Definitions and Assessment Approaches for Emergency Medical Services for Children

Pediatric Life Support (PLS) courses and instructional programs are educational tools developed to teach resuscitation and stabilization of children who are critically ill or injured. A number of PLS courses have been developed by national professional organizations for different health care providers (eg, pediatricians, emergency physicians, other physicians, prehospital professionals, pediatric and emergency advanced practice nurses, physician assistants). PLS courses and programs have attempted to clarify and standardize assessment and treatment approaches for clinical practice in emergency, trauma, and critical care. Although the effectiveness of PLS education has not yet been scientifically validated, the courses and programs have significantly expanded pediatric resuscitation training throughout the United States and internationally. Variability in terminology and in assessment components used in education and training among PLS courses has the potential to create confusion among target groups and in how experts train educators and learners to teach and practice pediatric emergency, trauma, and critical care. It is critical that all educators use standard terminology and patient assessment to address potential or actual conflicts regarding patient evaluation and treatment. This article provides a consensus of several organizations as to the proper order and terminology for pediatric patient assessment. The Supplemental Information provides definitions for terms and nomenclature used in pediatric resuscitation and life support courses

Executive Summary: The 2018 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference: Aligning the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Research Agenda to Reduce Health Outcome Gaps

Emergency care providers share a compelling interest in developing an effective patient‐centered, outcomes‐based research agenda that can decrease variability in pediatric outcomes. The 2018 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference “Aligning the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Research Agenda to Reduce Health Outcome Gaps (AEMCC)” aimed to fulfill this role. This conference convened major thought leaders and stakeholders to introduce a research, scholarship, and innovation agenda for pediatric emergency care specifically to reduce health outcome gaps. Planning committee and conference participants included emergency physicians, pediatric emergency physicians, pediatricians, and researchers with expertise in research dissemination and translation, as well as comparative effectiveness, in collaboration with patients, patient and family advocates from national advocacy organizations, and trainees. Topics that were explored and deliberated through subcommittee breakout sessions led by content experts included 1) pediatric emergency medical services research, 2) pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) research network collaboration, 3) PEM education for emergency medicine providers, 4) workforce development for PEM, and 5) enhancing collaboration across emergency departments (PEM practice in non–children’s hospitals). The work product of this conference is a research agenda that aims to identify areas of future research, innovation, and scholarship in PEM.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146868/1/acem13667.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146868/2/acem13667_am.pd

Computed Tomography With Intravenous Contrast Alone: The Role of Intra‐abdominal Fat on the Ability to Visualize the Normal Appendix in Children

