Timely diagnostics and safe procedures in children with anterior mediastinal masses (AMMs): a qualitative review of the AMM protocol at BC Children's Hospital in Vancouver BC.

The presence of an anterior mediastinal mass should prompt rapid triage, workup and treatment to effectively manage and prevent emergent complications. Implementation of an AMM protocol can ensure the response is standardized and coordinated. Importantly, such a protocol can encourage prompt multi-disciplinary communication to mitigate risks associated with procedures required for timely diagnosis. The aim of this review is to evaluate the BC Children's Hospital's Pediatric New/Suspected Anterior Mediastinal Mass (AMM) Protocol. Retrospective chart review was conducted for 18 patients admitted from February 2016 to May 2020 with AMM for whom the protocol was enacted. Primary parameters assessed presence of high-risk feature at time of presentation, time from admission and/or protocol activation to specific time points, including imaging, first diagnostic procedure, and diagnosis. Data regarding perioperative management, including anesthetic considerations and peri-operative complications, was also collected. Mean time from protocol activation to first diagnostic procedure and diagnosis were 1.88 days (range 0-7) and 2.24 days (range 0-7), respectively. The majority of procedures were conducted under sedation (n = 77, 64%), followed by general anesthetic (GA; n = 34, 28%) and local anesthetic (n = 10, 8%). Despite 15 cases having more than one high risk feature, pre-operative steroids were only administered for four of the total 158 procedures (3%) and extracorporeal life support (ECLS) and otolaryngology (ENT) were only required for immediate availability for seven procedures (4%). Furthermore, only 10 procedures (8%) had associated complications and none of these complications resulted in patient death. Our data demonstrate that implementation of a streamlined multi-disciplinary protocol can expedite time to diagnosis without impacting patient safety.

Oral morphine versus ibuprofen administered at home for postoperative orthopedic pain in children: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral morphine for postoperative pain after minor pediatric surgery, while increasingly popular, is not supported by evidence. We evaluated whether oral morphine was superior to ibuprofen for at-home management of children's postoperative pain. METHODS: We conducted a randomized superiority trial comparing oral morphine (0.5 mg/kg) with ibuprofen (10 mg/kg) in children 5 to 17 years of age who had undergone minor outpatient orthopedic surgery (June 2013 to September 2016). Participants took up to 8 doses of the intervention drug every 6 hours as needed for pain at home. The primary outcome was pain, according to the Faces Pain Scale - Revised, for the first dose. Secondary outcomes included additional analgesic requirements, adverse effects, unplanned health care visits and pain scores for doses 2 to 8. RESULTS: We analyzed data for 77 participants in each of the morphine and ibuprofen groups. Both interventions decreased pain scores with no difference in efficacy. The median difference in pain score before and after the first dose of medication was 1 (interquartile range 0-1) for both morphine and ibuprofen (p = 0.2). For doses 2 to 8, the median differences in pain score before and after the dose were not significantly different between groups. Significantly more participants taking morphine reported adverse effects (45/65 [69%] v. 26/67 [39%], p < 0.001), most commonly drowsiness (31/65 [48%] v. 15/67 [22%] in the morphine and ibuprofen groups, respectively; p = 0.003). INTERPRETATION: Morphine was not superior to ibuprofen, and both drugs decreased pain with no apparent difference in efficacy. Morphine was associated with significantly more adverse effects, which suggests that ibuprofen is a better first-line option after minor surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01686802.

Further evaluation of the scoring, reliability, and validity of the Hypertonia Assessment Tool (HAT).

We assessed the impact of videotape analysis on scoring of the Hypertonia Assessment Tool (HAT) that discriminates between hypertonia subtypes. The HAT was administered to 28 children with cerebral palsy (mean age 9 years, range 4-17 years, 61% male). HAT examinations were videotaped; scores were assigned before and after videotape review. Neurological examination provided the gold standard diagnosis. Interrater reliability, criterion validity and individual item validation were assessed using prevalence and bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK). Videotape review did not significantly change the HAT item scores or diagnoses. Item validation eliminated 1 dystonia item. Interrater reliability was moderate for dystonia (PABAK = 0.43) and excellent for spasticity and rigidity (PABAK = 0.86-1.0). Criterion validity was substantial for spasticity (PABAK = 0.71), moderate for dystonia (PABAK = 0.43-0.57) and excellent for the absence of rigidity (PABAK = 1.0). The HAT can be administered without videotape review. Dystonia item 1 did not change the HAT hypertonia diagnosis and will be removed from the HAT.