What is a clinical pathway? Refinement of an operational definition to identify clinical pathway studies for a Cochrane systematic review

Clinical pathways (CPWs) are a common component in the quest to improve the quality of health. CPWs are used to reduce variation, improve quality of care, and maximize the outcomes for specific groups of patients. An ongoing challenge is the operationalization of a definition of CPW in healthcare. This may be attributable to both the differences in definition and a lack of conceptualization in the field of clinical pathways. This correspondence article describes a process of refinement of an operational definition for CPW research and proposes an operational definition for the future syntheses of CPWs literature. Following the approach proposed by Kinsman et al. (BMC Medicine 8(1):31, 2010) and Wieland et al. (Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine 17(2):50, 2011), we used a four-stage process to generate a five criteria checklist for the definition of CPWs. We refined the operational definition, through consensus, merging two of the checklist’s criteria, leading to a more inclusive criterion for accommodating CPW studies conducted in various healthcare settings. The following four criteria for CPW operational definition, derived from the refinement process described above, are (1) the intervention was a structured multidisciplinary plan of care; (2) the intervention was used to translate guidelines or evidence into local structures; (3) the intervention detailed the steps in a course of treatment or care in a plan, pathway, algorithm, guideline, protocol or other ‘inventory of actions’ (i.e. the intervention had time-frames or criteria-based progression); and (4) the intervention aimed to standardize care for a specific population. An intervention meeting all four criteria was considered to be a CPW. The development of operational definitions for complex interventions is a useful approach to appraise and synthesize evidence for policy development and quality improvement

What is a clinical pathway? Refinement of an operational definition to identify clinical pathway studies for a Cochrane systematic review

Clinical pathways (CPWs) are a common component in the quest to improve the quality of health. CPWs are used to reduce variation, improve quality of care, and maximize the outcomes for specific groups of patients. An ongoing challenge is the operationalization of a definition of CPW in healthcare. This may be attributable to both the differences in definition and a lack of conceptualization in the field of clinical pathways. This correspondence article describes a process of refinement of an operational definition for CPW research and proposes an operational definition for the future syntheses of CPWs literature. Following the approach proposed by Kinsman et al. (BMC Medicine 8(1):31, 2010) and Wieland et al. (Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine 17(2):50, 2011), we used a four-stage process to generate a five criteria checklist for the definition of CPWs. We refined the operational definition, through consensus, merging two of the checklist's criteria, leading to a more inclusive criterion for accommodating CPW studies conducted in various healthcare settings. The following four criteria for CPW operational definition, derived from the refinement process described above, are (1) the intervention was a structured multidisciplinary plan of care; (2) the intervention was used to translate guidelines or evidence into local structures; (3) the intervention detailed the steps in a course of treatment or care in a plan, pathway, algorithm, guideline, protocol or other 'inventory of actions' (i.e. the intervention had time-frames or criteria-based progression); and (4) the intervention aimed to standardize care for a specific population. An intervention meeting all four criteria was considered to be a CPW. The development of operational definitions for complex interventions is a useful approach to appraise and synthesize evidence for policy development and quality improvement

Peri-operative red blood cell transfusion in neonates and infants: NEonate and Children audiT of Anaesthesia pRactice IN Europe: A prospective European multicentre observational study

BACKGROUND: Little is known about current clinical practice concerning peri-operative red blood cell transfusion in neonates and small infants. Guidelines suggest transfusions based on haemoglobin thresholds ranging from 8.5 to 12 g dl-1, distinguishing between children from birth to day 7 (week 1), from day 8 to day 14 (week 2) or from day 15 (≥week 3) onwards. OBJECTIVE: To observe peri-operative red blood cell transfusion practice according to guidelines in relation to patient outcome. DESIGN: A multicentre observational study. SETTING: The NEonate-Children sTudy of Anaesthesia pRactice IN Europe (NECTARINE) trial recruited patients up to 60 weeks' postmenstrual age undergoing anaesthesia for surgical or diagnostic procedures from 165 centres in 31 European countries between March 2016 and January 2017. PATIENTS: The data included 5609 patients undergoing 6542 procedures. Inclusion criteria was a peri-operative red blood cell transfusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint was the haemoglobin level triggering a transfusion for neonates in week 1, week 2 and week 3. Secondary endpoints were transfusion volumes, 'delta haemoglobin' (preprocedure - transfusion-triggering) and 30-day and 90-day morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Peri-operative red blood cell transfusions were recorded during 447 procedures (6.9%). The median haemoglobin levels triggering a transfusion were 9.6 [IQR 8.7 to 10.9] g dl-1 for neonates in week 1, 9.6 [7.7 to 10.4] g dl-1 in week 2 and 8.0 [7.3 to 9.0] g dl-1 in week 3. The median transfusion volume was 17.1 [11.1 to 26.4] ml kg-1 with a median delta haemoglobin of 1.8 [0.0 to 3.6] g dl-1. Thirty-day morbidity was 47.8% with an overall mortality of 11.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate lower transfusion-triggering haemoglobin thresholds in clinical practice than suggested by current guidelines. The high morbidity and mortality of this NECTARINE sub-cohort calls for investigative action and evidence-based guidelines addressing peri-operative red blood cell transfusions strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02350348

Parental presence during induction of anesthesia in children. Pros and cons

There is a high level of evidence that parental presence during induction of anesthesia in children does not lead to a reduction of fear and better cooperation of the child. However, pediatric anesthetists often encounter the request of parents to be present during the induction of anesthesia which is current practice in many countries. This article explains the grounds and the premises for this practice and describes those factors which might be important to support parental presence during induction of anesthesia in children. Some practical advice and tips on how parental presence in the clinic can be practically implemented are given at the end of the article

Qualität und sichere Anästhesie für alle Kinder : Sie haben ein Recht darauf!

