) trials, and part of a composite primary outcome in 88 (79%) trials. The overall median non-inferiority margin was an absolute risk difference of 9% (IQR 4.2%-10%). When non-inferiority margins were expressed relative to the baseline risk of primary outcome in control groups, the median relative non-inferiority margin was 1.5 (IQR 1.3-1.7). In multivariable regression analyses examining the association between trial characteristics (medical specialty, inclusion of paediatric patients, mortality as a sole or part of a composite primary outcome, presence of industry funding) and non-inferiority margin size, only medical specialty was significantly associated with non-inferiority margin size. CONCLUSION: Absolute and relative non-inferiority margins used in published trials comparing medications are large, allowing conclusions of non-inferiority in the context of large differences in mortality. Accepting the potential for large increases in outcomes involving mortality while declaring non-inferiority is a challenging methodological issue in the conduct of non-inferiority trials.

Medication reconciliation in pediatric cardiology performed by a pharmacy technician: a prospective cohort comparison study.

BACKGROUND: Medication reconciliation reduces potential medication discrepancies and adverse drug events. The role of pharmacy technicians in obtaining best possible medication histories (BPMHs) and performing reconciliation at the admission and transfer interfaces of care for pediatric patients has not been described. OBJECTIVES: To compare the completeness and accuracy of BPMHs and reconciliation conducted by a pharmacy technician (pilot study) and by nurses and/or pharmacists (baseline). The severity of identified unintentional discrepancies was rated to determine their clinical importance. METHODS: This prospective cohort comparison study involved patients up to 18 years of age admitted to and/or transferred between the Cardiology ward and the Cardiac Critical Care Unit of a pediatric tertiary care teaching hospital. A pharmacy resident conducted two 3-week audits: the first to assess the completeness and accuracy of BPMHs and reconciliation performed by nurses and/or pharmacists and the second to assess the completeness and accuracy of BPMHs and reconciliation performed by a pharmacy technician. RESULTS: The total number of patients was 38 in the baseline phase and 46 in the pilot period. There were no statistically significant differences between the baseline and pilot audits in terms of completion of BPMH (82% [28/34] versus 78% [21/27], p = 0.75) or completion of reconciliation (70% [23/33] versus 75% [15/20], p = 0.76) within 24 h of admission. Completeness of transfer reconciliation was significantly higher during the pilot study than at baseline (91% [31/34] versus 61% [11/18], p = 0.022). No significant differences between the baseline and pilot audits were found in the proportions of patients with at least one BPMH discrepancy (38% [13/34] versus 22% [6/27], p = 0.27), at least one unintentional discrepancy upon admission (21% [7/33] versus 10% [2/20], p = 0.46), or at least one unintentional discrepancy at the transfer interface (6% [1/18] versus 3% [1/34], p = 0.58). None of the 16 unintentional discrepancies were rated as causing severe patient discomfort or clinical deterioration. CONCLUSIONS: A trained pharmacy technician can perform admission and transfer medication reconciliation for pediatric patients with completeness and accuracy comparable to those of nurses and pharmacists. Future studies should explore the sustainability and cost-effectiveness of this practice model.

CONTEXTE: Le bilan comparatif des médicaments permet de réduire les possibles divergences au chapitre des médicaments ainsi que les éventuels événements indésirables liés aux médicaments. Le rôle des techniciens en pharmacie en ce qui a trait à l'obtention des meilleurs schémas thérapeutiques possibles (MSTP) et à la réalisation du bilan comparatif des médicaments au moment de l'admission et du transfert n'a pas encore été exposé chez l'enfant. OBJECTIFS: Comparer l'exhaustivité ainsi que l'exactitude des MSTP et des bilans comparatifs réalisés par une technicienne en pharmacie (étude pilote) à ceux réalisés par du personnel infirmier ou des pharmaciens (référence). Les divergences non intentionnelles observées ont été notées selon leur degré de gravité afin d'en établir l'importance clinique. MÉTHODES: Cette étude de cohorte prospective comparative a été menée auprès de patients de 18 ans et moins ayant été admis à l'unité des soins intensifs coronariens ou au service de cardiologie, ou ayant été transférés de l'un à l'autre de ces deux services, dans un hôpital d'enseignement de soins tertiaires pour enfants. Une résidente en pharmacie a procédé à deux vérifications de trois semaines chacune. Celles-ci avaient pour but d'évaluer l'exhaustivité et l'exactitude des MSTP ainsi que des bilans comparatifs : la première évaluation portant sur le travail effectué par du personnel infirmier ou des pharmaciens et la seconde portant sur celui réalisé par une technicienne en pharmacie. RÉSULTATS: Au total, la vérification a porté sur 38 patients au cours de la période de référence et 46 pour l'étude pilote. Aucune différence statistiquement significative n'a été notée entre les deux vérifications en ce qui a trait à l'obtention des MSTP (82 % [28/34] contre 78 % [21/27], p = 0,75) ou à la réalisation des bilans comparatifs (70 % [23/33] contre 75 % [15/20], p = 0,76) dans les 24 heures suivant l'admission. L'exhaustivité dans la réalisation des bilans comparatifs au moment des transferts était nettement plus élevée dans l'étude pilote que durant la période de référence (91 % [31/34] contre 61 % [11/18], p = 0,022). Aucune différence notable n'a été relevée entre les deux vérifications quant à la proportion de patients chez qui l'on a noté au moins une divergence dans le MSTP (38 % [13/34] contre 22 % [6/27], p = 0,27), au moins une divergence non intentionnelle au moment de l'admission (21 % [7/33] contre 10 % [2/20], p = 0,46) et au moins une divergence non intentionnelle au moment du transfert (6 % [1/18] contre 3 % [1/34], p = 0,58). Aucune des 16 divergences non intentionnelles n'a été classée comme cause de gêne importante pour le patient ou d'une détérioration clinique de ce dernier. CONCLUSIONS: Un technicien en pharmacie formé réalise des bilans comparatifs des médicaments, au moment de l'admission ou du transfert d'un enfant, d'une qualité comparable à celle du personnel infirmier ou des pharmaciens en ce qui a trait à l'exhaustivité et à l'exactitude. Les études ultérieures devraient porter sur la viabilité et le rapport coût-efficacité de ce modèle de pratique.

12-hour versus 24-hour creatinine clearance in critically ill pediatric patients.

Measurement of renal function is important to optimize drug dosing in critically ill pediatric patients and to prevent dose-related toxicities caused by medications that are eliminated or metabolized by the kidney. In clinical practice, the 24-h creatinine clearance (CrCl) is used as a surrogate marker of renal function. However, a 24-h urine collection period delays the availability of the result and increases the potential for collection errors. This prospective, observational study was performed to determine whether a 12-h CrCl is comparable to the traditional 24-h CrCl and to assess whether CrCl could be reliably predicted by the Schwartz equation, which mathematically estimates a child's GFR. A 24-h urine sample was collected in two 12-h aliquots from 60 catheterized critically ill children (age 2 d to 18 y). CrCl and Schwartz glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimates were determined for each 12- and 24-h period. Agreement between 12- and 24-h CrCl and between CrCl and Schwartz GFR estimates was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). An ICC > or =0.8 was considered to indicate excellent agreement. The ICC between the first 12-h CrCl and 24-h CrCl was 0.9605. The ICC between the second 12-h CrCl and 24-h CrCl was 0.9602. The ICC between the 24-h CrCl and Schwartz GFR was only 0.7046. All comparisons of 12- and 24-h CrCl indicated excellent agreement. In summary, the Schwartz equation was not a reliable estimate of renal function in critically ill children, and a 12-h CrCl is just as accurate as the standard 24-h CrCl to assess renal function and guide drug dosing.