'Baby Liberation' - Developing and implementing an individualised, developmentally-supportive care bundle to critically unwell infants in an Australian Paediatric Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: Infants requiring high acuity care within a Paediatric Intensive Care Unit are at multifactorial risk of neurological injury to the immature brain, resulting in long-term developmental difficulties. In 2020, Queensland Children's Hospital implemented an individualised family-centred developmental care program, 'Baby Liberation', to address an identified service gap for critically unwell infants, aimed at optimising early neuroprotective strategies and minimising risk of suboptimal developmental outcomes. AIM: To implement Baby Liberation for infants admitted to a quaternary paediatric intensive care referral centre. Secondary aims were to describe environmental changes, enablers and limitations related to implementation. STUDY DESIGN: A single-centre, prospective implementation pilot study investigated the feasibility of implementing Baby Liberation. Subjects included infants less than six months of age admitted to Queensland Children's Hospital Paediatric Intensive Care Unit. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary measures comprised data collected during the implementation period, including number of eligible patients and number of developmental care plans provided. Environmental audit data were collected pre and post implementation to inform secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Baby Liberation was feasibly implemented into the Queensland Children's Hospital Paediatric Intensive Care Unit. During implementation, 181 individualised care plans were provided to 313 eligible infants (57.8 %). Environmental audits showed improvements in all areas of developmental care, with greatest improvements noted in pain and stress management (+95 %) and staff support and development (+83.3 %). CONCLUSION: Implementation of Baby Liberation was feasible within a large quaternary paediatric intensive care unit and has potential to be expanded into other clinical areas providing acute infant care.

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.

Ventilator weaning and extubation practices in critically ill children: An Australian and New Zealand survey of practice.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to (i) describe current weaning and extubation practices in children (protocols to identify weaning candidates, spontaneous breathing trials, and other aspects of care such as sedation weaning) and (ii) understand responsibilities for ventilation weaning decisions across Australia and New Zealand (ANZ). METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of ANZ intensive care units who routinely intubate and ventilate children (<18 years) was conducted. We worked with the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Paediatric Study Group to identify units and potential respondents (senior nurse representative per unit) and to administer questionnaires. Survey questions (n = 35) examined current protocols, practices, unit staffing, and decision-making responsibilities for ventilation weaning and extubation. Open-ended questions examined respondents' experiences of weaning and extubation. RESULTS: A senior nursing respondent from 18/22 intensive care units (82%) completed the survey. Across units, most used sedation assessment tools (88%), and less often, sedation weaning tools (55%). Spontaneous awakening protocols were not used; one unit (5%) reported the use of a spontaneous breathing protocol. Two respondents reported that ventilation weaning protocols (11%) were in use, with 44% of units reporting the use of extubation protocols. Weaning and extubation practices were largely perceived as medically driven, with qualitative data demonstrating a desire from most respondents for greater shared decision-making. CONCLUSION: In ANZ, ventilation weaning and extubation practices are largely medically driven with variation in the use of protocols to support mechanical ventilation weaning and extubation in children. Our findings highlight the importance of future research to determine the impact of greater collaboration of the multidisciplinary team on weaning practices.

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.

Real-time seizure detection in paediatric intensive care patients: the RESET child brain protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 20%-40% of comatose children with risk factors in intensive care have electrographic-only seizures; these go unrecognised due to the absence of continuous electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring (cEEG). Utility of cEEG with high-quality assessment is currently limited due to high-resource requirements. New software analysis tools are available to facilitate bedside cEEG assessment using quantitative EEG (QEEG) trends. The primary aim of this study is to describe accuracy of interpretation of QEEG trends by paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) nurses compared with cEEG assessment by neurologist (standard clinical care) in children at risk of seizures and status epilepticus utilising diagnostic test statistics. The secondary aims are to determine time to seizure detection for QEEG users compared with standard clinical care and describe impact of confounders on accuracy of seizure detection. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a single-centre, prospective observational cohort study evaluating a paediatric QEEG programme utilising the full 19 electrode set. The setting will be a 36-bed quaternary PICU with medical, cardiac and general surgical cases. cEEG studies in PICU patients identified as 'at risk of seizures' will be analysed. Trained bedside clinical nurses will interpret the QEEG. Seizure events will be marked as seizures if >3 QEEG criteria occur. Post-hoc dedicated neurologists, who remain blinded to the QEEG analysis, will interpret the cEEG. Determination of standard test characteristics will assess the primary hypothesis. To calculate 95% (CIs) around the sensitivity and specificity estimates with a CI width of 10%, the sample size needed for sensitivity is 80 patients assuming each EEG will have approximately 9 to 18 1-hour epochs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received approval by the Children's Health Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/19/QCHQ/58145). Results will be made available to the funders, critical care survivors and their caregivers, the relevant societies, and other researchers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) 12621001471875.

The value of a learning needs analysis to establish educational priorities in a new clinical workforce.

A learning needs analysis was undertaken in a newly formed workforce. The goal of the learning needs analysis was to establish both the skill set and educational needs in the nursing workforce prior to moving to a new purpose built facility. The results would then enable nurse educators to develop, plan and deliver appropriate educational strategies. Staff (73%) completed an online survey; the results were collated and analysed. The results of the learning needs analysis suggested an experienced workforce that had great capacity to care for children across a wide spectrum of acute clinical needs. Interestingly the results of the learning needs analysis conflicted with the clinical reality. To investigate possible reasons for this difference we conducted a focus group session with nurse educators. The focus group findings highlighted the significance of change and how that impacted on the clinical capacity of experienced staff. We concluded that the results of the learning needs analysis were representative however they needed careful interpretation in the context of substantial change.