8 research outputs found

    Exposure and confidence across critical airway procedures in pediatric emergency medicine: An international survey study

    Get PDF
    Background: Airway management procedures are critical for emergency medicine (EM) physicians, but rarely performed skills in pediatric patients. Worldwide experience with respect to frequency and confidence in performing airway management skills has not been previously described. Objectives: Our aims were 1) to determine the frequency with which emergency medicine physicians perform airway procedures including: bag-mask ventilation (BMV), endotracheal intubation (ETI), laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion, tracheostomy tube change (TTC), and surgical airways, and 2) to investigate predictors of procedural confidence regarding advanced airway management in children. Methods: A web-based survey of senior emergency physicians was distributed through the six research networks associated with Pediatric Emergency Research Network (PERN). Senior physician was defined as anyone working without direct supervision at any point in a 24-h cycle. Physicians were queried regarding their most recent clinical experience performing or supervising airway procedures, as well as with hands on practice time or procedural teaching. Reponses were dichotomized to within the last year, or ≥ 1 year. Confidence was assessed using a Likert scale for each procedure, with results for ETI and LMA stratified by age. Response levels were dichotomized to “not confident” or “confident.” Multivariate regression models were used to assess relevant associations. Results: 1602 of 2446 (65%) eligible clinicians at 96 PERN sites responded. In the previous year, 1297 (85%) physicians reported having performed bag-mask ventilation, 900 (59%) had performed intubation, 248 (17%) had placed a laryngeal mask airway, 348 (23%) had changed a tracheostomy tube, and 18 (1%) had performed a surgical airway. Of respondents, 13% of physicians reported the opportunity to supervise but not provide ETI, 5% for LMA and 5% for BMV. The percentage of physicians reporting “confidence” in performing each procedure was: BMV (95%) TTC (43%), and surgical airway (16%). Clinician confidence in ETT and LMA varied by patient age. Supervision of an airway procedure was the strongest predictor of procedural confidence across airway procedures. Conclusion: BMV and ETI were the most commonly performed pediatric airway procedures by emergency medicine physicians, and surgical airways are very infrequent. Supervising airway procedures may serve to maintain procedural confidence for physicians despite infrequent opportunities as the primary proceduralist

    Exposure and confidence with critical non-airway procedures: A global survey of paediatric emergency medicine physicians

    No full text
    Background: Children rarely experience critical illness, resulting in low exposure of emergency physicians (EPs) to critical procedures. Our primary objective was to describe senior EP confidence, most recent performance and/or supervision of critical non-airway procedures. Secondary objectives were to compare responses between those who work exclusively in PEM and those who do not, and to determine whether confidence changed for selected procedures according to increasing patient age. Methods: Survey of senior EPs working in 96 emergency departments (EDs) affiliated with the Pediatric Emergency Research Networks (PERN). Questions assessed training, performance, supervision, and confidence in 11 non-airway critical procedures, including CPR, vascular access, chest decompression and cardiac procedures. Results:Of 2,446 physicians, 1,503 (61%) responded to the survey. Within the previous year, only CPR and insertion of an intraosseous needle (IO) had been performed by at least 50% of respondents: over 20% had performed defibrillation / DC cardioversion. More than 50% of respondents had never performed or supervised ED thoracotomy, pericardiocentesis, venous cutdown or transcutaneous pacing. Self-reported confidence was high for all patient age groups for CPR, needle thoracocentesis, tube thoracostomy, IO insertion and defibrillation / DC-cardioversion. Confidence levels increased with increasing patient age for central venous and arterial line insertion. Respondents working exclusively in PEM were more likely to report being at least somewhat confident in defibrillation / DC cardioversion, IO insertion, and central venous line insertion in particular age groups; however, they were less likely to be at least somewhat confident in ED thoracotomy and transcutaneous pacing.Conclusions: CPR and IO insertion were the only critical non-airway procedures performed by at least half of EPs within the previous year. Confidence was higher for these procedures, and needle and tube thoracostomy. These data may inform the development of continuing medical education activities to maintain pediatric procedural skills for emergency physicians

    The Pediatric Emergency Research Network

    No full text
    OBJECTIVES: The Pediatric Emergency Research Network (PERN) was launched in 2009 with the intent for existing national and regional research networks in pediatric emergency care to organize globally for the conduct of collaborative research across networks. METHODS: The Pediatric Emergency Research Network has grown from 5- to 8-member networks over the past decade. With an executive committee comprising representatives from all member networks, PERN plays a supportive and collaborative rather than governing role. The full impact of PERN's facilitation of international collaborative research, although somewhat difficult to quantify empirically, can be measured indirectly by the observed growth of the field, the nature of the increasingly challenging research questions now being addressed, and the collective capacity to generate and implement new knowledge in treating acutely ill and injured children. RESULTS: Beginning as a pandemic response with a high-quality retrospective case-controlled study of H1N1 influenza risk factors, PERN research has progressed to multiple observational studies and ongoing global randomized controlled trials. As a recent example, PERN has developed sufficient network infrastructure to enable the rapid initiation of a prospective observational study in response to the current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. In light of the ongoing need for translation of research knowledge into equitable clinical practice and to promote health equity, PERN is committed to a coordinated international effort to increase the uptake of evidence-based management of common and treatable acute conditions in all emergency department settings. CONCLUSIONS: The Pediatric Emergency Research Network's successes with global research, measured by prospective observational and interventional studies, mean that the network can now move to improve its ability to promote the implementation of scientific advances into everyday clinical practice. Achieving this goal will involve focus in 4 areas: (1) expanding the capacity for global randomized controlled trials; (2) deepening the focus on implementation science; (3) increasing attention to healthcare disparities and their origins, with growing momentum toward equity; and (4) expanding PERN's global reach through addition of sites and networks from resource-restricted regions. Through these actions, PERN will be able to build on successes to face the challenges ahead and meet the needs of acutely ill and injured children throughout the world

