Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial comparing the efficiency of two provider-endorsed manual paediatric fluid resuscitation techniques

Evan T Cole, Greg Harvey, Gary Foster, Lehana Thabane, Melissa J Parker, Evan T Cole, Greg Harvey, Gary Foster, Lehana Thabane, Melissa J Parker

Abstract

Introduction: Paediatric shock is a life-threatening condition with many possible causes and a global impact. Current resuscitation guidelines require rapid fluid administration as a cornerstone of paediatric shock management. However, little evidence is available to inform clinicians how to most effectively perform rapid fluid administration where this is clinically required, resulting in suboptimal knowledge translation of current resuscitation guidelines into clinical practice.

Objectives: This study aims to determine which of the two commonly used techniques for paediatric fluid resuscitation (disconnect-reconnect technique and push-pull technique) yields a higher fluid administration rate in a simulated clinical scenario. Secondary objectives include determination of catheter dislodgement rates, subjective and objective measures of provider fatiguability and descriptive information regarding any technical issues encountered with performance of each method under the study.

Methods and analysis: This study will utilise a randomised crossover trial design. Participants will include consenting healthcare providers from McMaster Children's Hospital. Each participant will administer 900 ml (60 ml/kg) of normal saline to a simulated 15 kg infant as quickly as possible on two separate occasions using the manual fluid administration techniques under the study. The primary outcome, rate of fluid administration, will be evaluated using a paired two-tailed Student t test.

Ethics and dissemination: This protocol has been approved by the Hamilton Health Sciences Research Ethics Board.

Results: These will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and presented at one or more scientific conferences.

Protocol registration: Protocol Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01774214.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The ‘disconnection–reconnection’ technique for fluid bolus delivery involves two HCPs. (A, B) One HCP rapidly prepares fluid-filled syringes. (C) A second HCP takes and connects a fluid-filled syringe to the IV extension tubing and administers the fluid to the patient by depressing the syringe plunger. The empty syringe is then disconnected and the process repeated until the desired volume of fluid has been administered.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The ‘push–pull’ technique for fluid bolus delivery involves one HCP. (A) The stopcock is positioned ‘off’ to the patient. The HCP ‘pulls’ the syringe plunger to draw fluid into the syringe from the bag of saline. (B) The stopcock is then toggled 180 degrees, turning this ‘on’ to the patient. (C) The HCP then ‘pushes’ the syringe plunger to administer the fluid. The process is repeated until fluid resuscitation is complete.
Figure 3
Figure 3
A randomised crossover trial design will be used. This design helps to reduce between group variability by having each participant perform each of the interventions under study. The order in which the interventions are performed is determined by randomisation, to control for any potential training or leaning effect. A washout period is included between interventions to allow for participant recovery from any resulting fatigue.

References

    1. McKiernan C, Lieberman S. Circulatory shock in children: an overview. Pediatr Rev 2005;26:451–60
    1. Management of shock. In: Chameides L, Samson RA, Schexnayder SM, Hazinski MF, eds. Pediatric Advanced Life Support Provider Manual. Dallas, Tx: American Heart Association 2011:85–108.
    1. Shock. In: Advanced trauma life support for doctors student manual. 8th edn. Chicago, IL: American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma; 2008:55–71.
    1. Brierley J, Carcillo JA, Choong K, et al. Clinical practice parameters for hemodynamic support of pediatric and neonatal septic shock: 2007 update from the American College of Critical Care Medicine. Crit Care Med 2009;37:666–88
    1. Parker MM, Hazelzet JA, Carcillo JA. Pediatric considerations. Crit Care Med 2004;32:S591–4
    1. Klabunde RE. Frank-Starling mechanism–Cardiovascular Physiology Concepts. June 4, 2007. (accessed 11 Mar 2013)
    1. Carcillo JA, Davis AL, Zaritsky A. Role of early fluid resuscitation in pediatric septic shock. JAMA 1991;266:1242–5
    1. Han YY, Carcillo JA, Dragotta MA, et al. Early reversal of pediatric-neonatal septic shock by community physicians is associated with improved outcome. Pediatrics 2003;112:793–9
    1. Oliveira CF, Nogueira de Sa FR, Oliveira DSF, et al. Time- and fluid-sensitive resuscitation for hemodynamic support of children in septic shock: barriers to the implementation of the American College of Critical Care Medicine/Pediatric Advanced Life Support Guidelines in a pediatric intensive care unit in a developing world. Pediatr Emerg Care 2008;24:810–15
    1. Ranjit S, Kissoon N, Jayakumar I. Aggressive management of dengue shock syndrome may decrease mortality rate: a suggested protocol. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2005;6:412–19
    1. Carcillo JA, Tasker RC. Fluid resuscitation of hypovolemic shock: acute medicine's great triumph for children. Intensive Care Med 2006;32:958–61
    1. Inwald DP, Tasker RC, Peters MJ, et al. Emergency management of children with severe sepsis in the United Kingdom: the results of the Paediatric Intensive Care Society sepsis audit. Arch Dis Child 2009;94:348–53
    1. Parker MJ, Manan A. Translating resuscitation guidelines into practice: health care provider attitudes, preferences and beliefs regarding pediatric fluid resuscitation performance. PLoS ONE 2013;8(3):e58282. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0058282
    1. Rothen HU, Lauber R, Mosimann M. An evaluation of the apid infusion system. Anaesthesia 1992;47:597–600
    1. Barcelona SL, Vilich F, Cot CJ. A comparison of flow rates and warming capabilities of the level 1 and rapid infusion system with various-size intravenous catheters. Anesth Analg 2003;97:358–63
    1. Dula DJ, Muller HA, Donovan JW. Flow rate variance of commonly used IV infusion techniques. J Trauma 1981;21:480–2
    1. Stoner M, Goodman D, Cohen D, et al. Rapid fluid resuscitation in pediatrics: testing the American College of Critical Care Medicine Guideline. Ann Emerg Med 2007;50:601–7
    1. Hodge D, Fleisher G. Pediatric catheter flow rates. Am J Emerg Med 1985;3:403–7
    1. Kleinman ME, Chameides L, Schexnayder SM, et al. Part 14: pediatric advanced life support: 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. Circulation 2010;122:S876–908
    1. Moher D, Hopewell S, Shulz KF, et al. Consort 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallelgroup randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:e1–37
    1. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:834–40
    1. Mills EJ, Chan A-W, Wu P, et al. Design, analysis, and presentation of crossover trials. Trials 2009;10:27.
    1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, December 2010. (accessed 11 Mar 2013)

Source: PubMed

3
Iratkozz fel