Factors Associated With Decision to Use and Dosing of Sugammadex in Children: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex was initially approved for reversal of neuromuscular blockade in adults in the United States in 2015. Limited data suggest sugammadex is widely used in pediatric anesthesia practice however the factors influencing use are not known. We explore patient, surgical, and institutional factors associated with the decision to use sugammadex versus neostigmine or no reversal, and the decision to use 2 mg/kg vs 4 mg/kg dosing. METHODS: Using data from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG) database, an EHR-derived registry, we conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study. Eligible cases were performed between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020, for children 0 to 17 years at US hospitals. Cases involved general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation and administration of rocuronium or vecuronium. Using generalized linear mixed models with institution and anesthesiologist-specific random intercepts, we measured the importance of a variety of patient, clinician, institution, anesthetic, and surgical risk factors in the decision to use sugammadex versus neostigmine, and the decision to use a 2 mg/kg vs 4 mg/kg dose. We then used intraclass correlation statistics to evaluate the proportion of variance contributed by institution and anesthesiologist specifically. RESULTS: There were 97,654 eligible anesthetics across 30 institutions. Of these 47.1% received sugammadex, 43.1% received neostigmine, and 9.8% received no reversal agent. Variability in the choice to use sugammadex was attributable primarily to institution (40.4%) and attending anesthesiologist (27.1%). Factors associated with sugammadex use (compared to neostigmine) include time from first institutional use of sugammadex (odds ratio [OR], 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-1.09, per month, P < .001), younger patient age groups (0-27 days OR, 2.59 [2.00-3.34], P < .001; 28 days-1 year OR, 2.72 [2.16-3.43], P < .001 vs 12-17 years), increased American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] physical status (ASA III: OR, 1.32 [1.23-1.42], P < .001 ASA IV OR, 1.71 [1.46-2.00], P < .001 vs ASA I), neuromuscular disease (OR, 1.14 (1.04-1.26], P = .006), cardiac surgery (OR, 1.76 [1.40-2.22], P < .001), dose of neuromuscular blockade within the hour before reversal (>2 ED95s/kg OR, 4.58 (4.14-5.07], P < .001 vs none), and shorter case duration (case duration <60 minutes OR, 2.06 [1.75-2.43], P < .001 vs >300 minutes). CONCLUSIONS: Variation in sugammadex use was primarily explained by institution and attending anesthesiologist. Patient factors associated with the decision to use sugammadex included younger age, higher doses of neuromuscular blocking agents, and increased medical complexity.

Sugammadex use in pediatric patients with stage IV-V chronic kidney disease in a quaternary referral hospital: a case series.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex is a pharmacologic agent that provides rapid reversal of neuromuscular blockade via encapsulation of the neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA). The sugammadex-NMBA complex is primarily cleared through glomerular filtration from the kidney, raising the possibility that alterations in renal function could affect its elimination. In pediatric patients, the benefits of sugammadex have led to widespread utilization; however, there is limited information on its application in pediatric renal impairment. This study examined sugammadex use and postoperative outcomes in pediatric patients with severe chronic renal impairment at our quaternary pediatric referral hospital. METHODS: After IRB approval, we performed a retrospective analysis in pediatric patients with stage IV and V chronic kidney disease who received sugammadex from January 2017 to March 2022. Postoperative outcomes studied included new or increased respiratory requirement, unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission, postoperative pneumonia, anaphylaxis, and death within 48 h postoperatively, unplanned deferral of intraoperative extubation, and repeat administrations of NMBA reversal after leaving the operating room. RESULTS: The final cohort included 17 patients ranging from 8 months to 16 years old. One patient required new postoperative noninvasive ventilation on postoperative day 2, which was credited to hypervolemia. Another patient had bronchospasm intraoperatively resolving with medication, which could not definitively be associated sugammadex administration. There were no instances of deferred extubation, unplanned ICU or need for supplemental oxygen after tracheal extubation identified. CONCLUSION: No adverse effects directly attributable to sugammadex in pediatric patients with severe renal impairment were detected. There may be a role for utilization of sugammadex for neuromuscular reversal in this population.

