The Impact of Clinical Trials Conducted by Research Networks in Pediatric Critical Care

Pediatric intensive care unit admissions network-rationale, framework and method of operation of a nationwide collaborative pediatric intensive care research network in Germany

The Pediatric Intensive Care Unit Admissions (PIA) network aims to establish a nationwide database in Germany to gather epidemiological, clinical, and outcome data on pediatric critical illness. The heterogeneity of pediatric patients in intensive care units (PICU) poses challenges in obtaining sufficient case numbers for reliable research. Multicentered approaches, such as patient registries, have proven effective in collecting large-scale data. However, Germany lacks a systematic registration system for pediatric intensive care admissions, hindering epidemiological and outcome assessments. The PIA network intends to address these gaps and provide a framework for clinical and epidemiological research in pediatric intensive care. The network will interconnect PICUs across Germany and collect structured data on diagnoses, treatment, clinical course, and short-term outcomes. It aims to identify areas for improvement in care, enable disease surveillance, and potentially serve as a quality control tool. The PIA network builds upon the existing infrastructure of the German Pediatric Surveillance Unit ESPED and utilizes digitalized data collection techniques. Participating units will complete surveys on their organizational structure and equipment. The study population includes patients aged ≥28 days admitted to participating PICUs, with a more detailed survey for cases meeting specific criteria. Data will be collected by local PIA investigators, anonymized, and entered into a central database. The data protection protocol complies with regulations and ensures patient privacy. Quarterly data checks and customized quality reports will be conducted to monitor data completeness and plausibility. The network will evaluate its performance, data collection feasibility, and data quality. Eligible investigators can submit proposals for data analyses, which will be reviewed and analyzed by trained statisticians or epidemiologists. The PIA network aims to improve pediatric intensive care medicine in Germany by providing a comprehensive understanding of critical illness, benchmarking treatment quality, and enabling disease surveillance.

Adaptive Clinical Trials in Pediatric Critical Care: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review investigates the use of adaptive designs in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in pediatric critical care.

DATA SOURCES

PICU RCTs, published between 1986 and 2020, stored in the www.PICUtrials.net database and MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and LILACS databases were searched (March 9, 2022) to identify RCTs published in 2021. PICU RCTs using adaptive designs were identified through an automated full-text screening algorithm.

STUDY SELECTION

All RCTs involving children (< 18 yr old) cared for in a PICU were included. There were no restrictions to disease cohort, intervention, or outcome. Interim monitoring by a Data and Safety Monitoring Board that was not prespecified to change the trial design or implementation of the study was not considered adaptive.

DATA EXTRACTION

We extracted the type of adaptive design, the justification for the design, and the stopping rule used. Characteristics of the trial were also extracted, and the results summarized through narrative synthesis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Sixteen of 528 PICU RCTs (3%) used adaptive designs with two types of adaptations used; group sequential design and sample size reestimation. Of the 11 trials that used a group sequential adaptive design, seven stopped early due to futility and one stopped early due to efficacy. Of the seven trials that performed a sample size reestimation, the estimated sample size decreased in three trials and increased in one trial.

CONCLUSIONS

Little evidence of the use of adaptive designs was found, with only 3% of PICU RCTs incorporating an adaptive design and only two types of adaptations used. Identifying the barriers to adoption of more complex adaptive trial designs is needed.

Designing a national pediatric critical care database: a Delphi consensus study

PURPOSE

We sought to describe the processes undertaken for the systematic selection and consensus determination of the common data elements for inclusion in a national pediatric critical care database in Canada.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre Delphi consensus study of Canadian pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) participating in the creation of a national database. Participants were PICU health care professionals, allied health professionals, caregivers, and other stakeholders. A dedicated panel group created a baseline survey of data elements based on literature, current PICU databases, and expertise in the field. The survey was then used for a Delphi iterative consensus process over three rounds, conducted from March to June 2021.

RESULTS

Of 86 invited participants, 68 (79%) engaged and agreed to participate as part of an expert panel. Panel participants were sent three rounds of the survey with response rates of 62 (91%), 61 (90%) and 55 (81%), respectively. After three rounds, 72 data elements were included from six domains, mostly reflecting clinical status and complex medical interventions received in the PICU. While race, gender, and home region were included by consensus, variables such as minority status, indigenous status, primary language, and ethnicity were not.

CONCLUSION

We present the methodological framework used to select data elements by consensus for a national pediatric critical care database, with participation from a diverse stakeholder group of experts and caregivers from all PICUs in Canada. The selected core data elements will provide standardized and synthesized data for research, benchmarking, and quality improvement initiatives of critically ill children.

