Rapid paediatric fluid resuscitation: a randomised controlled trial comparing the efficiency of two provider-endorsed manual paediatric fluid resuscitation techniques in a simulated setting

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

Abstract

Objectives: Manual techniques of intravascular fluid administration are commonly used during paediatric resuscitation, although it is unclear which technique is most efficient in the hands of typical healthcare providers. We compared the rate of fluid administration achieved with the disconnect-reconnect and push-pull manual syringe techniques for paediatric fluid resuscitation in a simulated setting.

Methods: This study utilised a randomised crossover trial design and enrolled 16 consenting healthcare provider participants from a Canadian paediatric tertiary care centre. The study was conducted in a non-clinical setting using a model simulating a 15 kg child in decompensated shock. Participants administered 900 mL (60 mL/kg) of normal saline to the simulated patient using each of the two techniques under study. The primary outcome was the rate of fluid administration, as determined by two blinded independent video reviewers. We also collected participant demographic data and evaluated other secondary outcomes including total volume administered, number of catheter dislodgements, number of technical errors, and subjective and objective measures of provider fatigue.

Results: All 16 participants completed the trial. The mean (SD) rate of fluid administration (mL/s) was greater for the disconnect-reconnect technique at 1.77 (0.145) than it was for the push-pull technique at 1.62 (0.226), with a mean difference of 0.15 (95% CI 0.055 to 0.251; p=0.005). There was no difference in mean volume administered (p=0.778) or participant self-reported fatigue (p=0.736) between techniques. No catheter dislodgement events occurred.

Conclusions: The disconnect-reconnect technique allowed for the fastest rate of fluid administration, suggesting that use of this technique may be preferable in situations requiring rapid resuscitation. These findings may help to inform future iterations of paediatric resuscitation guidelines.

Trial registration number: This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov [NCT01774214] prior to enrolling the first participant.

Keywords: ACCIDENT & EMERGENCY MEDICINE; INTENSIVE & CRITICAL CARE; TRAUMA MANAGEMENT.

Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(A–C) The ‘Disconnect–reconnect’ technique (DRT) for fluid administration requires an assistant. The assistant prepares syringes of fluid while the provider repeatedly selects a syringe (A), attaches it to the intravenous line and depresses the plunger (B), then disconnects and discards the empty syringe (C).
Figure 2
Figure 2
(A and B) The ‘push–pull’ technique (PPT) for fluid administration requires the healthcare provider to repeatedly perform two steps. With the stopcock positioned ‘off’ to the patient, the provider first pulls on the syringe plunger to fill the syringe with fluid (A). The provider must then toggle the stopcock ‘on’ to the patient and depress the plunger to administer fluid to the patient (B).
Figure 3
Figure 3
CONSORT trial flow diagram.

References

    1. Yager P, Noviski N. Shock. Pediatr Rev 2010;31:311–18
    1. McKiernan CA, Lieberman SA. Circulatory shock in children: an overview. Pediatri 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. Advanced trauma life support for doctors student manual. 8th edn. Chicago, IL: American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma, 2008:55–71
    1. Pediatric Trauma. Advanced trauma life support for doctors student course manual. 8th edn. Chicago, IL: American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma, 2008:225–46
    1. Nolan JP, Soar J, Zideman DA, et al. European resuscitation council guidelines for resuscitation 2010. Resuscitation 2010;81:1219–76
    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. Maitland K, Kiguli S, Opoka RO, et al. Mortality after fluid bolus in African children with severe infection. N Engl J Med 2011;364:2483–95
    1. Ford N, Hargreaves S, Shanks L. Mortality after fluid bolus in children with shock due to sepsis or severe infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2012;7:e43953.
    1. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for the management of severe sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Med 2013;41:580–637
    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. Intens 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. Paul R, Neuman MI, Monuteaux MC, et al. Adherence to PALS sepsis guidelines and hospital length of stay. Pediatrics 2012;130:e273.
    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:e58282.
    1. Harvey G, Foster G, Manan A, et al. Factors affecting pediatric isotonic fluid resuscitation efficiency: a randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of syringe size. BMC Emerg Med 2013;13:14.
    1. Stoner MJ, Goodman DG, Cohen DM, et al. Rapid fluid resuscitation in pediatrics: testing the American College of Critical Care Medicine guideline. Ann Emerg Med 2007;50:601–7
    1. Cole ET, Harvey G, Foster G, et al. Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial comparing the efficiency of two provider-endorsed manual paediatric fluid resuscitation techniques. BMJ Open 2013;21:e002754
    1. Orebaugh S. Venous air embolism: clinical and experimental considerations. Crit Care Med 1992;20:1169–77
    1. Athar MK, Islam T, Grammes J, et al. Near-fatal pulmonary air embolus from iatrogenic injection of air during contrast administration. QJM 2005;98:231–2
    1. Palmon SC, Moore LE, Lundberg J, et al. Venous air embolism: a review. J Clin Anesth 1997;9:251–7
    1. Salzman MB, Isenberg HD, Rubin LG. Use of disinfectants to reduce microbial contamination of hubs of vascular catheters. J Clin Microbiol 1993;31:475–9

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever