Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 52, Issue 1 , Pages 35-40.e13, July 2008

Comparison of Two Methods of Pediatric Resuscitation and Critical Care Management

Presented at the 4th Annual Australasian College of Emergency Medicine's Autumn Symposium 2007, Autumn Symposium, April 2007, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.

  • Steven Lee Fineberg, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Emergency Medicine, The St. George Hospital, Kogarah, New South Wales, Australia
    • Department of Emergency Medicine, The Wollongong Hospital, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress for correspondence: Steven Lee Fineberg, MD, Department of Emergency Medicine, The Wollongong Hospital, Crown Street, Wollongong, NSW 2500, Australia; 01161-242-225-330 or 01161-400-911-396
  • ,
  • Glenn Arendts, MBBS, MMed

      Affiliations

    • Department of Emergency Medicine, The Wollongong Hospital, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.

Received 30 May 2007; received in revised form 23 September 2007; accepted 22 October 2007. published online 14 April 2008.

Study objective

We compare time to drug delivery and the incidence of dosage error between 2 different systems of medication administration: The Broselow Pediatric Emergency Tape and a standardized volume/weight-based dose reformulation of resuscitation and critical care medications (reformulated to 0.1 mL/kg).

Methods

This was a randomized crossover trial, in which volunteers (n=16) from emergency department (ED) pediatric resuscitation teams from the ED of a large, urban, teaching hospital in Australia were assigned to manage simulated (Advanced Pediatric Life Support scenario) patients. The volunteers were each presented with 3 case scenarios (brady-asystolic arrest, status epilepticus, and rapid sequence intubation requiring administration of 4, 5, and 4 medications, respectively). The order of presentation was randomized for the 2 methods. The volunteers were then asked to manage 3 case scenarios using one and then the other method (resulting in a total of 6 cases managed per participant). The dosage of each medication ordered, as well as the time to the simulated administration of that medication, was recorded for all scenarios. The expected dosages were compared with the actual dosages delivered to determine which system provided greater accuracy in medication administration. Statistical analysis was undertaken using the Wilcoxon signed rank test and McNemars test for paired proportions.

Results

Compared with the Broselow tape, the standardized volume/weight-based dose reformulation significantly reduced median time to medication delivery for all clinical scenarios (147 versus 72 seconds; 197 versus 87 seconds; 146 versus 64 seconds; P<.001). The proportion of dosing errors with Broselow tape across the 3 scenarios was greater than with volume/weight-based dosing (0.08 versus 0, 0 versus 0, and 0.08 versus 0.02, respectively).

Conclusion

Use of a standardized volume/weight-based dose reformulation method is a simple, fast, and accurate method of medication delivery for the pediatric patient that eliminates the need for memorization and/or calculation. The standardized volume/weight-based dose reformulation method performs better than the Broselow tape in speed of delivery of medications used for pediatric resuscitation and critical care without any reduction in dosing accuracy.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Supervising editor: David M. Jaffe, MD

 Author contributions: SLF conceived the study, designed the trial, obtained necessary approvals, supervised the conduct of the trial and data collection, and undertook recruitment of volunteers. GA assisted with study design and data collection, managed the data, including quality control, and provided statistical advice on study design and data analysis. SLF drafted the article, and both authors contributed to its revision. SLF takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.

 Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article, that might create any potential conflict of interest. The authors have stated that no such relationships exist. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement.

 Publication dates: Available online April 14, 2008.

 Reprints not available from the authors.

PII: S0196-0644(07)01730-1

doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.10.021

Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 52, Issue 1 , Pages 35-40.e13, July 2008