BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Early risk stratification of infants with bronchiolitis receiving airway support is critical for focusing appropriate therapies, yet the tools to risk categorize this subpopulation do not exist. Our objective was to identify predictors of "escalated care" in bronchiolitis. We hypothesized there would be a significant association between escalated care and predictors in the emergency department. We subsequently developed a risk score for escalated care. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective cohort study of previously healthy infants aged <12 months with bronchiolitis. Our primary outcome was escalated care (ie, hospitalization with high-flow nasal cannula, noninvasive or invasive ventilation, or intensive care admission). The predictors evaluated were age, prematurity, day of illness, poor feeding, dehydration, apnea, nasal flaring and/or grunting, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, and retractions. . One of 217 (0.5%) infants without predictors received escalated care. The risk score ranged from 0 to 14 points, with the estimated risk of escalated care from 0.46% (0 points) to 96.9% (14 points). The area under the curve was 85%. CONCLUSIONS:We identified variables measured in the emergency department predictive of escalated care in bronchiolitis and derived a risk score to stratify risk of this outcome. This score may be used to aid management and disposition decisions.

No abstract

IntroductionEvidence suggests the presence of deficiencies in the quality of care provided to up to half of all paediatric trauma patients in Canada, the USA and Australia. Lack of adherence to evidence-based recommendations may be driven by lack of knowledge of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), heterogeneity in recommendations or concerns about their quality. We aim to systematically review CPG recommendations for paediatric injury care and appraise their quality.Methods and analysisWe will identify CPG recommendations through a comprehensive search strategy including Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Cochrane library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials and websites of organisations publishing recommendations on paediatric injury care. We will consider CPGs including at least one recommendation targeting paediatric injury populations on any diagnostic or therapeutic intervention from the acute phase of care with any comparator developed in high-income countries in the last 15 years (January 2007 to a maximum of 6 months prior to submission). Pairs of reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts and full text of eligible articles, extract data and evaluate the quality of CPGs and their recommendations using Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II and AGREE Recommendations Excellence instruments, respectively. We will synthesise evidence on recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence-to-Decision framework and present results within a recommendations matrix.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not a requirement as this study is based on available published data. The results of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at international scientific meetings and distributed to healthcare providers.PROSPERO registration numberInternational Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021226934).

ImportanceClinical manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 variants have not been systematically compared in children.ObjectiveTo compare symptoms, emergency department (ED) chest radiography, treatments, and outcomes among children with different SARS-CoV-2 variants.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis multicenter cohort study was performed at 14 Canadian pediatric EDs. Participants included children and adolescents younger than 18 years (hereinafter referred to as children) tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection in an ED between August 4, 2020, and February 22, 2022, with 14 days of follow-up.Exposure(s)SARS-CoV-2 variants detected on a specimen collected from the nasopharynx, nares, or throat.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was presence and number of presenting symptoms. The secondary outcomes were presence of core COVID-19 symptoms, chest radiography findings, treatments, and 14-day outcomes.ResultsAmong 7272 participants presenting to an ED, 1440 (19.8%) had test results positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of these, 801 (55.6%) were boys, with a median age of 2.0 (IQR, 0.6-7.0) years. Children with the Alpha variant reported the fewest core COVID-19 symptoms (195 of 237 [82.3%]), which were most often reported by participants with Omicron variant infection (434 of 468 [92.7%]; difference, 10.5% [95% CI, 5.1%-15.9%]). In a multivariable model with the original type as the referent, the Omicron and Delta variants were associated with fever (odds ratios [ORs], 2.00 [95% CI, 1.43-2.80] and 1.93 [95% CI, 1.33-2.78], respectively) and cough (ORs, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.06-1.91] and 1.57 [95% CI, 1.13-2.17], respectively). Upper respiratory tract symptoms were associated with Delta infection (OR, 1.96 [95% CI, 1.38-2.79]); lower respiratory tract and systemic symptoms were associated with Omicron variant infection (ORs, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.04-1.92] and 1.77 [95% CI, 1.24-2.52], respectively). Children with Omicron infection most often had chest radiography performed and received treatments; compared with those who had Delta infection, they were more likely to have chest radiography performed (difference, 9.7% [95% CI, 4.7%-14.8%]), to receive intravenous fluids (difference, 5.6% [95% CI, 1.0%-10.2%]) and corticosteroids (difference, 7.9% [95% CI, 3.2%-12.7%]), and to have an ED revisit (difference, 8.8% [95% CI, 3.5%-14.1%]). The proportions of children admitted to the hospital and intensive care unit did not differ between variants.Conclusions and RelevanceThe findings of this cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 variants suggest that the Omicron and Delta variants were more strongly associated with fever and cough than the original-type virus and the Alpha variant. Children with Omicron variant infection were more likely to report lower respiratory tract symptoms and systemic manifestations, undergo chest radiography, and receive interventions. No differences were found in undesirable outcomes (ie, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission) across variants.

