RATIONALE:A guideline that both evaluates current practice and provides recommendations to address sedation, pain, and delirium management with regard for neuromuscular blockade and withdrawal is not currently available. OBJECTIVE:To develop comprehensive clinical practice guidelines for critically ill infants and children, with specific attention to seven domains of care including pain, sedation/agitation, iatrogenic withdrawal, neuromuscular blockade, delirium, PICU environment, and early mobility. DESIGN:The Society of Critical Care Medicine Pediatric Pain, Agitation, Neuromuscular Blockade, and Delirium in critically ill pediatric patients with consideration of the PICU Environment and Early Mobility Guideline Taskforce was comprised of 29 national experts who collaborated from 2009 to 2021 via teleconference and/or e-mail at least monthly for planning, literature review, and guideline development, revision, and approval. The full taskforce gathered annually in-person during the Society of Critical Care Medicine Congress for progress reports and further strategizing with the final face-to-face meeting occurring in February 2020. Throughout this process, the Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures Manual for Guidelines development was adhered to. METHODS:Taskforce content experts separated into subgroups addressing pain/ analgesia, sedation, tolerance/iatrogenic withdrawal, neuromuscular blockade, delirium, PICU environment (family presence and sleep hygiene), and early mobility. Subgroups created descriptive and actionable Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome questions. An experienced medical information specialist developed search strategies to identify relevant literature between January 1990 and January 2020. Subgroups reviewed literature, determined quality of evidence, and formulated recommendations classified as "strong" with "we recommend" or "conditional" with "we suggest. " Good practice statements were used when indirect evidence supported benefit with no or minimal risk. Evidence gaps were noted. Initial recommendations were reviewed by each subgroup and revised as deemed necessary prior to being disseminated for voting by the full taskforce. Individuals who had an overt or potential conflict of interest abstained from relevant votes. Expert opinion alone was not used in substitution for a lack of evidence. RESULTS:The Pediatric Pain, Agitation, Neuromuscular Blockade, and Delirium in critically ill pediatric patients with consideration of the PICU Environment and Early Mobility taskforce issued 44 recommendations (14 strong and 30 conditional) and five good practice statements.

Implementation of an ICU bundle along with staff education and case conferences is effective for improving delirium screening, detection, and treatment and is associated with decreased delirium prevalence.

Objective Care of critically-ill children includes sedation but current therapies are suboptimal. To describe dexmedetomidine (DEX) use in children supported on mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure. Design Secondary analysis of data from the RESTORE clinical trial. Setting Thirty-one pediatric ICUs. Patients Data from 2449 children; 2 weeks to 17 years old. Interventions Sedation practices were unrestrained in the usual care arm. Patients were categorized as receiving dexmedetomidine as a primary sedative (DEXp), secondary sedative (DEXs), periextubation agent (DEXe), or never prescribed. DEX exposure and sedation and clinical profiles are described. Measurements and Main Results Of 1224 usual care patients, 596 (49%) received DEX. DEXp patients (N=138; 11%) were less critically ill (PRISM III-12 score median 6 [IQR 3–11]) and when compared to all other cohorts, experienced more episodic agitation. In the intervention group, time in sedation target improved from 28% to 50% within one day of initiating DEXp. DEXs usual care patients (N=280; 23%) included more children with severe PARDS or organ failure. DEXs patients experienced more inadequate pain (22% vs 11%) and sedation (31% vs 16%) events. DEXe patients (N=178; 15%) were those known to not tolerate an awake, intubated state and experienced a shorter ventilator weaning process (2.1 vs 2.3 days). Conclusions Our data support the use of dexmedetomidine as a primary agent in low criticality patients offering the benefit of rapid achievement of targeted sedation levels. Dexmedetomidine as a secondary agent does not appear to add benefit. The use of dexmedetomidine to facilitate extubation in children intolerant of an awake, intubated state may abbreviate ventilator weaning. These data support a broader armamentarium of pediatric critical care sedation.

OBJECTIVE: To compare withdrawal symptoms among pediatric intensive care patients receiving clonidine to those not receiving clonidine while being weaned from long-term dexmedetomidine. METHODS: This retrospective analysis evaluated Withdrawal Assessment Tool-1 (WAT-1) scores and hemodynamic parameters in pediatric patients on dexmedetomidine for 5 days or longer between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2012. The primary objective was to compare withdrawal symptoms based on the number of elevated WAT-1 scores among patients on clonidine to those not on clonidine, while being weaned from long-term dexmedetomidine. The secondary objective was to describe withdrawal symptoms associated with long-term dexmedetomidine use. RESULTS: Nineteen patients (median age, 1.5 years; interquartile range [IQR], 0.67–3.3) received 20 treatment courses of dexmedetomidine for at least 5 days. Clonidine was received by patients during 12 of the treatment courses. The patients in the clonidine group had an average of 0.8 (range, 0–6) elevated WAT-1 scores 24 hours post wean compared to an average of 3.2 (0–8) elevated WAT-1 scores in the no clonidine group (p = 0.49). There were no significant difierences between prewean and postwean systolic or diastolic blood pressures among the 2 groups. The average heart rate during the postwean period was 112 beats per minute (bpm) (range, 88.5–151.5) in the clonidine group compared to 138.4 bpm (range, 117.8–168.3) in the no clonidine group (p = 0.003). In the clonidine group, the mean change in heart rate postwean compared to prewean was an increase of 3.6 bpm (range, −39.6 to 47.5), compared to a mean increase of 29.9 bpm (range, 5.5–74.7) in the no clonidine group (p = 0.042). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difierence in WAT-1 scores between groups, with the clonidine group displaying a trend towards fewer elevated WAT-1 scores during the 24 hours post dexmedetomidine wean. Patients who received clonidine had significantly lower heart rates than the no clonidine group.