Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37397149›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in pediatrics2023

Effectiveness, quality and implementation of pain, sedation, delirium, and iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome algorithms in pediatric intensive care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ibo MacDonald, Véronique de Goumoëns, Mark Marston, Silvia Alvarado, Eva Favre, Alexia Trombert, Maria-Helena Perez, Anne-Sylvie Ramelet

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Ibo MacDonaldInstitute of Higher Education and Research in Healthcare, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Véronique de GoumoënsLa Source School of Nursing, HES-SO University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Mark MarstonInstitute of Higher Education and Research in Healthcare, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Silvia AlvaradoInstitute of Higher Education and Research in Healthcare, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Eva FavreInstitute of Higher Education and Research in Healthcare, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Alexia TrombertMedical Library, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Maria-Helena PerezDepartment Woman-Mother-Child, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Anne-Sylvie RameletInstitute of Higher Education and Research in Healthcare, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Pain, sedation, delirium, and iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome are conditions that often coexist, algorithms can be used to assist healthcare professionals in decision making. However, a comprehensive review is lacking. This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness, quality, and implementation of algorithms for the management of pain, sedation, delirium, and iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome in all pediatric intensive care settings. Methods: A literature search was conducted on November 29, 2022, in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, and Google Scholar to identify algorithms implemented in pediatric intensive care and published since 2005. Three reviewers independently screened the records for inclusion, verified and extracted data. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias using the JBI checklists, and algorithm quality was assessed using the PROFILE tool (higher % = higher quality). Meta-analyses were performed to compare algorithms to usual care on various outcomes (length of stay, duration and cumulative dose of analgesics and sedatives, length of mechanical ventilation, and incidence of withdrawal). Results: From 6,779 records, 32 studies, including 28 algorithms, were included. The majority of algorithms (68%) focused on sedation in combination with other conditions. Risk of bias was low in 28 studies. The average overall quality score of the algorithm was 54%, with 11 (39%) scoring as high quality. Four algorithms used clinical practice guidelines during development. The use of algorithms was found to be effective in reducing length of stay (intensive care and hospital), length of mechanical ventilation, duration of analgesic and sedative medications, cumulative dose of analgesics and sedatives, and incidence of withdrawal. Implementation strategies included education and distribution of materials (95%). Supportive determinants of algorithm implementation included leadership support and buy-in, staff training, and integration into electronic health records. The fidelity to algorithm varied from 8.2% to 100%. Conclusions: The review suggests that algorithm-based management of pain, sedation and withdrawal is more effective than usual care in pediatric intensive care settings. There is a need for more rigorous use of evidence in the development of algorithms and the provision of details on the implementation process. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021276053, PROSPERO [CRD42021276053].

Indexed as

algorithmdeliriumiatrogenic withdrawal syndromemeta-analysispainpediatric intensive caresedationsystematic reveiw

Identifiers

PMID37397149
PMCPMC10313131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.