Reporting of Social Determinants of Health in Pediatric Sepsis Studies.

OBJECTIVE: Standardized, consistent reporting of social determinants of health (SDOH) in studies on children with sepsis would allow for: 1) understanding the association of SDOH with illness severity and outcomes, 2) comparing populations and extrapolating study results, and 3) identification of potentially modifiable socioeconomic factors for policy makers. We, therefore, sought to determine how frequently data on SDOH were reported, which factors were collected and how these factors were defined in studies of sepsis in children. DATA SOURCES AND SELECTION: We reviewed 106 articles (published between 2005 and 2020) utilized in a recent systematic review on physiologic criteria for pediatric sepsis. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted by two reviewers on variables that fell within the World Health Organization's SDOH categories. DATA SYNTHESIS: SDOH were not the primary outcome in any of the included studies. Seventeen percent of articles (18/106) did not report on any SDOH, and a further 36.8% (39/106) only reported on gender/sex. Of the remaining 46.2% of articles, the most reported SDOH categories were preadmission nutritional status (35.8%, 38/106) and race/ethnicity (18.9%, 20/106). However, no two studies used the same definition of the variables reported within each of these categories. Six studies reported on socioeconomic status (3.8%, 6/106), including two from upper-middle-income and four from lower middle-income countries. Only three studies reported on parental education levels (2.8%, 3/106). No study reported on parental job security or structural conflict. CONCLUSIONS: We found overall low reporting of SDOH and marked variability in categorizations and definitions of SDOH variables. Consistent and standardized reporting of SDOH in pediatric sepsis studies is needed to understand the role these factors play in the development and severity of sepsis, to compare and extrapolate study results between settings and to implement policies aimed at improving socioeconomic conditions related to sepsis.

Criteria for Pediatric Sepsis-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Pediatric Sepsis Definition Taskforce.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the associations of demographic, clinical, laboratory, organ dysfunction, and illness severity variable values with: 1) sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock in children with infection and 2) multiple organ dysfunction or death in children with sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 1, 2004, and November 16, 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Case-control studies, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials in children greater than or equal to 37-week-old postconception to 18 years with suspected or confirmed infection, which included the terms "sepsis," "septicemia," or "septic shock" in the title or abstract. DATA EXTRACTION: Study characteristics, patient demographics, clinical signs or interventions, laboratory values, organ dysfunction measures, and illness severity scores were extracted from eligible articles. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed. DATA SYNTHESIS: One hundred and six studies met eligibility criteria of which 81 were included in the meta-analysis. Sixteen studies (9,629 patients) provided data for the sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock outcome and 71 studies (154,674 patients) for the mortality outcome. In children with infection, decreased level of consciousness and higher Pediatric Risk of Mortality scores were associated with sepsis/severe sepsis. In children with sepsis/severe sepsis/septic shock, chronic conditions, oncologic diagnosis, use of vasoactive/inotropic agents, mechanical ventilation, serum lactate, platelet count, fibrinogen, procalcitonin, multi-organ dysfunction syndrome, Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction score, Pediatric Index of Mortality-3, and Pediatric Risk of Mortality score each demonstrated significant and consistent associations with mortality. Pooled mortality rates varied among high-, upper middle-, and lower middle-income countries for patients with sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Strong associations of several markers of organ dysfunction with the outcomes of interest among infected and septic children support their inclusion in the data validation phase of the Pediatric Sepsis Definition Taskforce.

Double-Blind Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of Dopamine Versus Epinephrine as First-Line Vasoactive Drugs in Pediatric Septic Shock.

