Closing the gaps: consent and preoperative assessment for children and young people.

The changing ethical and legal landscape in the UK means that anaesthetists should routinely be discussing the risk of death during the consent process. To do this effectively means expanding anaesthetic preassessment services for children and young people, something that has been recognised as a priority, but which still needs investment and an appreciation of its value at the trust level.

Pediatric anesthesia in Europe: Variations within uniformity.

Organization of healthcare strongly differs between European countries and results in country-specific requirements in postgraduate medical training. Within the European Union (EU), the European Board of Anaesthesiology has set recommendations of training for the Specialty of Anaesthesiology including standards for Postgraduate Medical Specialist training including a description for providing service in pediatric anesthesia. However, these standards are advisory and not mandatory. Here we aimed to review the current state and associated challenges of pediatric anesthesia training in Europe. We report an important country-specific variability both in training and regulations of practice of pediatric anesthesia in the EU and in the United Kingdom. The requirements for training in pediatric anesthesia varies between nothing specified (Belgium) or providing anesthesia with direct supervision to a minimum of 50 cases below 5 years of age (Germany) to 3-6 month clinical practice in a specialized pediatric hospital (France). Likewise, the regulations for providing anesthesia to children varies from no regulations at all (Belgium) to age specific requirements and centralization of all children below 4 years of age to specified centers (United Kingdom). Officially recognized pediatric anesthesia fellowship programs are not available in most countries of Europe. It remains unclear if and how country-specific differences in pediatric anesthesia training are associated with clinical outcomes in pediatric perioperative care. There is converging interest and support for the establishment of a European pediatric anesthesia curriculum.

Implementation of paediatric pain care-bundle across South-West England clinical network of Emergency Departments and Minor Injury Units: A before and after study.

INTRODUCTION: Pain management in children is often poorly executed in Emergency Departments and Minor Injury Units. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a care bundle comprising targeted education on pain score documentation and provision of appropriately dosed analgesia for the paediatric population attending Emergency Departments (EDs) and Minor Injury Units (MIUs). METHODS: A total of 29 centres - 5 EDs and 24 MIUs - participated in an intervention study initiated by Emergency Nurse Practitioners to improve paediatric pain management. In Phase 1, up to 50 consecutive records of children under 18 presenting at each MIU and ED were examined (n = 1201 records); Pain Score (PS), age, whether the child was weighed, and provision of analgesia was recorded. A care bundle consisting of an education programme, paediatric dosage chart and flyers, was then introduced across the 29 centres. Nine months following introduction of the care bundle, the same data set was collected from units (Phase 2, n = 1090 records). RESULTS: The likelihood of children having a pain score documented increased significantly in Phase 2 (OR 6.90, 95% CI 5.72-8.32), The likelihood of children receiving analgesia also increased (OR1.82, 95% CI 1.51-2.19), although there was no increase in the proportion of children with moderate or severe pain receiving analgesia. More children were weighed following the care bundle (OR 2.58 95% CI 1.86-3.57). Infants and children who were not weighed were more likely to receive an incorrect analgesia dose (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of PS documentation improved and there was greater provision of analgesia overall following introduction of the care bundle. Although weighing of children did improve, the levels remain disappointingly low. EDs generally performed better than MIUs. The results show there were some improvements with this care bundle, but future work is needed to determine why pain management continues to fall below expected standards and how to further improve and sustain the impact of the care bundle.