Background Computed tomography ( CT ) with enteric contrast is frequently used to evaluate children with suspected appendicitis. The use of CT with intravenous ( IV ) contrast alone ( CT IV ) may be sufficient, however, particularly in patients with adequate intra‐abdominal fat ( IAF ). Objectives The authors aimed 1) to determine the ability of radiologists to visualize the normal (nondiseased) appendix with CT IV in children and to assess whether IAF adequacy affects this ability and 2) to assess the association between IAF adequacy and patient characteristics. Methods This was a retrospective 16‐center study using a preexisting database of abdominal CT scans. Children 3 to 18 years who had CT IV scan and measured weights and for whom appendectomy history was known from medical record review were included. The sample was chosen based on age to yield a sample with and without adequate IAF . Radiologists at each center reread their site's CT IV scans to assess appendix visualization and IAF adequacy. IAF was categorized as “adequate” if there was any amount of fat completely surrounding the cecum and “inadequate” if otherwise. Results A total of 280 patients were included, with mean age of 10.6 years (range = 3.1 to 17.9 years). All 280 had no history of prior appendectomy; therefore, each patient had a presumed normal appendix. A total of 102 patients (36.4%) had adequate IAF . The proportion of normal appendices visualized with CT IV was 72.9% (95% confidence interval [ CI ] = 67.2% to 78.0%); the proportions were 89% (95% CI  = 81.5% to 94.5%) and 63% (95% CI  = 56.0% to 70.6%) in those with and without adequate IAF (95% CI for difference of proportions = 16% to 36%). Greater weight and older age were strongly associated with IAF adequacy (p < 0.001), with weight appearing to be a stronger predictor, particularly in females. Although statistically associated, there was noted overlap in the weights and ages of those with and without adequate IAF . Conclusions Protocols using CT with IV contrast alone to visualize the appendix can reasonably include weight, age, or both as considerations for determining when this approach is appropriate. However, although IAF will more frequently be adequate in older, heavier patients, highly accurate prediction of IAF adequacy appears challenging solely based on age and weight. Resumen Tomografía Computarizada Únicamente con Contraste Intravenoso: El Papel de la Grasa Intrabadominal en la Capacidad para Visualizar el Apéndice Normal en los Niños Introduction La tomografía computarizada ( TC ) con contraste entérico es usada frecuentemente para evaluar a los niños con sospecha de apendicitis. El uso de la TC únicamente con contraste intravenoso ( TC IV ) puede ser suficiente, especialmente en pacientes con adecuada grasa intrabdominal ( GIA ). Objetivos 1) Determinar la capacidad de los radiólogos para visualizar el apéndice normal (sin enfermedad) con TC IV en niños, y valorar si la cantidad de GIA afecta a esta capacidad; y 2) valorar la asociación entre la idoneidad de la GIA y las características del paciente. Metodología Estudio retrospectivo de 16 hospitales que utilizó una base de datos prexistente de TC abdominales. Se incluyó a los niños entre 3 y 18 años que tenían una TC IV , una medida del peso e historia de apendectomía conocida por la revisión de la historia clínica. La muestra se eligió en base a la edad con el fin de conseguir una muestra con y sin GIA adecuada. Los radiólogos de cada centro releyeron las TC IV de sus centros para valorar la visualización del apéndice y la adecuación de la GIA . La GIA se clasificó como “adecuada” si había cualquier cantidad de grasa completamente alrededor del ciego e “inadecuada” si era de otra manera. Resultados Se incluyeron 280 pacientes, con una media de edad de 10,6 años (rango 3,1 a 17,9 años). Ninguno tenía historia previa de apendectomía; por lo tanto todos los pacientes tuvieron un apéndice presumiblemente normal. Ciento dos pacientes (36,4%) tuvieron GIA adecuada. El porcentaje de apéndices normales visualizados con TC IV fue de 72,9% ( IC 95% = 67,2% a 78,0%); la proporción fue 89% ( IC 95% = 81,5% a 94,5%), y 63% ( IC 95% = 56,0% a 70,6%) en aquéllos con y sin GIA adecuada ( IC 95% para la diferencia de proporciones = 16% a 36%). El mayor peso y la mayor edad se asociaron fuertemente con la adecuación de la GIA (p < 0,001), y el peso resultó ser el mayor factor predictivo, especialmente en mujeres. Aunque se asoció estadísticamente, se vio un solapamiento en los pesos y edades de aquéllos con y sin GIA adecuada. Conclusiones Los protocolos que usan la TC IV para visualizar el apéndice pueden razonablemente incluir el peso, la edad, o ambas como consideraciones para determinar cuándo esta aproximación es apropiada. Sin embargo, aunque la cantidad de GIA será frecuentemente más apropiada en los pacientes más mayores y de mayor peso, la predicción certera de adecuación de GIA es altamente desafiante si se basa sólo en la edad y el peso.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/99695/1/acem12185.pd

Frequency, Type, and Degree of Potential Harm of Adverse Safety Events among Pediatric Emergency Medical Services Encounters

Only 5–10% of emergency medical services (EMS) patients are children, and most pediatric encounters are low-acuity. EMS chart review has been used to identify adverse safety events (ASEs) in high-acuity and high-risk pediatric encounters. The objective of this work was to evaluate the frequency, type, and potential harm of ASEs in varied acuity pediatric EMS encounters. This cross-sectional study evaluated pediatric (ages 0–18 years) prehospital records from 15 EMS agencies among three states (Colorado, Connecticut, and Rhode Island) between November 2019 and October 2021. Research associates used a previously validated tool to analyze electronic EMS and hospital records. Adverse safety events were recorded in six care categories, grouped into four levels for analysis: assessment/diagnosis/clinical decision-making, procedures, medication administration (including O2), and fluid administration, and defined across five types of ASEs: Unintended injuries or consequences, Near misses, Suboptimal actions, Errors, and Management complications (UNSEMs). Type and frequency of ASEs in each category were rated in three harm severities: Harm Unlikely, Mild/Temporary, or Permanent/Severe. Three physicians verified ASEs determined by research associates. Frequency of ASEs and harm likelihood are reported. Records for 508 EMS patients were reviewed, with 63 (12.4%) transported using lights and sirens. At least one clinical intervention beyond assessment/diagnosis/clinical decision-making was documented for 183 (36.1%, 95% CI: 31.8, 40.4) patients. A total of 162 ASEs were identified for 112 patients (22.1%, 95% CI: 18.5, 25.7). Suboptimal actions were the most frequent UNSEM (n = 66, 40.7%; 95% CI: 33.1, 48.3). For ASEs, (n = 162), the most frequent associations were with procedures 39.5% (95% CI: 32.0, 47.0) or assessment/diagnosis/clinical decision making, 32.1%, (95% CI: 24.9, 39.3). Among care categories, fluid administration was associated with significantly more UNSEMs (58.1%, 95% CI:53.8, 62.4). Most ASEs were determined to be ‘Harm Unlikely’ 62.4% (95% CI: 54.4, 70.4), with assessment/diagnosis/clinical decision making having significantly fewer ASEs with documented harm (22.4%, 95% CI: 10.7, 34.1) compared to other care categories. Over 20% of pediatric EMS encounters had an identified ASE, and most were unlikely to cause harm. Most frequent ASEs were likely to be associated with procedures and assessment/diagnosis/clinical decision-making.</p