OBJECTIVES: The primary outcome was to compare the effects of dopamine or epinephrine in severe sepsis on 28-day mortality; secondary outcomes were the rate of healthcare-associated infection, the need for other vasoactive drugs, and the multiple organ dysfunction score. DESIGN: Double-blind, prospective, randomized controlled trial from February 1, 2009, to July 31, 2013. SETTING: PICU, Hospital Universitário da Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil. PATIENTS: Consecutive children who are 1 month to 15 years old and met the clinical criteria for fluid-refractory septic shock. Exclusions were receiving vasoactive drug(s) prior to hospital admission, having known cardiac disease, having already participated in the trial during the same hospital stay, refusing to participate, or having do-not-resuscitate orders. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either dopamine (5-10 µg/kg/min) or epinephrine (0.1-0.3 µg/kg/min) through a peripheral or intraosseous line. Patients not reaching predefined stabilization criteria after the maximum dose were classified as treatment failure, at which point the attending physician gradually stopped the study drug and started another catecholamine. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Physiologic and laboratory data were recorded. Baseline characteristics were described as proportions and mean (± SD) and compared using appropriate statistical tests. Multiple regression analysis was performed, and statistical significance was defined as a p value of less than 0.05. Baseline characteristics and therapeutic interventions for the 120 children enrolled (63, dopamine; 57, epinephrine) were similar. There were 17 deaths (14.2%): 13 (20.6%) in the dopamine group and four (7%) in the epinephrine group (p=0.033). Dopamine was associated with death (odds ratio, 6.5; 95% CI, 1.1-37.8; p=0.037) and healthcare-associated infection (odds ratio, 67.7; 95% CI, 5.0-910.8; p=0.001). The use of epinephrine was associated with a survival odds ratio of 6.49. CONCLUSIONS: Dopamine was associated with an increased risk of death and healthcare-associated infection. Early administration of peripheral or intraosseous epinephrine was associated with increased survival in this population. Limitations should be observed while interpreting these results.

Quality improvement programmes in paediatric sepsis from a global perspective.

Sepsis is a major contributor to poor child health outcomes around the world. The high morbidity, mortality, and societal cost associated with paediatric sepsis render it a global health priority, as summarised in Paper 1 of this Series. Sepsis is characterised by a dysregulated host response to infection that manifests as organ failure, and children are uniquely susceptible to sepsis, as discussed in Paper 2. The focus of this third Series paper is quality improvement in paediatric sepsis. The 2017 WHO resolution on sepsis outlined key aims to reduce the burden of sepsis. As of 2024, only a small number of countries have implemented systematic, paediatric-focused quality improvement programmes to raise sepsis awareness, enhance recognition of sepsis, promote timely treatment, and provide long-term support for paediatric sepsis survivors. We examine programme successes and systematic barriers to quality improvement targeting paediatric sepsis. We highlight the need for programme design to consider the entire patient journey, starting with prevention, caregiver awareness, recognition at home, education of the health-care workforce, development of health-care systems, and establishment of long-term family and survivor support extending beyond the intensive care unit. Building on lessons learnt from existing quality improvement programmes, we outline implementation strategies and measures to enable benchmarking. Ultimately, quality improvement on a global scale can only be accelerated through a global learning platform focusing on paediatric sepsis.

[Availability of pediatric and neonatal intensive care units in the city of São Paulo]. / Disponibilidade de unidades de terapia intensiva pediátrica e neonatal no município de São Paulo.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the health care service provided in pediatric intensive care units in the city of São Paulo, by identifying and describing the units and analyzing their geographic distribution. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study was carried out during a two-year period (August 2000 to July 2002). Data were collected through questionnaires answered by medical directors of each pediatric and neonatal intensive care unit. RESULTS: São Paulo is served by 107 pediatric and neonatal intensive care units, of which 85 (79.4%) completed and returned the questionnaire. We found a very unequal distribution of units as there were more units in places with the least pediatric population. Regarding to pediatric intensive care units specialization, 7% were pediatric, 41.2% were neonatal and 51.7% were mixed (pediatric and neonatal). Regarding hospital funds, 15.3% were associated with philanthropic institutions, 37.6% were private and 47% were public. A total of 1,067 beds were identified, of which 969 were active. The ratio bed/patient aged 0-14 was 1/2,728, varying from 1/604 at health districts-I to 1/6,812 at health districts-III. The units reported an average of 11.7 beds (2 to 60). The neonatal intensive care unit had a median of 16.9 beds per unit and pediatric intensive care units a median of 8.5 beds/unit. CONCLUSION: In São Paulo, we found an uneven distribution of pediatric and neonatal intensive care units among the health districts. There was also an uneven distribution between public and private units, and neonatal and pediatric ones. The current report is the first step in the effort to improve the quality of medical assistance in pediatric and neonatal intensive care units in São Paulo.