Related Experiment Videos
Adverse sedation events in pediatrics: a critical incident analysis of contributing factors
C J Coté1, D A Notterman, H W Karl
1Department of Pediatric Anesthesiology, Children's Memorial Hospital, Northwestern University School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60614, USA. ccote@nwu.edu
Insights
Adverse sedation events in children are more common in non-hospital settings, with inadequate monitoring and resuscitation contributing to poor outcomes. Guidelines and advanced training are crucial for pediatric sedation safety.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Anesthesiology
- Critical Care Medicine
- Emergency Medicine
Background:
- Adverse sedation events pose risks to children undergoing medical procedures.
- Critical incident analysis is a valuable method for understanding factors contributing to adverse events.
Purpose of the Study:
- To examine factors contributing to adverse sedation events in children.
- To analyze outcomes associated with different sedation settings and monitoring practices.
Main Methods:
- A database of adverse sedation events was compiled from FDA reports, US Pharmacopeia, and specialist surveys.
- 118 reports were reviewed by 4 physicians; only those with consensus agreement were included.
- Contributing factors and outcomes (death to no harm) were analyzed for 95 incidents.
Main Results:
- Adverse outcomes, including death and permanent neurologic injury, were more frequent in non-hospital-based facilities.
- Inadequate resuscitation and inconsistent physiologic monitoring (especially pulse oximetry) were linked to poor outcomes.
- Pulse oximetry use was associated with successful outcomes in hospitals but not always in non-hospital settings.
Conclusions:
- Non-hospital settings showed higher rates of adverse outcomes and inadequate resuscitation.
- Failure to use or respond to pulse oximetry, inadequate presedation evaluation, and lack of observers contributed to poor outcomes.
- Uniform guidelines, readily available resuscitation equipment, and advanced airway/resuscitation training are essential for pediatric sedation safety.
Objective:
Factors that contribute to adverse sedation events in children undergoing procedures were examined using the technique of critical incident analysis.
Methodology:
We developed a database that consists of descriptions of adverse sedation events derived from the Food and Drug Administration's adverse drug event reporting system, from the US Pharmacopeia, and from a survey of pediatric specialists. One hundred eighteen reports were reviewed for factors that may have contributed to the adverse sedation event. The outcome, ranging in severity from death to no harm, was noted. Individual reports were first examined separately by 4 physicians trained in pediatric anesthesiology, pediatric critical care medicine, or pediatric emergency medicine. Only reports for which all 4 reviewers agreed on the contributing factors and outcome were included in the final analysis.
Results:
Of the 95 incidents with consensus agreement on the contributing factors, 51 resulted in death, 9 in permanent neurologic injury, 21 in prolonged hospitalization without injury, and in 14 there was no harm. Patients receiving sedation in nonhospital-based settings compared with hospital-based settings were older and healthier. The venue of sedation was not associated with the incidence of presenting respiratory events (eg, desaturation, apnea, laryngospasm, approximately 80% in each venue) but more cardiac arrests occurred as the second (53.6% vs 14%) and third events (25% vs 7%) in nonhospital-based facilities. Inadequate resuscitation was rated as being a determinant of adverse outcome more frequently in nonhospital-based events (57.1% vs 2.3%). Death and permanent neurologic injury occurred more frequently in nonhospital-based facilities (92.8% vs 37.2%). Successful outcome (prolonged hospitalization without injury or no harm) was associated with the use of pulse oximetry compared with a lack of any documented monitoring that was associated with unsuccessful outcome (death or permanent neurologic injury). In addition, pulse oximetry monitoring of patients sedated in hospitals was uniformly associated with successful outcomes whereas in the nonhospital-based venue, 4 out of 5 suffered adverse outcomes. Adverse outcomes despite the benefit of an early warning regarding oxygenation likely reflect lack of skill in assessment and in the use of appropriate interventions, ie, a failure to rescue the patient.
Conclusions:
This study-a critical incident analysis-identifies several features associated with adverse sedation events and poor outcome. There were differences in outcomes for venue: adverse outcomes (permanent neurologic injury or death) occurred more frequently in a nonhospital-based facility, whereas successful outcomes (prolonged hospitalization or no harm) occurred more frequently in a hospital-based setting. Inadequate resuscitation was more often associated with a nonhospital-based setting. Inadequate and inconsistent physiologic monitoring (particularly failure to use or respond appropriately to pulse oximetry) was another major factor contributing to poor outcome in all venues. Other issues rated by the reviewers were: inadequate presedation medical evaluation, lack of an independent observer, medication errors, and inadequate recovery procedures. Uniform, specialty-independent guidelines for monitoring children during and after sedation are essential. Age and size-appropriate equipment and medications for resuscitation should be immediately available regardless of the location where the child is sedated. All health care providers who sedate children, regardless of practice venue, should have advanced airway assessment and management training and be skilled in the resuscitation of infants and children so that they can successfully rescue their patient should an adverse sedation event occur.