Comparing the Effectiveness of a Clinical Decision Support Tool in Reducing Pediatric Opioid Dose Calculation Errors: PediPain App vs. Traditional Calculators - A Simulation-Based Randomised Controlled Study.

Wrong dose calculation medication errors are widespread in pediatric patients mainly due to weight-based dosing. PediPain app is a clinical decision support tool that provides weight- and age- based dosages for various analgesics. We hypothesized that the use of a clinical decision support tool, the PediPain app versus pocket calculators for calculating pain medication dosages in children reduces the incidence of wrong dosage calculations and shortens the time taken for calculations. The study was a randomised controlled trial comparing the PediPain app vs. pocket calculator for performing eight weight-based calculations for opioids and other analgesics. Participants were healthcare providers routinely administering opioids and other analgesics in their practice. The primary outcome was the incidence of wrong dose calculations. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of wrong dose calculations in simple versus complex calculations; time taken to complete calculations; the occurrence of tenfold; hundredfold errors; and wrong-key presses. A total of 140 residents, fellows and nurses were recruited between June 2018 and November 2019; 70 participants were randomized to control group (pocket calculator) and 70 to the intervention group (PediPain App). After randomization two participants assigned to PediPain group completed the simulation in the control group by mistake. Analysis was by intention-to-treat (PediPain app = 68 participants, pocket calculator = 72 participants). The overall incidence of wrong dose calculation was 178/576 (30.9%) for the control and 23/544 (4.23%) for PediPain App, P < 0·001. The risk difference was - 32.8% [-38.7%, -26.9%] for complex and - 20.5% [-26.3%, -14.8%] for simple calculations. Calculations took longer within control group (median of 69 Sects. [50, 96]) compared to PediPain app group, (median 48 Sects. [38, 63]), P < 0.001. There were no differences in other secondary outcomes. A weight-based clinical decision support tool, the PediPain app reduced the incidence of wrong doses calculation. Clinical decision support tools calculating medications may be valuable instruments for reducing medication errors, especially in the pediatric population.

A systematic review of transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography in non-cardiac surgery: implications for point-of-care ultrasound education in the operating room.

PURPOSE: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCU) is an evolving field in anesthesia. Therefore a systematic review of common diagnoses made by POCU during non-cardiac surgery was conducted. The information obtained from the review may be used to develop POCU curricula for the perioperative setting during non-cardiac surgery. SOURCE: A systematic review was conducted for perioperative use of transthoracic /transesophageal echocardiography (TTE/TEE) in high-risk patients or in other patients experiencing periods of hemodynamic instability. The diagnoses included segmental wall motion abnormalities (SWMAs), low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), hypovolemia, air embolism, cardiac/aortic thrombus, pulmonary embolus (PE), aortic valve disease, mitral valve disease, tricuspid valve disease, right ventricular (RV) failure, pericardial disease, and patent foramen ovale. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Three hundred twenty-one studies were found using our search terms, and thirteen studies were retained that met our inclusion criteria for review. The studies included 968 patients analyzed as either preoperative exams in high-risk patients (n = 568) or intraoperative exams during times of hemodynamic compromise/cardiac arrest (n = 400). The most common diagnoses in the preoperative exam group were low ejection fraction (25.4%), aortic valve disease (24.4%), mitral valve disease (20.0%), RV failure (6.6%), and hypovolemia (6.3%). In the intraoperative exam group, the most common diagnoses were hypovolemia (33.2%), low ejection fraction (20.5%), RV failure (13.1%), SWMAs (10.1%), and PE (5.8%). CONCLUSION: In this systematic review examining the use of TTE or TEE in non-cardiac surgery, the most frequent diagnoses were valvulopathy, low LVEF, hypovolemia, PE, SWMAs, and RV failure. This information should be used to inform evidence-based curricula for POCU in anesthesiology.

"Completely out-at-sea" with "two-gender medicine": a qualitative analysis of physician-side barriers to providing healthcare for transgender patients.

BACKGROUND: Members of the transgender community have identified healthcare access barriers, yet a corresponding inquiry into healthcare provider perspectives has lagged. Our aim was to examine physician perceptions of barriers to healthcare provision for transgender patients. METHODS: This was a qualitative study with physician participants from Ontario, Canada. Semi-structured interviews were used to capture a progression of ideas related to barriers faced by physicians when caring for trans patients. Qualitative data were then transcribed verbatim and analysed with an emergent grounded theory approach. RESULTS: A total of thirteen (13) physician participants were interviewed. Analysis revealed healthcare barriers that grouped into five themes: Accessing resources, medical knowledge deficits, ethics of transition-related medical care, diagnosing vs. pathologising trans patients, and health system determinants. A centralising theme of "not knowing where to go or who to talk to" was also identified. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study show that physicians perceive barriers to the care of trans patients, and that these barriers are multifactorial. Access barriers impede physicians when referring patients to specialists or searching for reliable treatment information. Clinical management of trans patients is complicated by a lack of knowledge, and by ethical considerations regarding treatments--which can be unfamiliar or challenging to physicians. The disciplinary division of responsibilities within medicine further complicates care; few practitioners identify trans healthcare as an interest area, and there is a tendency to overemphasise trans status in mental health evaluations. Failure to recognise and accommodate trans patients within sex-segregated healthcare systems leads to deficient health policy. The findings of this study suggest potential solutions to trans healthcare barriers at the informational level--with increased awareness of clinical guidelines and by including trans health issues in medical education-and at the institutional level, with support for both trans-focused and trans-friendly primary care models.