Background and ObjectivesChildren with congenital heart disease (CHD) are at risk of deterioration in the face of common childhood illnesses, and their resuscitation and acute treatment requires guidance of CHD experts. Many children with CHD, however, present to their local emergency departments (ED) with gastrointestinal and respiratory symptoms that closely mimic symptoms of CHD related heart failure. This can lead to incorrect or delayed diagnosis and treatment where CHD expertise is limited. An understanding of the differences in cognitive decision-making processes between CHD experts and ED physicians can inform how best to support ED physicians when treating CHD patients.MethodsCardiac intensivists (CHD experts) and pediatric emergency department physicians (ED physicians) in a major academic cardiac center were interviewed using the critical decision method. Interview transcripts were coded deductively based on Schubert and Klein's macrocognitive frameworks and inductively to allow for new or modified characterization of dimensions.ResultsIn total, 6 CHD experts and 7 ED physicians were interviewed for this study. Although both CHD experts and ED physicians spent a lot of time sensemaking, their approaches to sensemaking differed. CHD experts reported readily recognizing the physiology of complex congenital heart disease and focused primarily on ruling out cardiac causes for the presenting illness. ED physicians reported a delay in attributing the signs and symptoms of the presenting illness to congenital heart disease, because these clinical findings were often non-specific, and thus explored different diagnoses. CHD experts moved quickly to treatment and more time anticipating potential problems and making specific contingency plans, while ED physicians spent more time gathering a range of data prior to arriving at a diagnosis. These findings were then applied to develop a prototype web-based decision support application for patients with CHD.ConclusionThere are differences in the cognitive processes used by CHD experts and ED physicians when managing CHD patients. An understanding of differences in the cognitive processes used by CHD experts and ED physicians can inform the development of potential interventions, such as clinical decision support systems and training pathways, to support decision making pertaining to the acute treatment of pediatric CHD patients.

In a review of guidelines for pediatric solid organ injuries, we identified 5 recommendations based on moderate quality evidence or rated as strong; these reflected non-operative management and angioembolization for renal injuries and hospital stay for liver and spleen injuries.

To systematically review clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for pediatric multisystem trauma, appraise their quality, synthesize the strength of recommendations and quality of evidence, and identify knowledge gaps. Background: Traumatic injuries are the leading cause of death and disability in children, who require a specific approach to injury care. Difficulties integrating CPG recommendations may cause observed practice and outcome variation in pediatric trauma care. Methods: We conducted a systematic review using Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials, and grey literature, from January 2007 to November 2022. We included CPGs targeting pediatric multisystem trauma with recommendations on any acute care diagnostic or therapeutic interventions. Pairs of reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of CPGs using "Appraisal of Guidelines, Research, and Evaluation II." Results: We reviewed 19 CPGs, and 11 were considered high quality. Lack of stakeholder engagement and implementation strategies were weaknesses in guideline development. We extracted 64 recommendations: 6 (9%) on trauma readiness and patient transfer, 24 (38%) on resuscitation, 22 (34%) on diagnostic imaging, 3 (5%) on pain management, 6 (9%) on ongoing inpatient care, and 3 (5%) on patient and family support. Forty-two (66%) recommendations were strong or moderate, but only 5 (8%) were based on high-quality evidence. We did not identify recommendations on trauma survey assessment, spinal motion restriction, inpatient rehabilitation, mental health management, or discharge planning. Conclusions:We identified 5 recommendations for pediatric multisystem trauma with high-quality evidence. Organizations could improve CPGs by engaging all relevant stakeholders and considering barriers to implementation. There is a need for robust pediatric trauma research, to support recommendations.

Background and ObjectivesChildren with congenital heart disease (CHD), have fragile hemodynamics and can deteriorate due to common childhood illnesses and the natural progression of their disease. During these acute periods of deterioration, these children often present to their local emergency departments (ED) where expertise in CHD is limited, and appropriate intervention is crucial to their survival. Previous studies identified that determining the appropriate intervention for CHD patients can be difficult for ED physicians, particularly since key components of effective decision making are not being met. Although key components of effective decision making for ED physicians have been identified, they have yet to be transformed into actionable guidance. We used decision centered design (DCD) to translate key components of decision making into decision requirements and associated design concepts, that we subsequently incorporated into a prototype clinical decision support system (CDSS).MethodsUsing framework analysis, transcripts from Critical Decision Method interviews of CHD experts and ED physicians were inductively coded to identify key decision requirements for ED physicians that are currently not well supported, and their associated design concepts. A design workshop was held to refine the identified key decision requirements and design concepts as well as to sketch information that would satisfy the identified requirements. These were iteratively incorporated into a prototype CDSS.ResultsThree decision requirements: (1) distinguish the patient's unique physiology based on their unique cardiac anatomy, (2) explicitly consider CHD specific differential diagnoses to allow a more structured reflection of diagnosis, and (3) select CHD appropriate interventions for each patient, were identified. These requirements along with design concepts and information needs identified through the design workshop were incorporated into the CDSS prototype.ConclusionWe identified key decision requirements and associated design concepts, that informed the design of a CDSS to provide actionable guidance for ED physicians when managing CHD patients. Meeting ED physicians' decision components with a CDSS requires the translation of their key decision requirements in its design. If not, we risk creating designs that interfere with clinician performance.