Implementation of an Analgesia-Sedation Protocol Is Associated With Reduction in Midazolam Usage in the PICU.

OBJECTIVES: Examine the association of a revised analgesia-sedation protocol with midazolam usage in the PICU. DESIGN: A single-center nonrandomized before-after study. SETTING: PICU at a quaternary pediatric hospital (Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA). PATIENTS: Children admitted to the PICU who were mechanically ventilated for greater than 24 hours. The preimplementation cohort included 190 eligible patients admitted between July 29, 2017, and February 28, 2018, and the postimplementation cohort included 144 patients admitted between July 29, 2019, and February 28, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Implementation of a revised analgesia-sedation protocol. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Our primary outcome, total dose of IV midazolam administered in mechanically ventilated patients up to day 14 of ventilation, decreased by 72% (95% CI [61-80%]; p < 0.001) in the postimplementation cohort. Dexmedetomidine usage increased 230% (95% CI [145-344%]) in the postimplementation cohort. Opioid usage, our balancing metric, was not significantly different between the two cohorts. There were no significant differences in ventilator-free days, PICU length of stay, rate of unplanned extubations, failed extubations, cardiorespiratory arrest events, and 24-hour readmissions to the PICU. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully implemented an analgesia-sedation protocol that primarily uses dexmedetomidine and intermittent opioids, and it was associated with significant decrease in overall midazolam usage in mechanically ventilated patients in the PICU. The intervention was not associated with changes in opioid usage or prevalence of adverse events.

Medication Reconciliation Failures in Children and Young Adults With Chronic Disease During Intensive and Intermediate Care.

OBJECTIVES: Although medication reconciliation has become standard during hospital admission, rates of unintentional medication discrepancies during intensive care of pediatric patients with chronic disease are unknown. Such discrepancies are an important cause of adverse drug events in adults with chronic illness and are associated with unintentional discontinuation of chronic medications. We sought to determine the rate, type, timing, and predictors of potentially harmful unintentional medication discrepancies in children and young adults with chronic disease. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Patients discharged from the intensive and intermediate care units at a tertiary care children's hospital from September 2013 to May 2014. PATIENTS: Consecutive sample of 308 patients less than 25 years old with chronic disease defined by prescription of at least one predetermined class of chronic medication prior to hospitalization. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The number of unintentional medication discrepancies with the potential for harm, as well as patient and medication-related factors predisposing patients to these errors were assessed. Two thousand seven hundred thirty-nine medication discrepancies were identified; 284 (10%) were unintentional and had the potential for harm (0.9/patient). Of these, 128 (45%) were due to errors in taking the preadmission medication history, whereas 156 (55%) were due to errors reconciling the medication history with orders. Most events occurred at admission (66%) and were dosing errors (45%). In multivariable negative binomial regression analyses (adjusted rate ratios [95% CI]), each additional preadmission medication (1.07 [1.04-1.10]), chronic respiratory medications (1.51 [1.01-2.28]), and chronic noninvasive ventilation (1.53 [1.07-2.19]) were associated with increased risk of a discrepancy. CONCLUSIONS: Unintentional medication discrepancies with the potential for harm are common among children and young adults with chronic disease during critical care admission due to both failure to obtain an accurate medication history and errors in reconciling the history with patient orders. The use of current medication reconciliation processes is insufficient to prevent errors in this high-risk population.

Family participation during intensive care unit rounds: goals and expectations of parents and health care providers in a tertiary pediatric intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVE: To compare perceptions, goals, and expectations of health care providers and parents regarding parental participation in morning rounds and target specific areas of opportunity for educational interventions. STUDY DESIGN: Semistructured interviews of parents and focus groups of health care providers to learn about their experiences in, goals for, and perceived barriers to successful parental participation in morning rounds. Qualitative methods were used to analyze interview and focus group transcripts. RESULTS: Parents (n = 21) and health care providers (n = 24) participated in interviews and focus groups, respectively. Analyses revealed key areas of agreement between providers and parents regarding goals for rounds when parents are present, including helping parents achieve an understanding of the child's current status and plan of care. Providers and parents disagreed, however, about the nature of opportunities to ask questions. Parents additionally reported a strong desire to provide expert advice about their children and expected transparency from their care team, while providers stated that parental presence sometimes hindered frank discussions and education. CONCLUSIONS: Some agreement in goals for parent participation in morning rounds exists, although there are opportunities to calibrate expectations for both parents and health care providers. Solutions may involve a protocol for orienting parents to morning rounds, focusing on improving communication with parents outside of morning rounds, and the preservation of a forum for providers to have private discussions as a team.

Family participation during intensive care unit rounds: attitudes and experiences of parents and healthcare providers in a tertiary pediatric intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the experiences and attitudes of healthcare providers and parents regarding parental participation in morning rounds, in particular to evaluate for differences in perception of parental comprehension of rounds content and parental comfort with attendance, and to identify subgroups of parents who are more likely to report comfort with attending rounds. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of 100 parents and 131 healthcare providers in a tertiary care pediatric medical/surgical intensive care unit. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze survey responses; univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to compare parent and healthcare provider responses. RESULTS: Of parents, 92% reported a desire to attend rounds, and 54% of healthcare providers reported a preference for parental presence. There were significant discrepancies in perception of understanding between the 2 groups, with healthcare providers much less likely to perceive that parents understood both the format (30% vs 73%, P < .001) and content (21% vs 84%, P < .001) of rounds compared with parents. Analysis of parent surveys did not reveal characteristics correlated with increased comfort or desire to attend rounds. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of parents wish to participate in morning rounds, whereas healthcare provider opinions are mixed. Important discrepancies exist between parent and healthcare provider perceptions of parental comfort and comprehension on rounds, which may be important in facilitating parental presence.