Peripherally Inserted Central catheter iNnovation to reduce Infections and Clots (the PICNIC trial): a randomised controlled trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are vital for the delivery of medical therapies, but up to 30% of PICCs are associated with complications such as deep vein thrombosis or infection. The integration of antimicrobial and hydrophobic catheter materials, and pressure-activated valves, into polyurethane PICCs are innovations designed to prevent infective and/or thrombotic complications. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre, parallel group, superiority randomised controlled trial with two experimental arms ((1) hydrophobic PICC (with pressure-activated valve); (2) chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated PICC (with external clamp)) and one control group ((3) conventional polyurethane PICC (with external clamp)). Recruitment of 1098 adult and paediatric patients will take place over 2 years at three tertiary-referral hospitals in Queensland, Australia. Patients are eligible for inclusion if their PICC is to be inserted for medical treatment, with a vascular size sufficient to support a 4-Fr PICC or larger, and with informed consent. The primary outcome is PICC failure, a composite of thrombotic (venous thrombosis, breakage and occlusion) and infective complications (PICC-associated bloodstream infection and local infection). Secondary outcomes include: all-cause PICC complication; thrombotic complications; infective complications; adverse events (local or systemic reaction); PICC dwell time; patient/parent satisfaction; and healthcare costs. Differences between both intervention groups and the control group will be compared using Cox proportional hazards regression. Effect estimates will be presented as HRs with corresponding 95% CI. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval from Queensland Health (HREC/QCHQ/48682) and Griffith University (Ref. No. 2019/094). Results will be published. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12619000022167.

A comparison of anesthetic protective barriers for the management of COVID-19 pediatric patients.

BACKGROUND: Barrier techniques, such as plastic sheets or intubation boxes, are purported to offer additional protection for healthcare workers. AIMS: To assess the functionality, perceived safety, droplet protection, and aerosol protection of several barrier techniques. METHODS: Firstly, a simulation study with 12 different laryngoscopists was conducted to assess the time taken to perform an intubation (via direct laryngoscopy, via video laryngoscopy, and via a bougie) with four different barrier techniques (personal protective equipment only, a plastic sheet, a tented plastic sheet, and an intubation box). Secondly, a cough at the time of intubation was simulated using ultraviolet dye to assess the spread of droplets; and thirdly, smoke was used to assess the spread of aerosols. RESULTS: Intubation time using the box was noninferior to using no barrier. Based on subjective ratings by the laryngoscopists, the most functional technique was no barrier followed by the intubation box, then the tented sheet, and then the plastic sheet. The technique that conferred the highest feeling of safety to the laryngoscopists was the intubation box, followed by the tented sheet, then no barrier, and then the plastic sheet. All the barriers prevented the ultraviolet dye contaminating the head and torso of the laryngoscopist. Smoke remained within the intubation box if plastics sheets were used to cover the openings and suction was ineffective at clearing it. With no barrier in place, smoke was effectively cleared away from the patient in a theater with laminar flow but tended to spread up toward the laryngoscopist in a room without laminar flow. CONCLUSIONS: A well-designed intubation box is an effective barrier against droplets and is noninferior to no barrier in relation to intubation time. However, a box interferes with laminar flow in theaters with formal ventilation systems and may result in accumulation of aerosols if it is completely enclosed.

Pediatric anesthetic implications of COVID-19-A review of current literature.

Pediatric anesthetists have an important role to play in the management of patients suspected or confirmed to have COVID-19. In many institutions, the COVID-19 intubation teams are staffed with anesthetists as the proceduralists working throughout the hospitals also in the ICU and Emergency Departments. As practitioners who perform aerosol generating procedures involving the airway, we are at high risk of exposure to the virus SARS-CoV-2 and need to ensure we are well prepared and trained to manage such cases. This article reviews the relevant pediatric literature surrounding COVID-19 and summarizes the key recommendations for anesthetists involved in the care of children during this pandemic.