Developing Appropriateness Criteria for Pediatric Vascular Access

Author:

Ullman Amanda J.123,Chopra Vineet45,Brown Erin16,Kleidon Tricia13,Cooke Marie12,Rickard Claire M.12,Bernstein Steven J.57

Affiliation:

1. Alliance for Vascular Access Teaching and Research, Menzies Health Institute Queensland and

2. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia;

3. Queensland Children’s Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia;

4. Divisions of Hospital Medicine and

5. Patient Safety Enhancement Program and Center for Clinical Management Research, Veterans Affair Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan; and

6. Child Health Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

7. General Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan;

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To describe the methodology undertaken to provide guidance on the appropriateness, as well as inappropriateness, of vascular access device selection, characteristics, and insertion technique for pediatric patients. METHODS: The RAND Corporation–University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method was used. After definition of key terms and scope, a systematic review of the pediatric vascular access literature was undertaken. Clinical scenarios were developed to reflect the common indications for vascular access across pediatric health care. These were sectioned according to (1) device selection, (2) device characteristics, and (3) insertion technique. An interdisciplinary panel of experts (N = 14) consisting of leading experts representing diverse pediatric clinical disciplines including anesthesiology, cardiology and cardiac surgery, critical care and emergency, general surgery, hematology and oncology, hospital medicine, infectious disease, interventional radiology, pharmacology, regional pediatric hospitalist, and vascular access nursing specialties was convened. The scenarios were rated for appropriateness by the panel over 2 rounds (1 [highly inappropriate] to 9 [highly appropriate]). Round 1 ratings were completed anonymously and independently by panel members and classified into 3 levels of appropriateness: appropriate, uncertain, and inappropriate, or disagreement. For round 2, panelists met in-person to discuss the round 1 ratings and independently rerated the indications. All indications were reclassified into 3 levels of appropriateness or disagreement. CONCLUSIONS: The RAND Corporation–University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method provides a rigorous, in-depth and transparent methodology to develop the first appropriateness criteria for the selection of pediatric vascular access devices in a range of patient groups.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Subject

Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

Cited by 8 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3