    The Pediatric Emergency Research Network: A Decade of Global Research Cooperation in Pediatric Emergency Care.

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVES: The Pediatric Emergency Research Network (PERN) was launched in 2009 with the intent for existing national and regional research networks in pediatric emergency care to organize globally for the conduct of collaborative research across networks. METHODS: The Pediatric Emergency Research Network has grown from 5- to 8-member networks over the past decade. With an executive committee comprising representatives from all member networks, PERN plays a supportive and collaborative rather than governing role. The full impact of PERN's facilitation of international collaborative research, although somewhat difficult to quantify empirically, can be measured indirectly by the observed growth of the field, the nature of the increasingly challenging research questions now being addressed, and the collective capacity to generate and implement new knowledge in treating acutely ill and injured children. RESULTS: Beginning as a pandemic response with a high-quality retrospective case-controlled study of H1N1 influenza risk factors, PERN research has progressed to multiple observational studies and ongoing global randomized controlled trials. As a recent example, PERN has developed sufficient network infrastructure to enable the rapid initiation of a prospective observational study in response to the current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. In light of the ongoing need for translation of research knowledge into equitable clinical practice and to promote health equity, PERN is committed to a coordinated international effort to increase the uptake of evidence-based management of common and treatable acute conditions in all emergency department settings. CONCLUSIONS: The Pediatric Emergency Research Network's successes with global research, measured by prospective observational and interventional studies, mean that the network can now move to improve its ability to promote the implementation of scientific advances into everyday clinical practice. Achieving this goal will involve focus in 4 areas: (1) expanding the capacity for global randomized controlled trials; (2) deepening the focus on implementation science; (3) increasing attention to healthcare disparities and their origins, with growing momentum toward equity; and (4) expanding PERN's global reach through addition of sites and networks from resource-restricted regions. Through these actions, PERN will be able to build on successes to face the challenges ahead and meet the needs of acutely ill and injured children throughout the world

    The Pediatric Emergency Research Network (PERN)

    Get PDF
    Objectives: The Pediatric Emergency Research Network (PERN) was launched in 2009 with the intent for existing national and regional research networks in paediatric emergency care to organise globally for the conduct of collaborative research across networks. Methods: PERN has grown from five to eight member networks over the past decade. With an executive committee comprising representatives from all member networks, PERN plays a supportive and collaborative rather than governing role. The full impact of PERN's facilitation of international collaborative research, although somewhat difficult to quantify empirically, can be measured indirectly by the observed growth of the field, the nature of the increasingly challenging research questions now being addressed and the collective capacity to generate and implement new knowledge in treating acutely ill and injured children. Results: Beginning as a pandemic response studying H1N1 influenza risk factors in children, PERN research has progressed to multiple observational studies and ongoing global randomised controlled trials (RCTs). As a recent example, PERN has developed sufficient network infrastructure to enable the rapid initiation of a prospective observational study in response to the current COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions: Following its success with developing global research, the PERN goal now is to promote the implementation of scientific advances into everyday clinical practice by: (i) expanding the capacity for global RCTs; (ii) deepening the focus on implementation science; (iii) increasing attention to healthcare disparities; and (iv) expanding PERN's reach into resource-restricted regions. Through these actions, PERN aims to meet the needs of acutely ill and injured children throughout the world.</p

    Preferred learning modalities and practice for critical skills: A global survey of paediatric emergency medicine clinicians

    No full text
    © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. Objective To describe senior paediatric emergency clinician perspectives on the optimal frequency of and preferred modalities for practising critical paediatric procedures. Methods Multicentre multicountry cross-sectional survey of senior paediatric emergency clinicians working in 96 EDs affiliated with the Pediatric Emergency Research Network. Results 1332/2446 (54%) clinicians provided information on suggested frequency of practice and preferred learning modalities for 18 critical procedures. Yearly practice was recommended for six procedures (bag valve mask ventilation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), endotracheal intubation, laryngeal mask airway insertion, defibrillation/direct current (DC) cardioversion and intraosseous needle insertion) by at least 80% of respondents. 16 procedures were recommended for yearly practice by at least 50% of respondents. Two procedures (venous cutdown and ED thoracotomy) had yearly practice recommended b
    corecore