A Survey of Resources and Nursing Workforce for Clinical Research Delivery in Paediatric Intensive Care Within the UK / Ireland

Introduction

Clinical research within Paediatric Intensive Care (PICU) is necessary to reduce morbidity and mortality associated within this resource-intensive environment. With UK PICUs encouraged to be research-active there was a drive to understand how centres support research delivery.

Aim

To identify the research workforce available within UK/Ireland PICUs to support clinical research delivery.

Method

An electronic survey, endorsed by the Paediatric Critical Care Society (PCCS), was designed and reported in accordance with CHERRIES guidelines. The survey was distributed by email to all UK/Ireland Nurse Managers and Medical/ Nursing Research leads, aiming for one response per site during the period of April-June 2021. Only one response per site was included in analysis.

Results

44 responses were received, representing 24/30 UK/Ireland sites (80% response rate). Responses from n = 21/30 units are included (three excluded for insufficient data). 90% (n = 19/21) units were research active, although only 52% (n = 11) had permanent research roles funded within their staffing establishment. The majority of units (n = 18, 86%) had less than two WTE research nurses. Resources were felt to be sufficient for current research delivery by 43% of units (n = 9), but this confidence diminished to 19% (n = 4) when considering their ability to support future research. The top barriers to research conduct were insufficiently funded/unfunded studies (52%; n = 11), clinical staff too busy to support research activity (52%; n = 11) and short-term/fixed-term contracts for research staff (38%; n = 8).

Conclusion

Despite the perceived importance of research and 90% of responding UK/Ireland PICUs being research active, the majority have limited resources to support research delivery. This has implications for their ability to participate in future multi-centre trials and opportunities to support the development of future medical/nursing clinical academics. Further work is required to identify optimum models of clinical research delivery.

Administrative data in pediatric critical care research-Potential, challenges, and future directions

Heterogenous patient populations with small case numbers constitute a relevant barrier to research in pediatric critical care. Prospective studies bring along logistic barriers and-if interventional-ethical concerns. Therefore, retrospective observational investigations, mainly multicenter studies or analyses of registry data, prevail in the field of pediatric critical care research. Administrative health care data represent a possible alternative to overcome small case numbers and logistic barriers. However, their current use is limited by a lack of knowledge among clinicians about the availability and characteristics of these data sets, along with required expertise in the handling of large data sets. Specifically in the field of critical care research, difficulties to assess the severity of the acute disease and estimate organ dysfunction and outcomes pose additional challenges. In contrast, trauma research has shown that classification of injury severity from administrative data can be achieved and chronic disease scores have been developed for pediatric patients, nurturing confidence that the remaining obstacles can be overcome. Despite the undoubted challenges, interdisciplinary collaboration between clinicians and methodologic experts have resulted in impactful publications from across the world. Efforts to enable the estimation of organ dysfunction and measure outcomes after critical illness are the most urgent tasks to promote the use of administrative data in critical care. Clever analysis and linking of different administrative health care data sets carry the potential to advance observational research in pediatric critical care and ultimately improve clinical care for critically ill children.

COVID-19: A Catalyst for Transforming Randomized Trials

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic incited a global clinical trial research agenda of unprecedented speed and high volume. This expedited research activity in a time of crisis produced both successes and failures that offer valuable learning opportunities for the scientific community to consider. Successes include the implementation of large adaptive and pragmatic trials as well as burgeoning efforts toward rapid data synthesis and open science principles. Conversely, notable failures include: (1) inadequate study design and execution; (2) data reversal, fraud, and retraction; and (3) research duplication and waste. Other challenges that became highlighted were the need to find unbiased designs for investigating complex, nonpharmaceutical interventions and the use of routinely collected data for outcomes assessment. This article discusses these issues juxtaposing the COVID-19 trials experience against trials in anesthesiology and other fields. These lessons may serve as a positive catalyst for transforming future clinical trial research.

Morbidity and Mortality in Critically Ill Children. II. A Qualitative Patient-Level Analysis of Pathophysiologies and Potential Therapeutic Solutions

OBJECTIVES

To describe at the individual patient level the pathophysiologic processes contributing to morbidity and mortality in PICUs and therapeutic additions and advances that could potentially prevent or reduce morbidity and mortality.

DESIGN

Qualitative content analysis of intensivists' conclusions on pathophysiologic processes and needed therapeutic advances formulated by structured medical record review.

SETTING

Eight children's hospitals affiliated with the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network.