Tracheostomy, Feeding-Tube, and In-Hospital Postoperative Mortality in Children: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Neuromuscular/neurologic disease confers increased risk of perioperative mortality in children. Some patients require tracheostomy and/or feeding tubes to ameliorate upper airway obstruction or respiratory failure and reduce aspiration risk. Empiric differences between patients with and without these devices and their association with postoperative mortality have not been previously assessed. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study using the Pediatric Health Information System measured 3- and 30-day in-hospital postsurgical mortality among children 1 month to 18 years of age with neuromuscular/neurologic disease at 44 US children's hospitals, from April 2016 to October 2018. We summarized differences between patients presenting for surgery with and without these devices using standardized differences. Then, we calculated 3- and 30-day mortality among patients with tracheostomy, feeding tube, both, and neither device, overall and stratified by important exposures, using Fisher exact test to test whether differences were significant. RESULTS: There were 43,193 eligible patients. Unadjusted 3-day mortality was 1.3% (549/43,193); 30-day mortality was 2.7% (1168/43,193). Most (79.1%) used neither a feeding tube or tracheostomy, 1.2% had tracheostomy only, 15.5% had feeding tube only, and 4.2% used both devices. Compared to children with neither device, children using either or both devices were more likely to have multiple CCCs, dysphagia, chronic pulmonary disease, cerebral palsy, obstructive sleep apnea, or malnutrition, and a prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stay within the previous year. They were less likely to present for high-risk surgeries (33% vs 57%). Having a feeding tube was associated with decreased 3-day mortality overall compared to having neither device (0.9% vs 1.3%, P = .003), and among children having low-risk surgery, and surgery during urgent or emergent hospitalizations. Having both devices was associated with decreased 3-day mortality among children having low-risk surgery (0.8% vs 1.9%; P = .013), and during urgent or emergent hospitalizations (1.6% vs 2.9%; P = .023). For 30-day mortality, having a feeding tube or both devices was associated with lower mortality when the data were stratified by the number of CCCs. CONCLUSIONS: Patients requiring tracheostomy, feeding tube, or both are generally sicker than patients without these devices. Despite this, having a feeding tube was associated with lower 3-day mortality overall and lower 30-day mortality when the data were stratified by the number of CCCs. Having both devices was associated with lower 3-day mortality in patients presenting for low-risk surgery, and surgery during urgent or emergent hospitalizations.

Structural, Nursing, and Physician Characteristics and 30-Day Mortality for Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery in Pennsylvania.

OBJECTIVE: Cardiac surgery ICU characteristics and clinician staffing patterns have not been well characterized. We sought to describe Pennsylvania cardiac ICUs and to determine whether ICU characteristics are associated with mortality in the 30 days after cardiac surgery. DESIGN: From 2012 to 2013, we conducted a survey of cardiac surgery ICUs in Pennsylvania to assess ICU structure, care practices, and clinician staffing patterns. ICU data were linked to an administrative database of cardiac surgery patient discharges. We used logistic regression to measure the association between ICU variables and death in 30 days. SETTING: Cardiac surgery ICUs in Pennsylvania. PATIENTS: Patients having coronary artery bypass grafting and/or cardiac valve repair or replacement from 2009 to 2011. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 57 cardiac surgical ICUs in Pennsylvania, 43 (75.4%) responded to the facility survey. Rounds included respiratory therapists in 26 of 43 (60.5%) and pharmacists in 23 of 43 (53.5%). Eleven of 41 (26.8%) reported that at least 2/3 of their nurses had a bachelor's degree in nursing. Advanced practice providers were present in most of the ICUs (37/43; 86.0%) but residents (8/42; 18.6%) and fellows (7/43; 16.3%) were not. Daytime intensivists were present in 21 of 43 (48.8%) responding ICUs; eight of 43 (18.6%) had nighttime intensivists. Among 29,449 patients, there was no relationship between mortality and nurse ICU experience, presence of any intensivist, or absence of residents after risk adjustment. To exclude patients who may have undergone transcatheter aortic valve replacement, we conducted a subgroup analysis of patients undergoing only coronary artery bypass grafting, and results were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Pennsylvania cardiac surgery ICUs have variable structures, care practices, and clinician staffing, although none of these are statistically significantly associated with mortality in the 30 days following surgery after adjustment.

An empirical comparison of key statistical attributes among potential ICU quality indicators.

