Critical care medicine · 2023
Implementation of Video Laryngoscope-Assisted Coaching Reduces Adverse Tracheal Intubation-Associated Events in the PICU.
Многоцентровое исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Giuliano John, Krishna Ashwin, Napolitano Natalie, Panisello Josep, Shenoi Asha, Sanders Ronald C, Rehder Kyle, Al-Subu Awni, Brown Calvin, Edwards Lauren, Wright Lisa, Pinto Matthew, Harwayne-Gidansky Ilana, Parsons Simon, Romer Amy, Laverriere Elizabeth, Shults Justine, Yamada Nicole K, Walsh Catharine M, Nadkarni Vinay, Nishisaki Akira, National Emergency Airway Registry for Children (NEAR4KIDS) and Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators (PALISI) Network
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate implementation of a video laryngoscope (VL) as a coaching device to reduce adverse tracheal intubation associated events (TIAEs).
DESIGN: Prospective multicenter interventional quality improvement study.
SETTING: Ten PICUs in North America.
PATIENTS: Patients undergoing tracheal intubation in the PICU.
INTERVENTIONS: VLs were implemented as coaching devices with standardized coaching language between 2016 and 2020. Laryngoscopists were encouraged to perform direct laryngoscopy with video images only available in real-time for experienced supervising clinician-coaches.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was TIAEs. Secondary outcomes included severe TIAEs, severe hypoxemia (oxygen saturation < 80%), and first attempt success. Of 5,060 tracheal intubations, a VL was used in 3,580 (71%). VL use increased from baseline (29.7%) to implementation phase (89.4%; p < 0.001). VL use was associated with lower TIAEs (VL 336/3,580 [9.4%] vs standard laryngoscope [SL] 215/1,480 [14.5%]; absolute difference, 5.1%; 95% CI, 3.1-7.2%; p < 0.001). VL use was associated with lower severe TIAE rate (VL 3.9% vs SL 5.3%; p = 0.024), but not associated with a reduction in severe hypoxemia (VL 15.7% vs SL 16.4%; p = 0.58). VL use was associated with higher first attempt success (VL 71.8% vs SL 66.6%; p < 0.001). In the primary analysis after adjusting for site clustering, VL use was associated with lower adverse TIAEs (odds ratio [OR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46-0.81; p = 0.001). In secondary analyses, VL use was not significantly associated with severe TIAEs (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.44-1.19; p = 0.20), severe hypoxemia (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.73-1.25; p = 0.734), or first attempt success (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.98-1.67; p = 0.073). After further controlling for patient and provider characteristics, VL use was independently associated with a lower TIAE rate (adjusted OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.86; p = 0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of VL-assisted coaching achieved a high level of adherence across the PICUs. VL use was associated with reduced adverse TIAEs.
DESIGN: Prospective multicenter interventional quality improvement study.
SETTING: Ten PICUs in North America.
PATIENTS: Patients undergoing tracheal intubation in the PICU.
INTERVENTIONS: VLs were implemented as coaching devices with standardized coaching language between 2016 and 2020. Laryngoscopists were encouraged to perform direct laryngoscopy with video images only available in real-time for experienced supervising clinician-coaches.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was TIAEs. Secondary outcomes included severe TIAEs, severe hypoxemia (oxygen saturation < 80%), and first attempt success. Of 5,060 tracheal intubations, a VL was used in 3,580 (71%). VL use increased from baseline (29.7%) to implementation phase (89.4%; p < 0.001). VL use was associated with lower TIAEs (VL 336/3,580 [9.4%] vs standard laryngoscope [SL] 215/1,480 [14.5%]; absolute difference, 5.1%; 95% CI, 3.1-7.2%; p < 0.001). VL use was associated with lower severe TIAE rate (VL 3.9% vs SL 5.3%; p = 0.024), but not associated with a reduction in severe hypoxemia (VL 15.7% vs SL 16.4%; p = 0.58). VL use was associated with higher first attempt success (VL 71.8% vs SL 66.6%; p < 0.001). In the primary analysis after adjusting for site clustering, VL use was associated with lower adverse TIAEs (odds ratio [OR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46-0.81; p = 0.001). In secondary analyses, VL use was not significantly associated with severe TIAEs (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.44-1.19; p = 0.20), severe hypoxemia (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.73-1.25; p = 0.734), or first attempt success (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.98-1.67; p = 0.073). After further controlling for patient and provider characteristics, VL use was independently associated with a lower TIAE rate (adjusted OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.86; p = 0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of VL-assisted coaching achieved a high level of adherence across the PICUs. VL use was associated with reduced adverse TIAEs.