PATIENTS

A randomly selected cohort of critically ill children with a new functional morbidity or mortality at hospital discharge. New morbidity was assessed using the Functional Status Scale and defined as worsening by two or more points in a single domain from preillness baseline.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Of 292 children, 175 (59.9%) had a new morbidity and 117 (40.1%) died. The most common pathophysiology was impaired substrate delivery (n = 158, 54.1%) manifesting as global or regional hypoxia or ischemia due to low cardiac output or cardiac arrest. Other frequent pathophysiologies were inflammation (n = 104, 35.6%) related to sepsis, respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or multiple organ dysfunction; and direct tissue injury (n = 64, 21.9%) including brain and spinal cord trauma. Chronic conditions were often noted (n = 156, 53.4%) as contributing to adverse outcomes. Drug therapies (n = 149, 51.0%) including chemotherapy, inotropes, vasoactive agents, and sedatives were the most frequently proposed needed therapeutic advances. Other frequently proposed therapies included cell regeneration (n = 115, 39.4%) mainly for treatment of neuronal injury, and improved immune and inflammatory modulation (n = 79, 27.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Low cardiac output and cardiac arrest, inflammation-related organ failures, and CNS trauma were the most common pathophysiologies leading to morbidity and mortality in PICUs. A research agenda focused on better understanding and treatment of these conditions may have high potential to directly impact patient outcomes.

Prevalence of Acute Rehabilitation for Kids in the PICU: A Canadian Multicenter Point Prevalence Study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate mobilization practices, barriers, and mobility-related adverse events in Canadian PICUs.

DESIGN

National 2-day point prevalence study.

SETTING

Thirteen PICUs across Canada.

PATIENTS

Children with a minimum 72-hour PICU length of stay on the allocated study day.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Outcomes of interest were the prevalence and nature of mobilization activities, rehabilitation resources, adverse events, and factors associated with out-of-bed mobility and therapist-provided mobility. Two PICUs (15%) had early mobilization practice guidelines, and one PICU (8%) reported a formal process for engaging families in the mobilization of patients. The prevalence of mobilization was 110 of 137 patient-days (80%). The commonest activity was out-of-bed mobility (87/137; 64% patient-days); there was no active mobilization on 46 patient-days (34%). Therapists provided mobility on 33% of patient-days. Mobility was most commonly facilitated by nurses (74% events) and family (49% events). Family participation was strongly associated with out-of-bed mobility (odds ratio 6.4; p = 0.001). Intubated, mechanically ventilated patients were mobilized out-of-bed on 18 of 50 patient-days (36%). However, the presence of an endotracheal tube, vasoactive infusions, and age greater than or equal to 3 years were independently associated with not being mobilized out-of-bed. Barriers were reported on 58 of 137 patient-days (42%), and adverse events occurred in 22 of 387 mobility events (6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Mobilization is common and safe, and the majority of children in Canadian PICUs are being mobilized out-of-bed, even when mechanically ventilated. Family engagement in PICU-based rehabilitation is increasing. This study provides encouraging evidence that common barriers can be overcome in order to safely mobilize children in PICUs.

An evidence-based review of the use of vasoactive and inotropic medications in post-operative paediatric patients after cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass from 2000 to 2020

BACKGROUND

Infants with moderate-to-severe CHD frequently undergo cardiopulmonary bypass surgery in childhood. Morbidity and mortality are highest in those who develop post-operative low cardiac output syndrome. Vasoactive and inotropic medications are mainstays of treatment for these children, despite limited evidence supporting their use.

METHODS

To help inform clinical practice, as well as the conduct of future trials, we performed a systematic review of existing literature on inotropes and vasoactives in children after cardiac surgery using the PubMed and EMBASE databases. We included studies from 2000 to 2020, and the patient population was defined as birth - 18 years of age. Two reviewers independently reviewed studies to determine final eligibility.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 37 papers. Collectively, selected studies reported on 12 different vasoactive and inotropic medications in 2856 children. Overall evidence supporting the use of these drugs in children after cardiopulmonary bypass was limited. The majority of studies were small with 30/37 (81%) enrolling less than 100 patients, 29/37 (78%) were not randomised, and safety and efficacy endpoints differed widely, limiting the ability to combine data for meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION

Vasoactive and inotropic support remain critical parts of post-operative care for children after cardiopulmonary bypass surgery. There is a paucity of data for the selection and dosing of vasoactives and inotropes for these patients. Despite the knowledge gaps that remain, numerous recent innovations create opportunities to rethink the conduct of clinical trials in this high-risk population.

Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo-a blinded randomized control trial to evaluate the safety of two strategies in critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (SUPPRESS-CHD)

BACKGROUND

Critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (CHD) are often prescribed stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding, despite the low incidence of stress ulcers and limited data on the safety and efficacy of SUP in infants. Recently, SUP has been associated with an increased incidence of hospital-acquired infections, community-acquired pneumonia, and necrotizing enterocolitis. The objective of this pilot study is to investigate the feasibility of performing a randomized controlled trial to assess the safety and efficacy of withholding SUP in infants with congenital heart disease admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit.