OBJECTIVE: Good quality indicators should have face validity, relevance to patients, and be able to be measured reliably. Beyond these general requirements, good quality indicators should also have certain statistical properties, including sufficient variability to identify poor performers, relative insensitivity to severity adjustment, and the ability to capture what providers do rather than patients' characteristics. We assessed the performance of candidate indicators of ICU quality on these criteria. Indicators included ICU readmission, mortality, several length of stay outcomes, and the processes of venous-thromboembolism and stress ulcer prophylaxis provision. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: One hundred thirty-eight U.S. ICUs from 2001-2008 in the Project IMPACT database. PATIENTS: Two hundred sixty-eight thousand eight hundred twenty-four patients discharged from U.S. ICUs. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We assessed indicators' (1) variability across ICU-years; (2) degree of influence by patient vs. ICU and hospital characteristics using the Omega statistic; (3) sensitivity to severity adjustment by comparing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) between models including vs. excluding patient variables, and (4) correlation between risk adjusted quality indicators using a Spearman correlation. Large ranges of among-ICU variability were noted for all quality indicators, particularly for prolonged length of stay (4.7-71.3%) and the proportion of patients discharged home (30.6-82.0%), and ICU and hospital characteristics outweighed patient characteristics for stress ulcer prophylaxis (ω, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.34-0.54), venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (ω, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.53-0.61), and ICU readmissions (ω, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.90). Mortality measures were the most sensitive to severity adjustment (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve % difference, 29.6%); process measures were the least sensitive (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve % differences: venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, 3.4%; stress ulcer prophylaxis, 2.1%). None of the 10 indicators was clearly and consistently correlated with a majority of the other nine indicators. CONCLUSIONS: No indicator performed optimally across assessments. Future research should seek to define and operationalize quality in a way that is relevant to both patients and providers.

Outcomes among patients discharged from busy intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: Strains on the capacities of intensive care units (ICUs) may influence the quality of ICU-to-floor transitions. OBJECTIVE: To determine how 3 metrics of ICU capacity strain (ICU census, new admissions, and average acuity) measured on days of patient discharges influence ICU length of stay (LOS) and post-ICU discharge outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study from 2001 to 2008. SETTING: 155 ICUs in the United States. PATIENTS: 200 730 adults discharged from ICUs to hospital floors. MEASUREMENTS: Associations between ICU capacity strain metrics and discharged patient ICU LOS, 72-hour ICU readmissions, subsequent in-hospital death, post-ICU discharge LOS, and hospital discharge destination. RESULTS: Increases in the 3 strain variables on the days of ICU discharge were associated with shorter preceding ICU LOS (all P < 0.001) and increased odds of ICU readmissions (all P < 0.050). Going from the 5th to 95th percentiles of strain was associated with a 6.3-hour reduction in ICU LOS (95% CI, 5.3 to 7.3 hours) and a 1.0% increase in the odds of ICU readmission (CI, 0.6% to 1.5%). No strain variable was associated with increased odds of subsequent death, reduced odds of being discharged home from the hospital, or longer total hospital LOS. LIMITATION: Long-term outcomes could not be measured. CONCLUSION: When ICUs are strained, triage decisions seem to be affected such that patients are discharged from the ICU more quickly and, perhaps consequentially, have slightly greater odds of being readmitted to the ICU. However, short-term patient outcomes are unaffected. These results suggest that bed availability pressures may encourage physicians to discharge patients from the ICU more efficiently and that ICU readmissions are unlikely to be causally related to patient outcomes. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; and Society of Critical Care Medicine.

An empirical derivation of the optimal time interval for defining ICU readmissions.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU) readmission rates are commonly viewed as indicators of ICU quality. However, definitions of ICU readmissions vary, and it is unknown which, if any, readmissions are associated with ICU quality. OBJECTIVE: Empirically derive the optimal interval between ICU discharge and readmission for purposes of considering ICU readmission as an ICU quality indicator. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: A total of 214,692 patients discharged from 157 US ICUs participating in the Project IMPACT database, 2001-2008. MEASURES: We graphically examined how patient characteristics and ICU discharge circumstances (eg, ICU census) were related to the odds of ICU readmissions as the allowable interval between ICU discharge and readmission was lengthened. We defined the optimal interval by identifying inflection points where these relationships changed significantly and permanently. RESULTS: A total of 2242 patients (1.0%) were readmitted to the ICU within 24 hours; 9062 (4.2%) within 7 days. Patient characteristics exhibited stronger associations with readmissions after intervals >48-60 hours. By contrast, ICU discharge circumstances and ICU interventions (eg, mechanical ventilation) exhibited weaker relationships as intervals lengthened, with inflection points at 30-48 hours. Because of the predominance of afternoon readmissions regardless of time of discharge, using intervals defined by full calendar days rather than fixed numbers of hours produced more valid results. DISCUSSION: It remains uncertain whether ICU readmission is a valid quality indicator. However, having established 2 full calendar days (not 48 h) after ICU discharge as the optimal interval for measuring ICU readmissions, this study will facilitate future research designed to determine its validity.

