Blog
About

  • Record: found
  • Abstract: found
  • Article: found
Is Open Access

Evaluating the test re-test reliability and inter-subject variability of health care provider manual fluid resuscitation performance

Read this article at

Bookmark
      There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

      Abstract

      BackgroundHealth Care Providers (HCPs) report that manual techniques of intravascular fluid resuscitation are commonly used during pediatric shock management. The optimal pediatric fluid resuscitation technique is currently unknown. We sought to determine HCP test-retest reliability (repeatability) and inter-subject variability of fluid resuscitation performance outcomes to inform the design of future studies.MethodsFifteen consenting HCPs from McMaster Children’s Hospital, in Hamilton, Canada participated in this single-arm interventional trial. Participants were oriented to a non-clinical model representing a 15 kg toddler, which incorporated a 22-gauge IV catheter. Following a standardization procedure, participants administered 600 mL (40 mL/kg) of saline to the simulated child under emergency conditions using prefilled 60-mL syringes. Each participant completed 5 testing trials. All testing was video recorded, with fluid administration time outcome data (in seconds) extracted from trial videos by two blinded outcome assessors. Data describing catheter dislodgement events, volume of saline effectively delivered, and participant demographics were also collected. The primary outcome of fluid administration time test-retest reliability was analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and intra-class correlation (ICC), with good reliability defined as ICC > 0.70.ResultsDifferences in HCP fluid administration times are attributable to inter-subject variability rather than intra-subject variability based on one-way ANOVA analysis, F (14,60) = 43.125; p < 0.001. Test-retest reliability of subjects was excellent with ICC = 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95-0.99); p < 0.001.ConclusionsFindings demonstrate excellent test-retest reliability of HCP fluid resuscitation performance in a setting involving a non-clinical model. Investigators can justify a single evaluation of HCP performance in future studies.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1756-0500-7-724) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

      Related collections

      Most cited references 12

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed.

      Results of reliability and agreement studies are intended to provide information about the amount of error inherent in any diagnosis, score, or measurement. The level of reliability and agreement among users of scales, instruments, or classifications is widely unknown. Therefore, there is a need for rigorously conducted interrater and intrarater reliability and agreement studies. Information about sample selection, study design, and statistical analysis is often incomplete. Because of inadequate reporting, interpretation and synthesis of study results are often difficult. Widely accepted criteria, standards, or guidelines for reporting reliability and agreement in the health care and medical field are lacking. The objective was to develop guidelines for reporting reliability and agreement studies. Eight experts in reliability and agreement investigation developed guidelines for reporting. Fifteen issues that should be addressed when reliability and agreement are reported are proposed. The issues correspond to the headings usually used in publications. The proposed guidelines intend to improve the quality of reporting. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
        Bookmark
        • Record: found
        • Abstract: found
        • Article: not found

        Clinical practice parameters for hemodynamic support of pediatric and neonatal septic shock: 2007 update from the American College of Critical Care Medicine.

        The Institute of Medicine calls for the use of clinical guidelines and practice parameters to promote "best practices" and to improve patient outcomes. 2007 update of the 2002 American College of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Guidelines for Hemodynamic Support of Neonates and Children with Septic Shock. Society of Critical Care Medicine members with special interest in neonatal and pediatric septic shock were identified from general solicitation at the Society of Critical Care Medicine Educational and Scientific Symposia (2001-2006). The Pubmed/MEDLINE literature database (1966-2006) was searched using the keywords and phrases: sepsis, septicemia, septic shock, endotoxemia, persistent pulmonary hypertension, nitric oxide, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), and American College of Critical Care Medicine guidelines. Best practice centers that reported best outcomes were identified and their practices examined as models of care. Using a modified Delphi method, 30 experts graded new literature. Over 30 additional experts then reviewed the updated recommendations. The document was subsequently modified until there was greater than 90% expert consensus. The 2002 guidelines were widely disseminated, translated into Spanish and Portuguese, and incorporated into Society of Critical Care Medicine and AHA sanctioned recommendations. Centers that implemented the 2002 guidelines reported best practice outcomes (hospital mortality 1%-3% in previously healthy, and 7%-10% in chronically ill children). Early use of 2002 guidelines was associated with improved outcome in the community hospital emergency department (number needed to treat = 3.3) and tertiary pediatric intensive care setting (number needed to treat = 3.6); every hour that went by without guideline adherence was associated with a 1.4-fold increased mortality risk. The updated 2007 guidelines continue to recognize an increased likelihood that children with septic shock, compared with adults, require 1) proportionally larger quantities of fluid, 2) inotrope and vasodilator therapies, 3) hydrocortisone for absolute adrenal insufficiency, and 4) ECMO for refractory shock. The major new recommendation in the 2007 update is earlier use of inotrope support through peripheral access until central access is attained. The 2007 update continues to emphasize early use of age-specific therapies to attain time-sensitive goals, specifically recommending 1) first hour fluid resuscitation and inotrope therapy directed to goals of threshold heart rates, normal blood pressure, and capillary refill 70% and cardiac index 3.3-6.0 L/min/m.
          Bookmark
          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Early reversal of pediatric-neonatal septic shock by community physicians is associated with improved outcome.