Im Jahr 1989 haben die Vereinten Nationen die „United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child“ (UNCRC) beschlossen und u. a. für Kinder der höchstmögliche Gesundheitsstandard gefordert. Safe Anaesthesia For Every Tot (SAFETOTS , www.safetots.org ), eine Vereinigung von international tätigen Kinderanästhesist*innen, hat daraus 10 Rechte, die „10 R“ („10 Rights“) abgeleitet, die für die pädiatrisch-anästhesiologische Praxis von essenzieller Bedeutung sind. Das erste Recht (R1) postuliert: „Kinder haben das Recht, höchstmöglichen Gesundheitsstandard in Anspruch nehmen zu dürfen. Vor allem Kinder unter drei Lebensjahren sollen durch erfahrene Anästhesistinnen mit fundierter Ausbildung, kontinuierlicher Weiterbildung und regelmäßiger Tätigkeit in Kinderanästhesie betreut werden. Kinder mit signifikanter Komorbidität und diejenigen, welche hoch-spezialisierte oder große Eingriffe benötigen, profitieren von spezialisierter Kinderanästhesie in Kinderkliniken“. Die aktuelle Situation in der kinderanästhesiologischen Versorgung wird den Anforderungen, wie durch die UNCRC gefordert, nicht überall gerecht. Oft werden Ärztinnen in der Anästhesie ohne ausreichende kinderspezifische Expertise mit der anästhesiologischen Versorgung von Neugeborenen, Säuglingen und Kleinkindern beauftragt, was zu Morbidität und Letalität führt. Um Kindern zu ihrem verbrieften Recht auf bestmögliche Versorgung zu verhelfen, bedarf es Veränderungen. Es braucht Entscheidungsträger*innen, Politiker*innen und Standesvertreter*innen, die umdenken und bereit sind, die UNCRC umzusetzen.Auf lokaler Ebene kann durch Reorganisation viel erreicht werden. Die Bündelung von operativen Eingriffen bei Kindern zusammen mit der Konzentration auf ein definiertes Team innerhalb einer Klinik führt bereits zu einer signifikanten Verbesserung. // In 1989 the United Nations passed the "United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child" (UNCRC) and, among others, demanded the highest attainable standard of health for children. Safe Anesthesia for Every Tot (SAFETOTS, www.safetots.org ), an association of internationally active pediatric anesthetists, has derived 10 rights, the 10 R's, which are of essential importance for the pediatric anesthetic practice. The first right (R1) postulates: "Children have the right to enjoy the highest possible standard of health. Children below the age of three years in particular should be treated by experienced anesthesiologists with profound and continuous training and regular activity in pediatric anesthesia. Children with significant comorbidities and those who need highly specialized or major interventions benefit from specialized pediatric anesthesia in pediatric centers". The current situation in pediatric anesthesia care in Germany, Austria and Switzerland does not always meet the requirements demanded by the UNCRC. Anesthesia-related complications are approximately 10 times more frequent in children than in adults. In contrast to adults, children who are injured during anesthesia are often healthy. Severe complications in pediatric anesthesia have a mortality that is several times higher than in adult anesthesia. There are hardly any statistics on this for German-speaking countries but corresponding cases frequently occur in the context of expert opinions in liability litigation and in the press. Anesthesiologists are often charged with the anesthetic care of newborns, infants and small children without having sufficient child-specific expertise, which results in morbidity and mortality. In some places, only a few babies per year undergo general anesthesia in clinics without a specialized pediatric anesthesia team or a small number of infant anesthesia cases are divided among a large number of anesthesiologists. These case numbers are not even sufficient to maintain a single pediatric anesthesiologist in training in this age group.Changes are needed to guarantee children the right to enjoy the highest attainable standard of health. We need decision-makers, politicians and professional representatives who rethink and who are willing to implement the UNCRC. This includes changing the current financing of hospitals in order that the quality actually provided is financed. The "pay for performance" must change to "pay for quality". In addition to broad basic pediatric care, all complex forms of pediatric treatment must be carried out in specialized pediatric centers, particularly for small and severely ill children.Significant improvement can be achieved at the local level by reorganization, bundling of pediatric surgical interventions within a clinical unit together with the concentration on a dedicated team

Management strategies for the difficult paediatric airway

Airway problems remain a leading cause of perioperative morbidity and mortality in children. Proficiency and expertise in airway management are, therefore, key elements for the safe conduct of anaesthesia in children. Clear strategies must be in place to successfully manage children with a normal, acutely impaired and expected difficult airway. Simple, forward only, easy to memorize and practice algorithms are essential in daily practice in preparation for the unexpected difficult paediatric airway. The child with the acutely impaired normal airway and known difficult airway is the domain of the experienced anaesthesiologist in an appropriately staffed and equipped paediatric setting. The following review describes current concepts and developments in the management of the difficult paediatric airway