The epidemiology of intensive care unit readmissions in the United States.

RATIONALE: The incidence of intensive care unit (ICU) readmissions across the United States is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine incidence of ICU readmissions in United States hospitals, and describe the distribution of time between ICU discharges and readmissions. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used 196,202 patients in 156 medical and surgical ICUs in 106 community and academic hospitals participating in Project IMPACT from April 1, 2001, to December 31, 2007. We used mixed-effects logistic regression, adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics, to describe how ICU readmission rates differed across patient types, ICU models, and hospital types. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Measurements consisted of 48- and 120-hour ICU readmission rates and time to readmission. A total of 3,905 patients (2%) were readmitted to the ICU within 48 hours, and 7,171 (3.7%) within 120 hours. In adjusted analysis, there was no difference in ICU readmissions across patient types or ICU models. Among medical patients, those in academic hospitals had higher odds of 48- and 120-hour readmission than patients in community hospitals without residents (1.51 [95% confidence interval, 1.12-2.02] and 1.63 [95% confidence interval, 1.24-2.16]). Median time to ICU readmission was 3.07 days (interquartile range, 1.27-6.58). Closed ICUs had the longest times to readmission (3.55 d [interquartile range, 1.42-7.50]). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 2% and 4% of ICU patients discharged to the ward are readmitted within 48 and 120 hours, within a median time of 3 days. Medical patients in academic hospitals are more likely to be readmitted than patients in community hospitals without residents. ICU readmission rates could be useful for policy makers and investigations into their causes and consequences.

Rationing in the intensive care unit: to disclose or disguise?

INTRODUCTION: Growing pressures to ration intensive care unit beds and services pose novel challenges to clinicians. Whereas the question of how to allocate scarce intensive care unit resources has received much attention, the question of whether to disclose these decisions to patients and surrogates has not been explored. KEY CONSIDERATIONS: We explore how considerations of professionalism, dual agency, patients' and surrogates' preferences, beneficence, and healthcare efficiency and efficacy influence the propriety of disclosing rationing decisions in the intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS: There are compelling conceptual reasons to support a policy of routine disclosure. Systematic disclosure of prevailing intensive care unit norms for making allocation decisions, and of at least the most consequential specific decisions, can promote transparent, professional, and effective healthcare delivery. However, many empiric questions about how best to structure and implement disclosure processes remain to be answered. Specifically, research is needed to determine how best to operationalize disclosure processes so as to maximize prospective benefits to patients and surrogates and minimize burdens on clinicians and intensive care units.

Positive and negative spillovers of the Health Disparities Collaboratives in federally qualified health centers: staff perceptions.

INTRODUCTION: Quality improvement (QI) interventions are usually evaluated for their intended effect; little is known about whether they generate significant positive or negative spillovers. METHODS: We mailed a 39-item self-administered survey to the 1256 staff at 135 federally qualified health centers (FQHC) implementing the Health Disparities Collaboratives (HDC), a large-scale QI collaborative intervention. We asked about the extent to which the HDC yielded improvements or detriments beyond its condition(s) of focus, particularly for non-HDC aspects of patient care and FQHC function. RESULTS: Response rate was 68.7%. The HDC was perceived to improve non-HDC patient care and general FQHC functioning more often than it was regarded as diminishing them. In all, 45% of respondents indicated that the HDC improved the quality of care for chronic conditions not being emphasized by the HDC; 5% responded that the HDC diminished that quality. Seventy-five percent stated that the HDC improved care provided to patients with multiple chronic conditions; 4% signified that the HDC diminished it. Fifty-five percent of respondents indicated that the HDC improved their FQHC's ability to move patients through their center, and 80% indicated that the HDC improved their FQHC's QI plan as a whole; 8% and 2% indicated that the HDC diminished these, respectively. DISCUSSION: On balance, the HDC was perceived to yield more positive spillovers than negative ones. This QI intervention appears to have generated effects beyond its condition of focus; QI's unintended effects should be included in evaluations to develop a better understanding of QI's net impact.

