Objective To determined the current incidence and acute complications of asymptomatic central venous catheter (CVC)-related deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in critically ill children. Study design We performed a prospective cohort study in 3 pediatric intensive care units. A total of 101 children with newly inserted untunneled CVC were included. CVC-related DVT was diagnosed using compression ultrasonography with color Doppler. Results Asymptomatic CVC-related DVT was diagnosed in 16 (15.8%) children, which equated to 24.7 cases per 1000 CVC-days. Age was independently associated with DVT. Compared with children aged <1 year, children aged >13 years had significantly higher odds of DVT (aOR, 14.1, 95% CI, 1.9–105.8; P = .01). Other patient demographics, interventions (including anticoagulant use), and CVC characteristics did not differ between children with and without DVT. Mortality-adjusted duration of mechanical ventilation, a surrogate for pulmonary embolism, was statistically similar in the 2 groups (22 ± 9 days in children with DVT vs 23 ± 7 days in children without DVT; P = .34). Mortality-adjusted intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay also were similar in the 2 groups. Conclusion Asymptomatic CVC-related DVT is common in critically ill children. However, the acute complications do not seem to differ between children with and without DVT. Larger studies are needed to confirm these results. Future studies should also investigate the chronic complications of asymptomatic CVC-related DVT.

This systematic review summarizes the current evidence for the association of OSA and pain outcomes. Further research is needed to identify the differential effects of nocturnal hypoxemia and fragmented sleep on pain intensity. Clinicians might consider screening patients with chronic pain for OSA.

Rationale The adoption of prone positioning for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has historically been poor. However, in mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) ARDS, proning has increased. Understanding the factors influencing this change is important for further expanding and sustaining the use of prone positioning in appropriate clinical settings. Objectives To characterize factors influencing the implementation of prone positioning in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 ARDS. Methods We conducted a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with 40 intensive care unit (ICU) team members (physicians, nurses, advanced practice providers, respiratory therapists, and physical therapists) working at two academic hospitals. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, a widely used implementation science framework outlining important features of implementation, to structure the interview guide and thematic analysis of interviews. Results ICU clinicians reported that during the COVID-19 pandemic, proning was viewed as standard early therapy for COVID-19 ARDS rather than salvage therapy for refractory hypoxemia. By caring for large volumes of proned patients, clinicians gained increased comfort with proning and now view proning as a low-risk, high-benefit intervention. Within ICUs, adequate numbers of trained staff members, increased team agreement around proning, and the availability of specific equipment (e.g., to limit pressure injuries) facilitated greater proning use. Hospital-level supports included proning teams, centralized educational resources specific to the management of COVID-19 (including a recommendation for prone positioning), and an electronic medical record proning order. Important implementation processes included informal dissemination of best practices through on-the-job learning and team interactions during routine bedside care. Conclusions The implementation of prone positioning for COVID-19 ARDS took place in the context of evolving clinician viewpoints and ICU team cultures. Proning was facilitated by hospital support and buy-in and leadership from bedside clinicians. The successful implementation of prone positioning during the COVID-19 pandemic may serve as a model for the implementation of other evidence-based therapies in critical care.

No abstract