Establishing a paediatric critical care core quality measure set using a multistakeholder, consensus-driven process.

Introduction: Monitoring healthcare quality is challenging in paediatric critical care due to measure variability, data collection burden, and uncertainty regarding consumer and clinician priorities. Objective: We sought to establish a core quality measure set that (i) is meaningful to consumers and clinicians and (ii) promotes alignment of measure use and collection across paediatric critical care. Design: We conducted a multi-stakeholder Delphi study with embedded consumer prioritisation survey. The Delphi involved two surveys, followed by a consensus meeting. Triangulation methods were used to integrate survey findings prior tobefore the consensus meeting. In the consensus panel, broad agreement was reached on a core measure set, and recommendations were made for future measurement directions in paediatric critical care. Setting and participants: Australian and New Zealand paediatric critical care survivors (aged >18 years) and families were invited to rank measure priorities in an online survey distributed via social media and consumer groups. A concurrent Delphi study was undertaken with paediatric critical care clinicians, policy makers, and a consumer representative. Interventions: None. Main outcome measures: Priorities for quality measures. Results: Respondents to the consumer survey (n = 117) identified (i) nurse-patient ratios; (ii) visible patient goals; and (iii) long-term follow-up as their quality measure priorities. In the Delphi process, clinicians (Round 1 n = 191; Round 2 n = 117 [61% retention]; Round 3 n = 14) and a consumer representative reached broad agreement on a 51-item (61% of 83 initial measures) core measure set. Clinician priorities were (i) nurse-patient ratio; (ii) staff turnover; and (iii) long term-follow up. Measure feasibility was rated low due to a perceived lack of standardised case definitions or data collection burden. Five recommendations were generated. Conclusions: We defined a 51-item core measurement set for paediatric critical care, aligned with clinician and consumer priorities. Next steps are implementation and methodological evaluation in quality programs, and where appropriate, retirement of redundant measures.

Implementing paediatric appropriate use criteria for endotracheal suction to reduce complications in mechanically ventilated children with respiratory infections.

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal suction is used to maintain endotracheal tube patency. There is limited guidance to inform clinical practice for children with respiratory infections. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine whether implementation of a paediatric endotracheal suction appropriate use guideline Paediatric AirWay Suction (PAWS) is associated with an increased use of appropriate and decreased use of inappropriate suction interventions. METHODS: A mixed-method, pre-implementation-post-implementation study was conducted between September 2021 and April 2022. Suction episodes in mechanically ventilated children with a respiratory infection were eligible. Using a structured approach, we implemented the PAWS guideline in a single paediatric intensive care unit. Evaluation included clinical (e.g., suction intervention appropriateness), implementation (e.g., acceptability), and cost outcomes (implementation costs). Associations between implementation of the PAWS guideline and appropriateness of endotracheal suction intervention use were investigated using generalised linear models. RESULTS: Data from 439 eligible suctions were included in the analysis. Following PAWS implementation, inappropriate endotracheal tube intervention use reduced from 99% to 58%, an absolute reduction (AR) of 41% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 25%, 56%). Reductions were most notable for open suction systems (AR: 48%; 95% CI: 30%, 65%), 0.9% sodium chloride use (AR: 23%; 95% CI: 8%, 38%) and presuction and postsuction manual bagging (38%; 95% CI: 16%, 60%, and 86%; 95% CI: 73%, 99%), respectively. Clinicians perceived PAWS as acceptable and suitable for use. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of endotracheal tube suction appropriate use guidelines in a mixed paediatric intensive care unit was associated with a large reduction in inappropriate suction intervention use in paediatric patients with respiratory infections.

The Paediatric AirWay Suction (PAWS) appropriateness guide for endotracheal suction interventions.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Endotracheal suction is an invasive and potentially harmful technique used for airway clearance in mechanically ventilated children. Choice of suction intervention remains a complex and variable process. We sought to develop appropriate use criteria for endotracheal suction interventions used in paediatric populations. METHODS: The RAND Corporation and University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method was used to develop the Paediatric AirWay Suction appropriateness guide. This included defining key terms, synthesising current evidence, engaging an expert multidisciplinary panel, case scenario development, and two rounds of appropriateness ratings (weighing harm with benefit). Indications (clinical scenarios) were developed from common applications or anticipated use, current practice guidelines, clinical trial results, and expert consultation. RESULTS: Overall, 148 (19%) scenarios were rated as appropriate (benefit outweighs harm), 542 (67%) as uncertain, and 94 (11%) as inappropriate (harm outweighs benefit). Disagreement occurred in 24 (3%) clinical scenarios, namely presuction and postsuction bagging across populations and age groups. In general, the use of closed suction was rated as appropriate, particularly in the subspecialty population 'patients with highly infectious respiratory disease'. Routine application of 0.9% saline for nonrespiratory indications was more likely to be inappropriate/uncertain than appropriate. Panellists preferred clinically indicated suction versus routine suction in most circumstances. CONCLUSION: Appropriate use criteria for endotracheal suction in the paediatric intensive care have the potential to impact clinical decision-making, reduce practice variability, and improve patient outcomes. Furthermore, recognition of uncertain clinical scenarios facilitates identification of areas that would benefit from future research.