Pediatric Perioperative DNR Orders: A Case Series in a Children's Hospital.

CONTEXT: Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders are common among children receiving palliative care, who may nevertheless benefit from surgery and other procedures. Although anesthesia, surgery, and pediatric guidelines recommend systematic reconsideration of DNR orders in the perioperative period, data regarding how clinicians evaluate and manage DNR orders in the perioperative period are limited. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate perioperative management of DNR orders at a tertiary care children's hospital. METHODS: We reviewed electronic medical records for all children with DNR orders in place within 30 days of surgery at a tertiary care pediatric hospital from February 1, 2016, to August 1, 2017. Using standardized case report forms, we abstracted the following from physician notes: 1) patient/family wishes with respect to the DNR, 2) whether preoperative DNR orders were continued, modified, or suspended during the perioperative period, and 3) whether life-threatening events occurred in the perioperative period. Based on data from these reports, we created a process flow diagram regarding DNR order decision-making in the perioperative period. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients aged six days to 17 years had a DNR order in place within 30 days of 29 procedures. No documented systematic reconsideration took place for 41% of procedures. DNR orders were modified for two (7%) procedures and suspended for 15 (51%). Three children (13%) suffered life-threatening events. We identified four time points in the perioperative period where systematic reconsideration should be documented in the medical record, and identified recommended personnel involved and important discussion points at each time point. CONCLUSION: Opportunities exist to improve how DNR orders are managed during the perioperative period.

Sustaining quality improvement in community health centers: perceptions of leaders and staff.

The Health Disparities Collaboratives are the largest national quality improvement (QI) initiatives in community health centers. This article identifies the incentives and assistance personnel believe are necessary to sustain QI. In 2004, 1006 survey respondents (response rate 67%) at 165 centers cited lack of resources, time, and staff burnout as common barriers. Release time was the most desired personal incentive. The highest funding priorities were direct patient care services (44% ranked no. 1), data entry (34%), and staff time for QI (26%). Participants also needed help with patient self-management (73%), information systems (77%), and getting providers to follow guidelines (64%).

The perceived financial impact of quality improvement efforts in community health centers.

We administered surveys to 100 chief executive officers (CEOs) of community health centers to determine their perceptions of the financial impact of the Health Disparities Collaboratives, a national quality improvement initiative. One third of the CEOs believed that the HDC had a negative financial impact on their health center, and this perception was significantly correlated with centers having a higher proportion of uninsured patients. Performance-based payment incentives may improve care but may also add new financial burdens to facilities that treat the uninsured population. As such, a provider's payer mix may need to be considered in the design of QI programs if they are to be sustainable.

The cost consequences of improving diabetes care: the community health center experience.

BACKGROUND: Despite significant interest in the business case for quality improvement (QI), there are few evaluations of the impact of QI programs on outpatient organizations. The financial impact of the Health Disparities Collaboratives (HDC), a national QI program conducted in community health centers (HCs), was examined. METHODS: Chief executive officers (CEOs) from health centers in two U.S. regions that participated in the Diabetes HDC (N = 74) were surveyed. In case studies of five selected centers, program costs/revenues, clinical costs/revenues, overall center financial health, and indirect costs/benefits were assessed. RESULTS: CEOs were divided on the HDC's overall effect on finances (38%, worsened; 48%, no change; 14%, improved). Case studies showed that the HDC represented a new administrative cost ($6-$22/patient, year 1) without a regular revenue source. In centers with billing data, the balance of diabetes-related clinical costs/revenues and payor mix did not clearly worsen or improve with the program's start. The most commonly mentioned indirect benefits were improved chronic illness care and enhanced staff morale. DISCUSSION: CEO perceptions of the overall financial impact of the HDC vary widely; the case studies illustrate the numerous factors that may influence these perceptions. Whether the identified balance of costs and benefits is generalizable or sustainable will have to be addressed to optimally design financial reimbursement and incentives.