Prehospital Recognition and Management of Pediatric Sepsis: A Qualitative Assessment

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Sepsis is a life-threatening disease in children and is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Early prehospital recognition and management of children with sepsis may have significant effects on the timely resuscitation of this high-risk clinical condition. However, the care of acutely ill and injured children in the prehospital setting can be challenging. This study aims to understand barriers, facilitators, and attitudes regarding recognition and management of pediatric sepsis in the prehospital setting. METHODS: This was a qualitative study of EMS professionals participating in focus groups using a grounded theory-based design to gather information on recognition and management of septic children in the prehospital setting. Focus groups were held for EMS administrators and medical directors. Separate focus groups were held for field clinicians. Focus groups were conducted video conference until saturation of ideas was reached. Using consensus methodology, transcripts were coded in an iterative process. Data were then organized into positive and negative factors based on the validated PRECEDE-PROCEED model for behavioral change. RESULTS: Thirty-eight participants in six focus groups identified nine environmental factors, 21 negative factors, and 14 positive factors pertaining to recognition and management of pediatric sepsis. These findings were organized into the PRECEDE-PROCEED planning model. Pediatric sepsis guidelines were identified as positive factors when they did exist and negative factors when they were complicated or did not exist. Six interventions were identified by participants. These include raising awareness of pediatric sepsis, increasing pediatric education, receiving feedback on prehospital encounters, increasing pediatric exposure and skills training, and improving dispatch information. CONCLUSION: This study fills a gap by examining barriers and facilitators to prehospital diagnosis and management of pediatric sepsis. Using the PRECEDE-PROCEED model, nine environmental factors, 21 negative factors, and 14 positive factors were identified. Participants identified six interventions that could create the foundation to improve prehospital pediatric sepsis care. Policy changes were suggested by the research team based on the results of this study. These interventions and policy changes provide a roadmap for improving care in this population and lay the groundwork for future research

Definitions and Assessment Approaches for Emergency Medical Services for Children.

Pediatric Life Support (PLS) courses and instructional programs are educational tools developed to teach resuscitation and stabilization of children who are critically ill or injured. A number of PLS courses have been developed by national professional organizations for different health care providers (eg, pediatricians, emergency physicians, other physicians, prehospital professionals, pediatric and emergency advanced practice nurses, physician assistants). PLS courses and programs have attempted to clarify and standardize assessment and treatment approaches for clinical practice in emergency, trauma, and critical care. Although the effectiveness of PLS education has not yet been scientifically validated, the courses and programs have significantly expanded pediatric resuscitation training throughout the United States and internationally. Variability in terminology and in assessment components used in education and training among PLS courses has the potential to create confusion among target groups and in how experts train educators and learners to teach and practice pediatric emergency, trauma, and critical care. It is critical that all educators use standard terminology and patient assessment to address potential or actual conflicts regarding patient evaluation and treatment. This article provides a consensus of several organizations as to the proper order and terminology for pediatric patient assessment. The Supplemental Information provides definitions for terms and nomenclature used in pediatric resuscitation and life support courses

The 2018 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference: Aligning the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Research Agenda to Reduce Health Outcome Gaps.

Emergency care providers share a compelling interest in developing an effective patient‐centered, outcomes‐based research agenda that can decrease variability in pediatric outcomes. The 2018 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference “Aligning the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Research Agenda to Reduce Health Outcome Gaps (AEMCC)” aimed to fulfill this role. This conference convened major thought leaders and stakeholders to introduce a research, scholarship, and innovation agenda for pediatric emergency care specifically to reduce health outcome gaps. Planning committee and conference participants included emergency physicians, pediatric emergency physicians, pediatricians, and researchers with expertise in research dissemination and translation, as well as comparative effectiveness, in collaboration with patients, patient and family advocates from national advocacy organizations, and trainees. Topics that were explored and deliberated through subcommittee breakout sessions led by content experts included 1) pediatric emergency medical services research, 2) pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) research network collaboration, 3) PEM education for emergency medicine providers, 4) workforce development for PEM, and 5) enhancing collaboration across emergency departments (PEM practice in non–children’s hospitals). The work product of this conference is a research agenda that aims to identify areas of future research, innovation, and scholarship in PEM.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146868/1/acem13667.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146868/2/acem13667_am.pd