Search

Objective: Life‐threatening thoracic trauma requires emergency pleural decompression and thoracostomy and chest drain insertion are core trauma procedures. Reliably determining a safe site for pleural decompression in children can be challenging. We assessed whether the Mid‐Arm Point (MAP) technique, a procedural aid proposed for use with injured adults, would also identify a safe site for pleural decompression in children. Methods: Children (0–18 years) attending four EDs were prospectively recruited. The MAP technique was performed, and chest wall skin marked bilaterally at the level of the MAP; no pleural decompression was performed. Radio‐opaque markers were placed over the MAP‐determined skin marks and corresponding intercostal space (ICS) reported using chest X‐ray. Results: A total of 392 children participated, and 712 markers sited using the MAP technique were analysed. Eighty‐three percentage of markers were sited within the 'safe zone' for pleural decompression (4th to 6th ICSs). When sited outside the 'safe zone', MAP‐determined markers were typically too caudal. However, if the site for pleural decompression was transposed one ICS cranially in children ≥4 years, the MAP technique performance improved significantly with 91% within the 'safe zone'. Conclusions: The MAP technique reliably determines a safe site for pleural decompression in children, albeit with an age‐based adjustment, the Mid‐Arm Point in PAEDiatrics (MAPPAED) rule: 'in children aged ≥4 years, use the MAP and go up one ICS to hit the safe zone. In children <4 years, use the MAP.' When together with this rule, the MAP technique will identify a site within the 'safe zone' in 9 out of 10 children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In 2013, our intubations highlighted a safety gap – only 49% achieved first‐pass success without hypoxia or hypotension. NAP4 recommended debriefing after intubation, but limited published methods existed. Primary aim is to implement a feasible process for immediate debriefing and feedback for emergency airway management. Secondary aims are to contribute to reduced frequency of adverse intubation‐related events and implement qualitative improvements in patient safety through team reflection and feedback. Methods: A component of a prospective quality improvement (QI) study over 4 years in the ED of the Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. Debrief and feedback after intubation was one of seven study interventions. Targeted staff training and involvement of departmental leaders occurred. A post‐intervention cohort was audited in 2016. Analysis included the Team Emergency Assessment Measure. Results: Immediate post‐event debriefing occurred in 39 (85%) of 46 intubations. Debriefing was short (median duration 5 min, interquartile range [IQR] 5–10) and soon after (median time 20 min, IQR 5–60). Commonest location was the resuscitation room (92%), led by the team leader (97%). Commonest barrier preventing immediate debriefing was excessive workload. Two QI process measures were assessed during debriefing (adequate resuscitation, airway plan) and case summaries distributed for 100% of intubations. Performance outcomes included contribution to 78% first‐pass success without hypoxia or hypotension. Team reflection prompted changes to environment (signage, stickers), training (skill drills), teamwork and process (communication, clinical event debriefing). Conclusion: Structured and targeted debriefing after intubating children in the ED is feasible and contributes to measurable and qualitative improvements in patient safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]