A follow-up survey of total intravenous anesthesia usage in children in the U.K. and Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Total intravenous anesthesia usage in children remains relatively unpopular in the UK and Ireland. A postal survey by Hill et al in 2008 indicated that only 26% of Consultants used a propofol infusion at least once a month. AIMS: Following an increase in teaching and training opportunities in pediatric total intravenous anesthesia in the UK, we repeated the survey among Consultant members of Association of Paediatric Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland and Society for Intravenous Anaesthesia, to see if this had affected total intravenous anesthesia usage in children and how practice may have changed. METHODS: We used an anonymous online survey sent to Association of Paediatric Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland and Society for Intravenous Anaesthesia members. RESULTS: A total of 291 responses were analyzed. Total intravenous anesthesia was the default method of anesthesia in 8% of respondents and a further 46% used total intravenous anesthesia at least monthly. Overall total intravenous anesthesia usage had increased in the past year in 53%. The main indications were malignant hyperthermia susceptibility, and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Ear/nose/throat surgery was the most popular surgical specialty. The main reasons for not using total intravenous anesthesia were that it was too "fiddly" and lack of confidence in the user. Most respondents used propofol in combination with remifentanil. Over 80% used propofol target-controlled infusion. The potential for propofol-related infusion syndrome concerned many, with 74% limiting infusion duration as a result. Bispectral Index was not used routinely by the majority of anesthetists. Even though most anesthetists did not use total intravenous anesthesia routinely, 98% felt they would be confident to anesthetize an malignant hyperpyrexia-positive patient using the technique. CONCLUSION: This survey has shown that although total intravenous anesthesia is not the default anesthetic technique for most anesthetists, overall usage in children has more than doubled in the past 10 years, with many happy to use it in a wide variety of patients and procedures.

A national survey of propofol infusion use by paediatric anaesthetists in Great Britain and Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of propofol in 1977, it has been widely used for the induction and maintenance of anaesthesia and for sedation on the intensive care unit. Recently, case reports of suspected propofol infusion syndrome (PRIS) following short term infusions have been published. We set out to obtain a picture of the current use of propofol infusions by paediatric anaesthetists in Great Britain and Ireland. METHODS: A questionnaire concerning the use of propofol infusions was sent to 388 paediatric anaesthetists. RESULTS: A total of 242 (62%) replies were received. 26% of anaesthetists used propofol infusions with at least a monthly frequency. 136 (56%) anaesthetists thought that propofol infusions were of benefit in reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting. The majority of anaesthetists did not state a maximum infusion rate or length of infusion. Of those anaesthetists who answered the questions the maximum rate used was 30 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1) and the longest time considered for an infusion was 72 h. Only 5 (2%) anaesthetists regularly used BIS monitoring, although 106 (44%) expressed a desire to use it if it was freely available in their hospitals. Modifications to infusions from 1% to 2% propofol were used by 38 (16%) anaesthetists and 28 (12%) used glucose infusions intra-operatively. CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide variety in the use of propofol infusions by paediatric anaesthetists. The mechanisms underlying PRIS are poorly understood and require further work to ensure propofol infusions are used appropriately for anaesthesia in children.

Children with learning disabilities.

Children with learning disabilities can present numerous challenges in the acute hospital setting. This review article examines the causes and presentations of learning disability, and considers some of the management strategies employed when these children present for surgery.

Comparison of the bispectral index monitor with the Comfort score in assessing level of sedation of critically ill children.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the value of bispectral index as a monitor of sedation in critically ill children with a validated sedation scoring system. DESIGN: Prospective convenience sample. SETTING: Paediatric intensive care unit in a tertiary paediatric centre. PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: Forty-three critically ill children receiving sedation and mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Simultaneous recording of bispectral index (BIS) and assessment of depth of sedation using the Comfort score were performed at regular intervals. To determine if BIS could detect episodes of arousal, times of endotracheal suctioning and the corresponding BIS score were recorded. There was an overall moderate correlation between BIS scores and Comfort scores ( r=0.50, r(2)=0.25, p<0.0001). Children who had a neurological reason for their current admission ( n=25) showed a weaker correlation ( r=0.26, r(2)=0.06, p<0.007) than those ( n=15) with normal neurology ( r=0.51, r(2)=0.26, p<0.0001). There were no significant differences in the rise in BIS following endotracheal suctioning among any of the predefined depths of sedation. There was a correlation of r=0.84 ( r(2)=0.71) (SE of slope 0.49, CI(95) 1.79-3.88) for mean BIS values for each individual Comfort score from 8-23. Using Spearman's rank correlation of Comfort versus mean BIS, the correlation coefficient was r=0.92. CONCLUSIONS: Bispectral index scores correlate with Comfort scores to a moderate degree. BIS is able to discriminate between light and deep levels of sedation, but not between deep and very deep levels of sedation. The BIS monitor may provide a useful method for assessing sedation in critically ill children, especially those receiving neuromuscular blockers.