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.

Is this child sick? Usefulness of the Pediatric Assessment Triangle in emergency settings.

OBJECTIVE: The Pediatric Assessment Triangle is a rapid assessment tool that uses only visual and auditory clues, requires no equipment, and takes 30-60s to perform. It's being used internationally in different emergency settings, but few studies have assessed its performance. The aim of this narrative biomedical review is to summarize the literature available regarding the usefulness of the Pediatric Assessment Triangle in clinical practice. SOURCES: The authors carried out a non-systematic review in the PubMed®, MEDLINE®, and EMBASE® databases, searching for articles published between 1999-2016 using the keywords "pediatric assessment triangle," "pediatric triage," "pediatric assessment tools," and "pediatric emergency department." SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS: The Pediatric Assessment Triangle has demonstrated itself to be useful to assess sick children in the prehospital setting and make transport decisions. It has been incorporated, as an essential instrument for assessing sick children, into different life support courses, although little has been written about the effectiveness of teaching it. Little has been published about the performance of this tool in the initial evaluation in the emergency department. In the emergency department, the Pediatric Assessment Triangle is useful to identify the children at triage who require more urgent care. Recent studies have assessed and proved its efficacy to also identify those patients having more serious health conditions who are eventually admitted to the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: The Pediatric Assessment Triangle is quickly spreading internationally and its clinical applicability is very promising. Nevertheless, it is imperative to promote research for clinical validation, especially for clinical use by emergency pediatricians and physicians.

Initial Asthma Severity Assessment Tools as Predictors of Hospitalization.

BACKGROUND: Assessment tools to classify and prioritize patients, such as systems of triage, and indicators of severity, such as clinical respiratory scores, are helpful in guiding the flow of asthmatic patients in the emergency department. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess the performance of the Pediatric Assessment Triangle (PAT), triage level (TL), Pulmonary Score (PS), and initial O2 saturation (O2 sat), in predicting hospitalization in pediatric acute asthma exacerbations. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study evaluating PAT, TL, and PS at presentation, and initial O2 sat of asthmatic children in the pediatric emergency department (PED). The primary outcome measure was the rate of hospitalization. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS) in the PED and admission to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). RESULTS: PAT, TL, PS, and initial O2 sat were recorded in 14,953 asthmatic children. Multivariate analysis yielded the following results: Abnormal PAT and more severe TLs (I-II) were independent risk factors for hospitalization (odds ratio [OR] 1.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4-1.8; OR 3.4, 95% CI 2.6-4.3, respectively) and longer LOS (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3-1.7; OR 2.6, 95% CI 2-3.3, respectively). PS > 3 showed a strong association with hospitalization (OR 8.1, 95% CI 7-9.4), PICU admission (OR 9.6, 95% CI 3-30.9) and longer LOS (OR 6.2, 95% CI 5.6-6.9). O2 sat < 94% was an independent predictor of admission (OR 5.2, 95% CI 4.6-5.9), PICU admission (OR 4.6, 95% CI 4.5-4.6), and longer LOS (OR 4.6, 95% CI 4.1-5.2). CONCLUSIONS: PAT, TL, PS, and initial O2 sat are good predictors of hospitalization in pediatric acute asthma exacerbations.

The Validity of the Pediatric Assessment Triangle as the First Step in the Triage Process in a Pediatric Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the association between pediatric assessment triangle (PAT) findings during triage and markers of severity in a pediatric emergency department (PED). METHODS: During the study period, patients arriving to the PED were classified by trained nurses with the Pediatric Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale using a computer system, from which data were obtained and analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of children hospitalized related with PAT findings. The secondary outcome measures were the admission to the intensive care unit (%), PED length of stay, and performance of blood tests (%). RESULTS: Among the 302,103 episodes included, there were abnormal PAT findings in 24,120 cases (7.9%). Multivariate analysis adjusted for age confirmed that PAT findings and triage level were independent risk factors for admission (odds ratio [OR], 2.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13-2.29; OR, 6.01; 95% CI, 5.79-6.24, respectively). Abnormal findings in appearance or in more than 1 PAT component were even more strongly associated with admission (3.99; 95% CI, 3.63-4.38; 14.99, 95% CI, 11.99-18.74, respectively). When adjusted for triage level and age, abnormal PAT findings were also an independent risk factor for intensive care unit admission (OR, 4.44; 95% CI, 3.77-5.24) and a longer stay in the PED (OR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.72-1.84). CONCLUSIONS: Abnormal findings in the PAT applied by trained nurses at triage identify patients with a higher risk of hospitalization. The PAT seems to be a valid tool for identifying the most severe patients as a first step in the triage process.

Is this child sick? Usefulness of the Pediatric Assessment Triangle in emergency settings / Esta criança está doente? Utilidade do Triângulo de Avaliação Pediátrica nas configurações de emergência

Abstract Objective: The Pediatric Assessment Triangle is a rapid assessment tool that uses only visual and auditory clues, requires no equipment, and takes 30-60 s to perform. It's being used internationally in different emergency settings, but few studies have assessed its performance. The aim of this narrative biomedical review is to summarize the literature available regarding the usefulness of the Pediatric Assessment Triangle in clinical practice. Sources: The authors carried out a non-systematic review in the PubMed®, MEDLINE®, and EMBASE® databases, searching for articles published between 1999-2016 using the keywords "pediatric assessment triangle," "pediatric triage," "pediatric assessment tools," and "pediatric emergency department." Summary of the findings: The Pediatric Assessment Triangle has demonstrated itself to be useful to assess sick children in the prehospital setting and make transport decisions. It has been incorporated, as an essential instrument for assessing sick children, into different life support courses, although little has been written about the effectiveness of teaching it. Little has been published about the performance of this tool in the initial evaluation in the emergency department. In the emergency department, the Pediatric Assessment Triangle is useful to identify the children at triage who require more urgent care. Recent studies have assessed and proved its efficacy to also identify those patients having more serious health conditions who are eventually admitted to the hospital. Conclusions: The Pediatric Assessment Triangle is quickly spreading internationally and its clinical applicability is very promising. Nevertheless, it is imperative to promote research for clinical validation, especially for clinical use by emergency pediatricians and physicians.

