OBJECTIVES: To describe trends in critical illness from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in children over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that PICU admission rates were higher in the Omicron period compared with the original outbreak but that fewer patients needed endotracheal intubation. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: This study took place in nine U.S. PICUs over 3 weeks in January 2022 (Omicron period) compared with 3 weeks in March 2020 (original period). PATIENTS: Patients less than or equal to 21 years old who screened positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection by polymerase chain reaction or hospital-based rapid antigen test and were admitted to a PICU or intermediate care unit were included. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 267 patients (239 Omicron and 28 original) were reviewed. Forty-five patients in the Omicron cohort had incidental SARS-CoV-2 and were excluded from analysis. The Omicron cohort patients were younger compared with the original cohort patients (median [interquartile range], 6 yr [1.3–13.3 yr] vs 14 yr [8.3–17.3 yr]; p = 0.001). The Omicron period, compared with the original period, was associated with an average increase in COVID-19–related PICU admissions of 13 patients per institution (95% CI, 6–36; p = 0.008), which represents a seven-fold increase in the absolute number admissions. We failed to identify an association between cohort period (Omicron vs original) and odds of intubation (odds ratio, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.3–1.7). However, we cannot exclude the possibility of up to 70% reduction in intubation. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19–related PICU admissions were seven times higher in the Omicron wave compared with the original outbreak. We could not exclude the possibility of up to 70% reduction in use of intubation in the Omicron versus original epoch, which may represent differences in PICU/hospital admission policy in the later period, or pattern of disease, or possibly the impact of vaccination.

Background: Enteral nutrition (EN) interruptions because of EN intolerance impede nutrient delivery. We aimed to examine whether revising the EN intolerance definition of an algorithm would decrease EN interruptions and improve nutrient delivery in critically ill children. Methods:We performed a cross-sectional cohort study including patients who were admitted to our intensive care unit (ICU) for >24 h and received EN.The EN intolerance definition in our nutrition algorithm was modified to include two symptoms of EN intolerance. We compared time to 60% EN adequacy (EN delivered/EN prescribed x 100) and EN interruptions before and after this intervention. Results: We included 150 eligible patients, 78 and 72 patients in the preimplementation and postimplementation cohorts, respectively. There were no significant differences in demographics and clinical characteristics. The preimplementation and postimplementation cohorts achieved 60% EN adequacy 4 (2-5) days and 3 (2-5) days after ICU admission, respectively (P = 0.59). The preimplementation cohort had a median of 1 (1-2) interruption per patient and the postimplementation cohort 2 (1-3; P = 0.08). The frequency of interruptions because of EN intolerance within the first 8 days of ICU admission was 17 in the preimplementation and 10 in the postimplementation cohorts. Conclusion: Modifying the EN intolerance definition of a nutrition algorithm did not change the time to 60% EN adequacy or total number of EN interruptions in critically ill children. EN intolerance and interruptions continue to limit nutrient delivery. Research on the best definition for EN intolerance and its effect on nutrition outcomes is needed.