Procedure time significantly shortens as a function of experience. After an adequate learning curve, the procedure can be performed in a very acceptable amount of time.

No abstract

Introduction E-cigarette, or vaping, product use associated lung injury (EVALI) has become a recent concern among public health officials. Factors that contribute to the concern include an increasing number of cases over time, the severity of the illness, and an unknown understanding of the pathophysiology and etiology of the illness. Case Series We cared for three adolescent patients with acute respiratory failure secondary to EVALI. All three patients were treated with high-dose steroids in addition to antimicrobials, which resulted in clinical improvement and resolution of their respiratory failure. Pulmonary function testing was performed on these previously healthy patients both acutely and subacutely. Additionally, we report the results from the laboratory analysis of one vaping device fluid which revealed previously unpublished components within these products. Discussion EVALI is a recent public health concern without a known etiology which can cause life-threatening lung injury in patients without prior lung pathology. We hope these cases will highlight the importance of return precautions in adolescents with vague respiratory symptoms and provide a cautionary tale to providers while they counsel patients regarding the use of these products.

BackgroundFront-line clinicians are expected to make accurate and timely diagnostic decisions before transferring patients to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) but may not always learn their patients’ outcomes. We evaluated the characteristics of post-transfer updates received by referring clinicians regarding PICU patients and determined preferences regarding content, delivery, and timing of such updates.MethodsWe administered an electronic cross-sectional survey to Iowa clinicians who billed for ≥5 pediatric patients or referred ≥1 patient to the University of Iowa (UI) PICU in the year before survey administration.ResultsOne hundred and one clinicians (51 non-UI, 50 UI-affiliated) responded. Clinicians estimated that, on average, 8% of pediatric patients they saw over 1 year required PICU admission; clinicians received updates on 40% of patients. Seventy percent of UI clinicians obtained updates via self-initiated electronic record review, while 37% of non-UI clinicians relied on PICU communication (p = 0.013). Clinicians indicated that updates regarding diagnoses/outcomes will be most relevant to their practice. Among clinicians who received updates, 13% received unexpected information; 40% changed their practice as a result.ConclusionsClinicians received updates on less than half of the patients they referred to a PICU, although such updates could potentially influence clinical practice. Study findings will inform the development of a formal feedback system from the PICU to referring clinicians.

No abstract