          Experimental and clinical studies of septic shock support the concept that early resuscitation with fluid and inotropic therapies improves survival in a time-dependent manner. The new American College of Critical Care Medicine-Pediatric Advanced Life Support (ACCM-PALS) Guidelines for hemodynamic support of newborns and children in septic shock recommend this therapeutic approach. The objective of this study was to determine whether early septic shock reversal and use of resuscitation practice consistent with the new ACCM-PALS Guidelines by community physicians is associated with improved outcome. A 9-year (January 1993-December 2001) retrospective cohort study was conducted of 91 infants and children who presented to local community hospitals with septic shock and required transport to Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh. Shock reversal (defined by return of normal systolic blood pressure and capillary refill time), resuscitation practice concurrence with ACCM-PALS Guidelines, and hospital mortality were measured. Overall, 26 (29%) patients died. Community physicians successfully achieved shock reversal in 24 (26%) patients at a median time of 75 minutes (when the transport team arrived at the patient's bedside), which was associated with 96% survival and >9-fold increased odds of survival (9.49 [1.07-83.89]). Each additional hour of persistent shock was associated with >2-fold increased odds of mortality (2.29 [1.19-4.44]). Nonsurvivors, compared with survivors, were treated with more inotropic therapies (dopamine/dobutamine [42% vs 20%] and epinephrine/norepinephrine [42% vs 6%]) but not increased fluid therapy (median volume; 32.9 mL/kg vs 20.0 mL/kg). Resuscitation practice was consistent with ACCM-PALS Guidelines in only 27 (30%) patients; however, when practice was in agreement with guideline recommendations, a lower mortality was observed (8% vs 38%). Early recognition and aggressive resuscitation of pediatric-neonatal septic shock by community physicians can save lives. Educational programs that promote ACCM-PALS recommended rapid, stepwise escalations in fluid as well as inotropic therapies may have value in improving outcomes in these children.
            Bookmark

            Author and article information

            Affiliations
            [ ]Department of Pediatrics, McMaster Children’s Hospital and McMaster University, 1280 Main St W. Room 3A, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1 Canada
            [ ]Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Paediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, and University of Toronto, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1X8 Canada
            [ ]Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1200 Main St W, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3Z5 Canada
            [ ]Biostatistics Unit,/FSORC, St Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, 3rd floor Martha Wing 50 Charlton Avenue East, Hamilton, L8N 4A6 Canada
            [ ]Department of Anesthesia, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1 Canada
            [ ]Division of Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, McMaster Children’s Hospital and McMaster University, 1280 Main St. W, Room 3Y, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1 Canada
            Contributors
            parkermj@mcmaster.ca
            leefmh@mcmaster.ca
            mbuagblc@mcmaster.ca
            ThabanL@mcmaster.ca
            Journal
            BMC Res Notes
            BMC Res Notes
            BMC Research Notes
            BioMed Central (London )
            1756-0500
            15 October 2014
            15 October 2014
            2014
            : 7
            : 1
            25315062
            4210565
            3254
            10.1186/1756-0500-7-724
            © Parker et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014

            This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

            Categories
            Research Article
            Custom metadata
            © The Author(s) 2014

            Medicine

            pediatrics, fluid therapy, shock, resuscitation, research methods

            Comments

            Comment on this article