Airway topicalization in pediatric anesthesia: An international cross‐sectional study
Rattachement africain : gb, au, us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Background There is no national or international consensus or guideline on recommended dosing of lidocaine for airway topicalization in children. Doses quoted in the literature vary substantially. Aims The primary aim of the study was to ascertain current international dosing practices (mg.kg−1and concentration of solution) for lidocaine airway topicalization in children. The secondary aims included examining aftercare instructions for those receiving lidocaine airway topicalization and instances of local anesthetic systemic toxicity secondary to the use of lidocaine for airway topicalization in pediatric patients. Methods This cross‐sectional study consisted of 11–20 questions across three domains—population demographics, clinical practice, and local anesthetic systemic toxicity. It adhered to the consensus‐based checklist for reporting of survey studies. Responses were collected over 14 weeks using a combination of probability (cluster and simple random) and nonprobability (purposive, convenience and snowball) sampling. Data were analyzed based on the response rate per question with proportions expressed as percentages and nonparametric data expressed as median (interquartile range [range]) in an effort to minimize nonresponse error. No weighting of items or propensity scoring was applied. Results After initial exclusions, 1501 participants from 69 countries, across six continents, were included. Consultant anesthetists or those with an equivalent level of experience accounted for 1262/1501 (84.1%) of responses. Results showed heterogeneity in dosing and timing regimens and evidence that dosing may contribute to adverse outcomes. The maximum dose reported by participants who use lidocaine for airway topicalization as part of their normal practice was 5 mg.kg−1(4–6 mg.kg−1[0.5–50]) median (interquartile range [range]) over 2 h (1‐4 h [0–30]). Conclusion The results support the need for further research and consensus in this area, in order to provide safe provision of lidocaine airway topicalization in children. It is hoped the results of this study can support future collaborative work in this area.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Airway topicalization in pediatric anesthesia: An international cross‐sectional study
- Date Crossref
- 11/10/2023
- Éditeur
- Wiley
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
Cardiff and Vale University Health Board Department of Anaesthesia pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Health Education England pays non établi dans la noticeOrganisme public
-
Royal Hospital for Children Department of Anaesthesia pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Royal Edinburgh Hospital pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust Department of Anaesthesia pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Royal Adelaide Hospital pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Women's and Children's Hospital Department of Anaesthesia pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Ninewells Hospital Department of Anaesthesia pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Boston Children's Hospital Department of Anesthesiology pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Health Education and Improvement Wales Cardiff UK pays non établi dans la noticeInstitution
Department of Anaesthesia — Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, Health Education England et Department of Anaesthesia — Royal Hospital for Children, avec 7 autres affiliations.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.