Resumo Objetivo: O Triângulo de Avaliação Pediátrica é uma ferramenta de avaliação rápida que usa apenas pistas visuais e auditivas, não necessita de equipamentos e leva de 30-60 segundos. Tem sido usado internacionalmente em diferentes configurações de emergência, porém poucos estudos avaliaram seu desempenho. O objetivo desta análise biomédica narrativa é resumir a literatura disponível com relação à utilidade do Triângulo de Avaliação Pediátrica na prática clínica. Fontes: Fizemos uma análise não sistemática nas bases de dados do PubMed®, Medline® e Embase® em busca de artigos publicados entre 1999-2016 com as palavras-chave "triângulo de avaliação pediátrica", "triângulo pediátrico", "ferramentas de avaliação pediátrica" e "departamento de emergência pediátrica". Resumo dos achados: O Triângulo de Avaliação Pediátrica demonstrou ser útil na avaliação de crianças doentes na configuração pré-hospitalar e na tomada de decisões de transporte. Ele foi incorporado, como um instrumento essencial na avaliação de crianças doentes, em diferentes cursos de apoio de vida, apesar de pouco ter sido escrito sobre a eficácia de ensino do Triângulo de Avaliação Pediátrica. Pouco foi publicado sobre o desempenho do Triângulo de Avaliação Pediátrica na avaliação inicial no departamento de emergência (DE). No DE, o Triângulo de Avaliação Pediátrica é útil para identificar, na triagem, crianças que exigem cuidado mais urgente. Estudos recentes avaliaram e provaram a eficácia do Triângulo de Avaliação Pediátrica também na identificação dos pacientes com doenças de saúde mais graves e, eventualmente, são internados no hospital. Conclusões: O Triângulo de Avaliação Pediátrica se difunde rapidamente de forma internacional e sua aplicabilidade clínica é muito promissora. Contudo, é essencial promover pesquisa para validação clínica, principalmente para o uso clínico por pediatras e médicos de emergência.

Validation of the "Step-by-Step" Approach in the Management of Young Febrile Infants.

BACKGROUND: A sequential approach to young febrile infants on the basis of clinical and laboratory parameters, including procalcitonin, was recently described as an accurate tool in identifying patients at risk for invasive bacterial infection (IBI). Our aim was to prospectively validate the Step-by-Step approach and compare it with the Rochester criteria and the Lab-score. METHODS: Prospective study including infants ≤90 days with fever without source presenting in 11 European pediatric emergency departments between September 2012 and August 2014. The accuracy of the Step-by-Step approach, the Rochester criteria, and the Lab-score in identifying patients at low risk of IBI (isolation of a bacterial pathogen in a blood or cerebrospinal fluid culture) was compared. RESULTS: Eighty-seven of 2185 infants (4.0%) were diagnosed with an IBI. The prevalence of IBI was significantly higher in infants classified as high risk or intermediate risk according to the Step by Step than in low risk patients. Sensitivity and negative predictive value for ruling out an IBI were 92.0% and 99.3% for the Step by Step, 81.6% and 98.3% for the Rochester criteria, and 59.8% and 98.1% for the Lab-score. Seven infants with an IBI were misclassified by the Step by Step, 16 by Rochester criteria, and 35 by the Lab-score. CONCLUSIONS: We validated the Step by Step as a valuable tool for the management of infants with fever without source in the emergency department and confirmed its superior accuracy in identifying patients at low risk of IBI, compared with the Rochester criteria and the Lab-score.

Elaboration of a risk map in a paediatric Emergency Department of a teaching hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a risk map in a paediatric ED of a tertiary teaching hospital, combining proactive and reactive strategies. METHODS: Between June and December 2013, a multidisciplinary committee in a paediatric Emergency Department (ED) in Bilbao (Basque Country of Spain) mapped the patient's journey and identified potential risks to patients (proactive strategy). The researchers also analysed incidents reported by professionals and caregivers (mainly parents) in the paediatric ED from November 2004-December 2013 (reactive strategies). Combining the results of both strategies, we applied the 'Failure mode and effects analysis' tool to identify and prioritise high or very high-risk situations and apply them to the risk map. RESULTS: Using proactive strategies, 49 opportunities for failures, 60 effects and 252 causes were identified. The most common failures were related to the discharge of the patient; the most common effects were complaints by parents, long stay in the ED, delay in diagnosis/treatment and unnecessary treatment. Main causes were not including the family in the process, shift change, incorrect identification of the patient and computer errors. Using reactive strategies, 1795 reported incidents were analysed. The most common incidents were related to medical equipment (38%), resources/organisation of staff (17%), clinical process (15%), facilities (12%) and medication errors (5%). Proactive strategies identified risks in tests, treatment and discharge. The reactive strategy added risks concerning prehospital transfer, triage, medical care, tests, treatment and discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Proactive and reactive strategies, involving professionals and caregivers, can complement each other in identifying potential patient safety risks in a paediatric ED.