WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: Pediatric Brain Injury Research Network investigators recently derived a highly sensitive clinical prediction rule for pediatric abusive head trauma (AHT). WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:The performance of this AHT screening tool has been validated. Four clinical variables, readily available at the time of admission, detect pediatric AHT with high sensitivity in intensive care settings. abstract BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To reduce missed cases of pediatric abusive head trauma (AHT), Pediatric Brain Injury Research Network investigators derived a 4-variable AHT clinical prediction rule (CPR) with sensitivity of .96. Our objective was to validate the screening performance of this AHT CPR in a new, equivalent patient population. METHODS:We conducted a prospective, multicenter, observational, cross-sectional study. Applying the same inclusion criteria, definitional criteria for AHT, and methods used in the completed derivation study, Pediatric Brain Injury Research Network investigators captured complete clinical, historical, and radiologic data on 291 acutely headinjured children ,3 years of age admitted to PICUs at 14 participating sites, sorted them into comparison groups of abusive and nonabusive head trauma, and measured the screening performance of the AHT CPR. RESULTS:In this new patient population, the 4-variable AHT CPR demonstrated sensitivity of .96, specificity of .46, positive predictive value of .55, negative predictive value of .93, positive likelihood ratio of 1.67, and negative likelihood ratio of 0.09. Secondary analysis revealed that the AHT CPR identified 98% of study patients who were ultimately diagnosed with AHT.CONCLUSIONS: Four readily available variables (acute respiratory compromise before admission; bruising of the torso, ears, or neck; bilateral or interhemispheric subdural hemorrhages or collections; and any skull fractures other than an isolated, unilateral, nondiastatic, linear, parietal fracture) identify AHT with high sensitivity in young, acutely head-injured children admitted to the PICU. Pediatrics 2014;134:e1537-e1544

Post-intensive care syndrome, a condition defined by new or worsening impairment in cognition, mental health, and physical function after critical illness, has emerged in the past decade as a common and life-altering consequence of critical illness. New strategies are urgently needed to mitigate the risk of neuropsychological and functional impairment common after critical illness and to prepare and support survivors on their road toward recovery. The present state of critical care survivorship is described, and postdischarge care delivery in the United States and the potential impact of the present-day fragmented model of care delivery are detailed. A novel strategy that uses peer support groups could more effectively meet the needs of survivors of critical illness and mitigate post-intensive care syndrome.

No abstract

IMPORTANCE Family-centered care, which supports family presence (FP) during procedures, is now a widely accepted standard at health care facilities that care for children. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the practice of FP during tracheal intubation (TI) in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). Family presence during procedures in PICUs has been advocated.OBJECTIVE To describe the current practice of FP during TI and evaluate the association with procedural and clinician (including physician, respiratory therapist, and nurse practitioner) outcomes across multiple PICUs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Prospective cohort study in which all TIs from July 2010 to March 2014 in the multicenter TI database (National Emergency Airway Registry for Children [NEAR4KIDS]) were analyzed. Family presence was defined as a family member present during TI. This study included all TIs in patients younger than 18 years in 22 international PICUs.EXPOSURES Family presence and no FP during TI in the PICU. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe percentage of FP during TIs. First attempt success rate, adverse TI-associated events, multiple attempts (Ն3), oxygen desaturation (oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry <80%), and self-reported team stress level.RESULTS A total of 4969 TI encounters were reported. Among those, 81% (n = 4030) of TIs had documented FP status (with/without). The median age of participants with FP was 2 years and 1 year for those without FP. The average percentage of TIs with FP was 19% and varied widely across sites (0%-43%; P < .001). Tracheal intubations with FP (vs without FP) were associated with older patients (median, 2 years vs 1 year; P = .04), lower Paediatric Index of Mortality 2 score, and pediatric resident as the first airway clinician (23%, n = 179 vs 18%, n = 584; odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2-1.7). Tracheal intubations with FP and without FP were no different in the first attempt success rate (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.85-1.18), adverse TI-associated events (any events: OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.85-1.30 and severe events: OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.75-1.43), multiple attempts (Ն3) (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.82-1.28), oxygen desaturation (oxygen saturation <80%) (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.80-1.18), or self-reported team stress level (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.92-1.31). This result persisted after adjusting for patient and clinician confounders.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Wide variability exists in FP during TIs across PICUs. Family presence was not associated with first attempt success, adverse TI-associated events, oxygen desaturation (<80%), or higher team stress level. Our data suggest that FP during TI can safely be implemented as part of a family-centered care model in the PICU.

OBJECTIVE: Passive, opt-out recruitment strategies have the potential to improve efficiency and enlarge the participant pool for clinical studies. We report on the feasibility of using a passive consent strategy for a multicenter pediatric study. METHODS: We assessed the response to passive and active control recruitment strategies used in a multicenter pediatric cohort study and describe the variability in acceptance among institutional review boards (IRBs) and parents of pediatric patients. RESULTS: Twenty-six pediatric centers submitted IRB applications; 24 centers participated. Sixteen IRBs approved the proposed passive recruitment strategy, and 6 IRBs required active consent strategies; 2 centers used a modified participation mode using control subjects from neighboring centers. In all, 4529 potential participants were identified across 22 centers. In the pre-enrollment phase, opt-out rates were significantly lower in the passive consent group compared with the active recruitment centers (1.6% vs 11.8%; P &lt; .001). During the enrollment phase, however, refusal rates in the passive consent group were significantly higher (38.1% vs 12.2%; P = .004). The overall refusal rate across both groups was 33.3%. CONCLUSIONS: IRB variability in interpretation and application of regulations affects consistency of study procedure across sites and may reduce validity of study findings. Opt-out consent allowed us to create a large representative pool of control subjects. Parents were more likely to refuse to be approached for a study in the pre-enrollment phase when active consent was used, but were more likely to decline actual study enrollment when passive consent was used in the pre-enrollment period.