Renal Dysfunction Criteria in Critically Ill Children: The PODIUM Consensus Conference

CONTEXT Renal dysfunction is associated with poor outcomes in critically ill children. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the current evidence for criteria defining renal dysfunction in critically ill children and association with adverse outcomes. To develop contemporary consensus criteria for renal dysfunction in critically ill children. DATA SOURCES PubMed and Embase were searched from January 1992 to January 2020. STUDY SELECTION Included studies evaluated critically ill children with renal dysfunction, performance characteristics of assessment tools for renal dysfunction, and outcomes related to mortality, functional status, or organ-specific or other patient-centered outcomes. Studies with adults or premature infants (≤36 weeks' gestational age), animal studies, reviews, case series, and studies not published in English with inability to determine eligibility criteria were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION Data were extracted from included studies into a standard data extraction form by task force members. RESULTS The systematic review supported the following criteria for renal dysfunction: (1) urine output <0.5 mL/kg per hour for ≥6 hours and serum creatinine increase of 1.5 to 1.9 times baseline or ≥0.3 mg/dL, or (2) urine output <0.5 mL/kg per hour for ≥12 hours, or (3) serum creatinine increase ≥2 times baseline, or (4) estimated glomerular filtration rate <35 mL/minute/1.73 m2, or (5) initiation of renal replacement therapy, or (6) fluid overload ≥20%. Data also support criteria for persistent renal dysfunction and for high risk of renal dysfunction. LIMITATIONS All included studies were observational and many were retrospective. CONCLUSIONS We present consensus criteria for renal dysfunction in critically ill children

Understanding innovators' experiences of barriers and facilitators in implementation and diffusion of healthcare service innovations: A qualitative study

This article is made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund - Copyright @ 2011 Barnett et al.Background: Healthcare service innovations are considered to play a pivotal role in improving organisational efficiency and responding effectively to healthcare needs. Nevertheless, healthcare organisations encounter major difficulties in sustaining and diffusing innovations, especially those which concern the organisation and delivery of healthcare services. The purpose of the present study was to explore how healthcare innovators of process-based initiatives perceived and made sense of factors that either facilitated or obstructed the innovation implementation and diffusion. Methods: A qualitative study was designed. Fifteen primary and secondary healthcare organisations in the UK, which had received health service awards for successfully generating and implementing service innovations, were studied. In-depth, semi structured interviews were conducted with the organisational representatives who conceived and led the development process. The data were recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. Results: Four main themes were identified in the analysis of the data: the role of evidence, the function of inter-organisational partnerships, the influence of human-based resources, and the impact of contextual factors. "Hard" evidence operated as a proof of effectiveness, a means of dissemination and a pre-requisite for the initiation of innovation. Inter-organisational partnerships and people-based resources, such as champions, were considered an integral part of the process of developing, establishing and diffusing the innovations. Finally, contextual influences, both intra-organisational and extra-organisational were seen as critical in either impeding or facilitating innovators' efforts. Conclusions: A range of factors of different combinations and co-occurrence were pointed out by the innovators as they were reflecting on their experiences of implementing, stabilising and diffusing novel service initiatives. Even though the innovations studied were of various contents and originated from diverse organisational contexts, innovators' accounts converged to the significant role of the evidential base of success, the inter-personal and inter-organisational networks, and the inner and outer context. The innovators, operating themselves as important champions and being often willing to lead constructive efforts of implementation to different contexts, can contribute to the promulgation and spread of the novelties significantly.This research was supported financially by the Multidisciplinary Assessment of Technology Centre for Healthcare (MATCH)

Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science

Abstract Background Many interventions found to be effective in health services research studies fail to translate into meaningful patient care outcomes across multiple contexts. Health services researchers recognize the need to evaluate not only summative outcomes but also formative outcomes to assess the extent to which implementation is effective in a specific setting, prolongs sustainability, and promotes dissemination into other settings. Many implementation theories have been published to help promote effective implementation. However, they overlap considerably in the constructs included in individual theories, and a comparison of theories reveals that each is missing important constructs included in other theories. In addition, terminology and definitions are not consistent across theories. We describe the Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research (CFIR) that offers an overarching typology to promote implementation theory development and verification about what works where and why across multiple contexts. Methods We used a snowball sampling approach to identify published theories that were evaluated to identify constructs based on strength of conceptual or empirical support for influence on implementation, consistency in definitions, alignment with our own findings, and potential for measurement. We combined constructs across published theories that had different labels but were redundant or overlapping in definition, and we parsed apart constructs that conflated underlying concepts. Results The CFIR is composed of five major domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the process of implementation. Eight constructs were identified related to the intervention (e.g., evidence strength and quality), four constructs were identified related to outer setting (e.g., patient needs and resources), 12 constructs were identified related to inner setting (e.g., culture, leadership engagement), five constructs were identified related to individual characteristics, and eight constructs were identified related to process (e.g., plan, evaluate, and reflect). We present explicit definitions for each construct. Conclusion The CFIR provides a pragmatic structure for approaching complex, interacting, multi-level, and transient states of constructs in the real world by embracing, consolidating, and unifying key constructs from published implementation theories. It can be used to guide formative evaluations and build the implementation knowledge base across multiple studies and settings.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78272/1/1748-5908-4-50.xmlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78272/2/1748-5908-4-50-S1.PDFhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78272/3/1748-5908-4-50-S3.PDFhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78272/4/1748-5908-4-50-S4.PDFhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78272/5/1748-5908-4-50.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78272/6/1748-5908-4-50-S2.PDFPeer Reviewe

PsAID12 Provisionally Endorsed at OMERACT 2018 as Core Outcome Measure to Assess Psoriatic Arthritis-specific Health-related Quality of Life in Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVE: The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) and Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) psoriatic arthritis (PsA) working group is developing a Core Outcome Measurement Set for PsA clinical trials [randomized controlled trials (RCT) and longitudinal observational studies (LOS)] using the OMERACT Filter 2.1 instrument selection algorithm. Our objective was to assess the Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease questionnaire (PsAID12) for the measurement of the core domain PsA-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL).METHODS: PsAID12 measurement property evidence gathered in a systematic literature review, and additional analyses conducted in LOS, were used to inform a consensus process. Analyses that had not been published were independently reviewed by the OMERACT technical advisory group. Data and process were presented, discussed in breakout groups, and voted on at the OMERACT conference (Terrigal, Australia, May 2018).RESULTS: PsAID12 fulfilled the green (good to go) OMERACT standards for domain match, feasibility, reliability, and construct/longitudinal construct validity. Discrimination and thresholds of meaning were amber (caution but good enough to go forward). The overall working group recommendation was amber/provisional endorsement of PsAID12 for measuring PsA-specific HRQOL in RCT and LOS. Of 96 participants who voted at the PsA OMERACT workshop, 87.5% (84) voted "yes" to endorse this recommendation; 14 of the 96 were patient research partners (PRP) and 93% of them (13) voted "yes"; 82 participants were not PRP and 87% of them (71) voted "yes."CONCLUSION: At OMERACT 2018, PsAID12 was the first patient-reported outcome measure provisionally endorsed as a core outcome measure for disease-specific HRQOL in PsA clinical trials. PsAID12 discrimination and improvement thresholds will be studied in future RCT.</p

High Levels of Morbidity and Mortality Among Pediatric Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients With Severe Sepsis: Insights From the Sepsis PRevalence, OUtcomes, and Therapies International Point Prevalence Study*

Objectives: Pediatric severe sepsis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and hematopoietic cell transplant patients represent a high-risk population. We assessed the epidemiology of severe sepsis in hematopoietic cell transplant patients, describing patient outcomes compared with children with no history of hematopoietic cell transplant. Design: Secondary analysis of the Sepsis PRevalence, OUtcomes, and Therapies point prevalence study, comparing demographics, sepsis etiology, illness severity, organ dysfunction, and sepsis-related treatments in patients with and without hematopoietic cell transplant. The primary outcome was hospital mortality. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine adjusted differences in mortality. Setting: International; 128 PICUs in 26 countries. Patients: Pediatric patients with severe sepsis prospectively identified over a 1-year period. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: In patients with severe sepsis, 37/567 (6.5%) had a history of hematopoietic cell transplant. Compared with patients without hematopoietic cell transplant, hematopoietic cell transplant patients had significantly higher hospital mortality (68% vs 23%; p < 0.001). Hematopoietic cell transplant patients were more likely to have hospital acquired sepsis and had more preexisting renal and hepatic dysfunction than non–hematopoietic cell transplant patients with severe sepsis. History of hematopoietic cell transplant, renal replacement therapy, admission from inpatient floor, and number of organ dysfunctions at severe sepsis recognition were independently associated with hospital mortality in multivariable analysis; hematopoietic cell transplant conferred the highest odds of mortality (odds ratio, 4.00; 95% CI, 1.78–8.98). In secondary analysis of hematopoietic cell transplant patients compared with other immunocompromised patients with severe sepsis, history of hematopoietic cell transplant remained independently associated with hospital mortality (odds ratio, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.11–8.27). Conclusions: In an international study of pediatric severe sepsis, history of hematopoietic cell transplant is associated with a four-fold increased odds of hospital mortality after adjustment for potential measured confounders. Hematopoietic cell transplant patients more often originated from within the hospital compared to children with severe sepsis without hematopoietic cell transplant, possibly providing an earlier opportunity for sepsis recognition and intervention in this high-risk population

