Evolution of enhanced recovery for children undergoing elective intestinal surgery.

Enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) have been widely adopted in adult populations, with over 30 years of experience demonstrating the effectiveness of these protocols in patients undergoing gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. In the last decade, ERPs have been applied to pediatric populations across multiple subspecialties. The objective of this manuscript is to explore the evolution of how ERPs have been implemented and adapted specifically for pediatric populations undergoing GI surgery, predominantly for inflammatory bowel disease. The reported findings reflect a thorough exploration of the literature, including initial surveys of practice/readiness assessments, consensus recommendations of expert panels, and data from a rapidly growing number of single center studies. These efforts have culminated in a national prospective, multicenter trial evaluating clinical and implementation outcomes for enhanced recovery in children undergoing GI surgery. In short, this historical and clinical review reflects on the evolution of ERPs in pediatric surgery and expounds upon the next steps needed to apply ERPs to future pediatric populations.

Intercostal spinal nerve cryoablation for analgesia following pectus excavatum repair.

Pectus excavatum is a common chest wall deformity, most often treated during adolescence, that presents a significant postoperative pain control challenge for pediatric surgeons following surgical correction. The purpose of this article is to review the technique and outcomes of intercostal spinal nerve cryoablation for postoperative analgesia following surgical correction of pectus excavatum. Contemporary and historic literature were reviewed. Findings are summarized to provide a concise synopsis of the benefits of intercostal spinal nerve cryoablation relative to alternative analgesic modalities, as well as advocate for more widespread inclusion of this technique into multimodal pain regimens.

An instrument for assessing the quality of informed consent documents for elective procedures: development and testing.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a nationally applicable tool for assessing the quality of informed consent documents for elective procedures. DESIGN: Mixed qualitative-quantitative approach. SETTING: Convened seven meetings with stakeholders to obtain input and feedback on the tool. PARTICIPANTS: Team of physician investigators, measure development experts, and a working group of nine patients and patient advocates (caregivers, advocates for vulnerable populations and patient safety experts) from different regions of the country. INTERVENTIONS: With stakeholder input, we identified elements of high-quality informed consent documents, aggregated into three domains: content, presentation and timing. Based on this comprehensive taxonomy of key elements, we convened the working group to offer input on the development of an abstraction tool to assess the quality of informed consent documents in three phases: (1) selecting the highest-priority elements to be operationalised as items in the tool; (2) iteratively refining and testing the tool using a sample of qualifying informed consent documents from eight hospitals; and (3) developing a scoring approach for the tool. Finally, we tested the reliability of the tool in a subsample of 250 informed consent documents from 25 additional hospitals. OUTCOMES: Abstraction tool to evaluate the quality of informed consent documents. RESULTS: We identified 53 elements of informed consent quality; of these, 15 were selected as highest priority for inclusion in the abstraction tool and 8 were feasible to measure. After seven cycles of iterative development and testing of survey items, and development and refinement of a training manual, two trained raters achieved high item-level agreement, ranging from 92% to 100%. CONCLUSIONS: We identified key quality elements of an informed consent document and operationalised the highest-priority elements to define a minimum standard for informed consent documents. This tool is a starting point that can enable hospitals and other providers to evaluate and improve the quality of informed consent.