Child Health and the Pediatric Hematology-Oncology Workforce: 2020-2040.

Pediatric hematology-oncology (PHO) is 1 of the oldest recognized pediatric subspecialities. PHO physicians care for infants, children, adolescents, and young adults with all types of cancer and nonmalignant blood conditions, in many cases temporarily assuming the role of a primary care physician because of the complexity and intensity of treatment. However, the number of clinically active PHO subspecialists needed to care for children in the United States remains unknown. Recent papers suggest a potential oversaturation of PHO physicians in some geographic areas. This article is part of a Pediatrics supplement focused on projecting the future supply of the pediatric subspecialty workforce. It draws on information available in the literature, data from the American Board of Pediatrics, and findings from a new microsimulation model estimating the future supply of pediatric subspecialists through 2040. The model predicts a workforce growth in PHO subspecialists of 66% by 2040. Alternative scenarios, including changes in clinical time and fellowship size, resulted in a difference in growth of ±18% from baseline. The model also forecasts significant geographic maldistribution. For example, the current workforce is concentrated in the Northeast Census region and the model predicts the New England Census division will have a 2.9-fold higher clinical workforce equivalent per 100 000 children aged 0 to 18 years than the Mountain Census division by 2040. These findings suggest potential opportunities to improve the PHO subspecialty workforce and the outcomes and experiences of its patient population through educational changes, practice initiatives, policy interventions, and dedicated research.

A Prospective, Holistic, Multicenter Approach to Tracking and Understanding Bloodstream Infections in Pediatric Hematology-Oncology Patients.

OBJECTIVE To assess the burden of bloodstream infections (BSIs) among pediatric hematology-oncology (PHO) inpatients, to propose a comprehensive, all-BSI tracking approach, and to discuss how such an approach helps better inform within-center and across-center differences in CLABSI rate DESIGN Prospective cohort study SETTING US multicenter, quality-improvement, BSI prevention network PARTICIPANTS PHO centers across the United States who agreed to follow a standardized central-line-maintenance care bundle and track all BSI events and central-line days every month. METHODS Infections were categorized as CLABSI (stratified by mucosal barrier injury-related, laboratory-confirmed BSI [MBI-LCBI] versus non-MBI-LCBI) and secondary BSI, using National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) definitions. Single positive blood cultures (SPBCs) with NHSN defined common commensals were also tracked. RESULTS Between 2013 and 2015, 34 PHO centers reported 1,110 BSIs. Among them, 708 (63.8%) were CLABSIs, 170 (15.3%) were secondary BSIs, and 232 (20.9%) were SPBCs. Most SPBCs (75%) occurred in patients with profound neutropenia; 22% of SPBCs were viridans group streptococci. Among the CLABSIs, 51% were MBI-LCBI. Excluding SPBCs, CLABSI rates were higher (88% vs 77%) and secondary BSI rates were lower (12% vs 23%) after the NHSN updated the definition of secondary BSI (P<.001). Preliminary analyses showed across-center differences in CLABSI versus secondary BSI and between SPBC and CLABSI versus non-CLABSI rates. CONCLUSIONS Tracking all BSIs, not just CLABSIs in PHO patients, is a patient-centered, clinically relevant approach that could help better assess across-center and within-center differences in infection rates, including CLABSI. This approach enables informed decision making by healthcare providers, payors, and the public. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:690-696.