Search

BackgroundCOVID-19 forced healthcare systems to make unprecedented changes in clinical care processes. The authors hypothesized that the COVID-19 pandemic adversely impacted timely access to care, perioperative processes, and clinical outcomes for pediatric patients undergoing primary appendectomy.MethodsA retrospective, international, multicenter study was conducted using matched cohorts within participating centers of the international PEdiatric Anesthesia COVID-19 Collaborative (PEACOC). Patients younger than 18 yr old were matched using age, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status, and sex. The primary outcome was the difference in hospital length of stay of patients undergoing primary appendectomy during a 2-month period early in the COVID-19 pandemic (April to May 2020) compared with prepandemic (April to May 2019). Secondary outcomes included time to appendectomy and the incidence of complicated appendicitis.ResultsA total of 3,351 cases from 28 institutions were available with 1,684 cases in the prepandemic cohort matched to 1,618 in the pandemic cohort. Hospital length of stay was statistically significantly different between the two groups: 29 h (interquartile range: 18 to 79) in the pandemic cohort versus 28 h (interquartile range: 18 to 67) in the prepandemic cohort (adjusted coefficient, 1 [95% CI, 0.39 to 1.61]; P < 0.001), but this difference was small. Eight centers demonstrated a statistically significantly longer hospital length of stay in the pandemic period than in the prepandemic period, while 13 were shorter and 7 did not observe a statistically significant difference. During the pandemic period, there was a greater occurrence of complicated appendicitis, prepandemic 313 (18.6%) versus pandemic 389 (24.1%), an absolute difference of 5.5% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.1 to 1.59]; P = 0.003). Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 testing was associated with significantly longer time-to-appendectomy, 720 min (interquartile range: 430 to 1,112) with testing versus 414 min (interquartile range: 231 to 770) without testing, adjusted coefficient, 306 min (95% CI, 241 to 371; P < 0.001), and longer hospital length of stay, 31 h (interquartile range: 20 to 83) with testing versus 24 h (interquartile range: 14 to 68) without testing, adjusted coefficient, 7.0 (95% CI, 2.7 to 11.3; P = 0.002).ConclusionsFor children undergoing appendectomy, the COVID-19 pandemic did not significantly impact hospital length of stay.Editor’s perspective

Background and Objectives: This educational review outlines the current landscape of pediatric anesthesia training, care delivery, and challenges across Canada, Barbados, and the United States. Descriptions and Conclusions: Approximately 5% of Canadian children undergo general anesthesia annually, administered by fellowship‐trained pediatric anesthesiologists in children's hospitals, general anesthesiologists in community hospitals, or family practice anesthesiologists in underserved regions. In Canada, the focus is on national‐level evaluation and accreditation of pediatric anesthesia fellowship training, addressing challenges arising from workforce shortages, particularly in remote areas. Barbados, a Caribbean nation, lacks dedicated pediatric hospitals but has provided pediatric anesthesia since 1972 through anesthetists with additional training. Challenges in its development, common to low‐middle‐income countries, include inadequate infrastructure and workforce shortages. Increased awareness of pediatric anesthesia as a sub‐specialty could enhance perioperative care for Barbadian children. Pediatric anesthesia encompasses various specialties in the United States, with pediatric anesthesiologists playing a foundational role. Challenges faced include recruitment and retention difficulties, supply‐chain shortages, and the proliferation of anesthesia sites, all impacting the delivery of modern, high‐quality, and cost‐effective patient care. Collaborative efforts at national and organizational levels strive to improve the quality and safety of pediatric anesthesia care in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most common imaging procedure requiring sedation/anesthesia in children. Understanding adverse events associated with sedation/anesthesia is important in making decisions regarding MRI vs. other imaging modalities. No large studies have evaluated the practice of pediatric sedation/anesthesia for MRI by a variety of pediatric specialists. Purpose: Utilize a large pediatric sedation database to characterize the patients and adverse events associated with sedation/anesthesia for pediatric MRI. Study Type: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Subjects: The Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium (PSRC) has 109,947 entries for sedations for MRI from November 10, 2011 through December 18, 2017. Assessment: Patient demographics, sedative medications, interventions, and adverse events are described. Associations with adverse events were assessed. Trends in sedative medications used over time are examined. Statistical Tests: Descriptive statistics, Chi‐Squared and Fisher's Exact tests for categorical variables, logistic regression and assessment of trend using logistic regression and other method. Results: A total of 109,947 MRI‐related sedations were examined. Most subjects (66.2%) were 5 years old or younger. Seizure or other neurologic issue prompted MRI in 63.7% of cases. Providers responsible for sedation/anesthesia included intensivists (49.3%), emergency medicine physicians (28.2%), hospitalists (10.2%), and anesthesiologists (9.8%). The most commonly used sedative agent was propofol (89.1%). The most common airway intervention was supplemental oxygen (71.7%), followed by head/airway repositioning (20.6%). Airway‐related adverse events occurred in 8.4% of patients. Serious adverse events occurred in only 0.06% of patients, including three cases of cardiac arrest. No mortality was recorded. There was a statistically significant increase in the use of dexmedetomidine over time. Data Conclusions: Overall, adverse event rates were low. Sedation/anesthesia with propofol infusion and natural airway was the most common method used by this varied group of sedation providers. The use of dexmedetomidine increased over time. Evidence Level: 4 Technical Efficacy: Stage 5 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]