High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation Use and Severe Pediatric ARDS in the Pediatric Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipient

INTRODUCTION: The effectiveness of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) in the pediatric hematopoietic cell transplant patient has not been established. We sought to identify current practice patterns of HFOV, investigate parameters during HFOV and their association with mortality, and compare the use of HFOV to conventional mechanical ventilation in severe pediatric ARDS. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of a multi-center database of pediatric and young adult allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant subjects requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for critical illness from 2009 through 2014. Twelve United States pediatric centers contributed data. Continuous variables were compared using a Wilcoxon rank-sum test or a Kruskal-Wallis analysis. For categorical variables, univariate analysis with logistic regression was performed. RESULTS: The database contains 222 patients, of which 85 subjects were managed with HFOV. Of this HFOV cohort, the overall pediatric ICU survival was 23.5% (n = 20). HFOV survivors were transitioned to HFOV at a lower oxygenation index than nonsurvivors (25.6, interquartile range 21.1-36.8, vs 37.2, interquartile range 26.5-52.2, P = .046). Survivors were transitioned to HFOV earlier in the course of mechanical ventilation, (day 0 vs day 2, P = .002). No subject survived who was transitioned to HFOV after 1 week of invasive mechanical ventilation. We compared subjects with severe pediatric ARDS treated only with conventional mechanical ventilation versus early HFOV (within 2 d of invasive mechanical ventilation) versus late HFOV. There was a trend toward difference in survival (conventional mechanical ventilation 24%, early HFOV 30%, and late HFOV 9%, P = .08). CONCLUSIONS: In this large database of pediatric allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant subjects who had acute respiratory failure requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for critical illness with severe pediatric ARDS, early use of HFOV was associated with improved survival compared to late implementation of HFOV, and the subjects had outcomes similar to those treated only with conventional mechanical ventilation

Early Cumulative Fluid Balance and Outcomes in Pediatric Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients With Acute Respiratory Failure: A Multicenter Study

Objectives: To evaluate the associations between early cumulative fluid balance (CFB) and outcomes among critically ill pediatric allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients with acute respiratory failure, and determine if these associations vary by treatment with renal replacement therapy (RRT). Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of a multicenter retrospective cohort of patients (1mo - 21yrs) post-allogeneic HCT with acute respiratory failure treated with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) from 2009 to 2014. Fluid intake and output were measured daily for the first week of IMV (day 0 = day of intubation). The exposure, day 3 CFB (CFB from day 0 through day 3 of IMV), was calculated using the equation [Fluid in - Fluid out] (liters)/[PICU admission weight](kg)*100. We measured the association between day 3 CFB and PICU mortality with logistic regression, and the rate of extubation at 28 and 60 days with competing risk regression (PICU mortality = competing risk). Results: 198 patients were included in the study. Mean % CFB for the cohort was positive on day 0 of IMV, and increased further on days 1-7 of IMV. For each 1% increase in day 3 CFB, the odds of PICU mortality were 3% higher (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.03, 95% CI 1.00-1.07), and the rate of extubation was 3% lower at 28 days (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio (aSHR) 0.97, 95% CI 0.95-0.98) and 3% lower at 60 days (aSHR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95-0.98). When day 3 CFB was dichotomized, 161 (81%) had positive and 37 (19%) had negative day 3 CFB. Positive day 3 CFB was associated with higher PICU mortality (aOR 3.42, 95% CI 1.48-7.87) and a lower rate of extubation at 28 days (aSHR 0.30, 95% CI 0.18-0.48) and 60 days (aSHR 0.30, 95% 0.19-0.48). On stratified analysis, the association between positive day 3 CFB and PICU mortality was significantly stronger in those not treated with RRT (no RRT: aOR 9.11, 95% CI 2.29-36.22; RRT: aOR 1.40, 95% CI 0.42-4.74). Conclusions: Among critically ill pediatric allogeneic HCT recipients with acute respiratory failure, positive and increasing early CFB were independently associated with adverse outcomes

Australasian Malignant PLeural Effusion (AMPLE)-3 trial: Study protocol for a multi-centre randomised study comparing indwelling pleural catheter (±talc pleurodesis) versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for management of malignant pleural effusion

Introduction: Malignant pleural effusions (MPEs) are common. MPE causes significant breathlessness and impairs quality of life. Indwelling pleural catheters (IPC) allow ambulatory drainage and reduce hospital days and re-intervention rates when compared to standard talc slurry pleurodesis. Daily drainage accelerates pleurodesis, and talc instillation via the IPC has been proven feasible and safe. Surgical pleurodesis via video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is considered a one-off intervention for MPE and is often recommended to patients who are fit for surgery. The AMPLE-3 trial is the first randomised trial to compare IPC (±talc pleurodesis) and VATS pleurodesis in those who are fit for surgery. Methods and analysis: A multi-centre, open-labelled randomised trial of patients with symptomatic MPE, expected survival of ≥ 6 months and good performance status randomised 1:1 to either IPC or VATS pleurodesis. Participant randomisation will be minimised for (i) cancer type (mesothelioma vs non-mesothelioma); (ii) previous pleurodesis (vs not); and (iii) trapped lung, if known (vs not). Primary outcome is the need for further ipsilateral pleural interventions over 12 months or until death, if sooner. Secondary outcomes include days in hospital, quality of life (QoL) measures, physical activity levels, safety profile, health economics, adverse events, and survival. The trial will recruit 158 participants who will be followed up for 12 months. Ethics and dissemination: Sir Charles Gairdner and Osborne Park Health Care Group (HREC) has approved the study (reference: RGS356). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings. Discussion: Both IPC and VATS are commonly used procedures for MPE. The AMPLE-3 trial will provide data to help define the merits and shortcomings of these procedures and inform future clinical care algorithms. Trial registration: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12618001013257. Registered on 18 June 2018. Protocol version: Version 3.00/4.02.1

Ivermectin for COVID-19 in adults in the community (PRINCIPLE): an open, randomised, controlled, adaptive platform trial of short- and longer-term outcomes

Background The evidence for whether ivermectin impacts recovery, hospital admissions, and longer-term outcomes in COVID-19 is contested. The WHO recommends its use only in the context of clinical trials. Methods In this multicentre, open-label, multi-arm, adaptive platform randomised controlled trial, we included participants aged ≥18 years in the community, with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and symptoms lasting ≤14 days. Participants were randomised to usual care, usual care plus ivermectin tablets (target 300-400 μg/kg per dose, once daily for 3 days), or usual care plus other interventions. Co-primary endpoints were time to first self-reported recovery, and COVID-19 related hospitalisation/death within 28 days, analysed using Bayesian models. Recovery at 6 months was the primary, longer term outcome. Trial registration: ISRCTN86534580. Findings The primary analysis included 8811 SARS-CoV-2 positive participants (median symptom duration 5 days), randomised to ivermectin (n=2157), usual care (n=3256), and other treatments (n=3398) from June 23, 2021 to July 1, 2022. Time to self-reported recovery was shorter in the ivermectin group compared with usual care (hazard ratio 1·15 [95% Bayesian credible interval, 1·07 to 1·23], median decrease 2.06 days [1·00 to 3·06]), probability of meaningful effect (pre-specified hazard ratio ≥1.2) 0·192). COVID-19-related hospitalisations/deaths (odds ratio 1·02 [0·63 to 1·62]; estimated percentage difference 0% [-1% to 0·6%]), serious adverse events (three and five respectively), and the proportion feeling fully recovered were similar in both groups at 6 months (74·3% and 71·2% respectively (RR = 1·05, [1·02 to 1·08]) and also at 3 and 12 months.,. Interpretation Ivermectin for COVID-19 is unlikely to provide clinically meaningful improvement in recovery, hospital admissions, or longer-term outcomes. Further trials of ivermectin for SARS-Cov-2 infection in vaccinated community populations appear unwarranted. Funding UKRI / National Institute of Health Research (MC_PC_19079)