METHODS

A single center, prospective, double-blinded, randomized placebo-controlled pilot feasibility trial will be performed in infants with CHD admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit and anticipated to require respiratory support for > 24 h. Patients will be randomized to receive a histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) or placebo until they are discontinued from respiratory support. Randomization will be performed within 2 strata defined by admission type (medical or surgical) and age (neonate, age < 30 days, or infant, 1 month to 1 year). Allocation will be a 1:1 ratio using permuted blocks to ensure balanced allocations across the two treatment groups within each stratum. The primary outcomes include feasibility of screening, consent, timely allocation of study drug, and protocol adherence. The primary safety outcome is the rate of clinically significant upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The secondary outcomes are the difference in the relative and absolute abundance of the gut microbiota and functional microbial profiles between the two study groups. We plan to enroll 100 patients in this pilot study.

DISCUSSION

Routine use of SUP to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in infants is controversial due to a low incidence of bleeding events and concern for adverse effects. The role of SUP in infants with CHD has not been examined, and there is equipoise on the risks and benefits of withholding this therapy. In addition, this therapy has been discontinued in other neonatal populations due to the concern for hospital-acquired infections and necrotizing enterocolitis. Furthermore, exploring changes to the microbiome after exposure to SUP may highlight the mechanisms by which SUP impacts potential microbial dysbiosis of the gut and its association with hospital-acquired infections. Assessment of the feasibility of a trial of withholding SUP in critically ill infants with CHD will facilitate planning of a larger multicenter trial of safety and efficacy of SUP in this vulnerable population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03667703. Registered 12 September 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03667703?term=SUPPRESS+CHD&draw=2&rank=1 . All WHO Trial Registration Data Set Criteria are met in this manuscript.

[Scientific impact and bibliometric contextualisation of Paediatrics compared to other specialities]

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this paper is twofold. On the one hand, to identify and characterise the production, citation, impact and collaboration indicators of the Pediatrics area of the Journal Citation Reports, and on the other hand, to place the journal Anales de Pediatría in the context of the Spanish journals of another twenty areas and medical specialties.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

The sources of information used to obtain the indicators were Science Citation Index-Expanded, Journal Citation Reports, and Scimago Journal & Country Rank. A regression analysis was performed to determine the correlation between the citation and other variables.

RESULTS

Pediatrics ranked 8th in scientific production during the period 2009-2018. In citations per journal it ranks 17th, and the average citations per article approaches 27, occupying, in this case, the 18th position. Below Pediatrics are Emergency Medicine, Rehabilitation, and Primary Health Care. There are no citations for 12.47% of the articles. The average impact factor places the area in 18th place and its h index was 197, reaching 14th position, and standing above seven other areas. The percentage of works carried out with international collaboration was 17.71%, above Primary Health Care (12.88%), Oncology (16.37%), and Emergency Medicine (17.03%). Among the Spanish journals, Anales de Pediatría was the fourth most productive journal, and occupied an intermediate position in terms of the number of citations.

CONCLUSIONS

The indicators of citation and impact of the Pediatrics area tend to be above areas such as Emergency Medicine, Primary Health Care, Dentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine, and Rehabilitation. Professional practice outside large hospitals, together with poor funding, as well as the low number of clinical trials due to the ethical requirements imposed on studies with children, may be the causes that result in moderate citation and impact indicators.

Advancing Randomized Controlled Trials in Pediatric Critical Care: The Perspectives of Trialists

OBJECTIVES

Clinical research is a complex scientific and social enterprise. Our objective was to identify strategies that pediatric critical care trialists consider acceptable, feasible, and effective to improve the design and conduct randomized controlled trials in pediatric critical care.

DESIGN

Qualitative descriptive study using semistructured individual interviews.

SUBJECTS

We interviewed 26 pediatric critical care researchers from seven countries who have published a randomized controlled trial (2005-2015). We used purposive sampling to achieve diversity regarding researcher characteristics and randomized controlled trial characteristics.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Most participants (24 [92%]) were from high-income countries, eight (31%) had published more than one randomized controlled trial, 17 (65%) had published a multicenter randomized controlled trial, and eight (31%) had published a multinational randomized controlled trial. An important theme was "building communities"-groups of individuals with similar interests, shared experiences, and common values, bound by professional and personal relationships. Participants described a sense of community as a source of motivation and encouragement and as a means to larger, more rigorous trials, increasing researcher and clinician engagement and maintaining enthusiasm. Strategies to build communities stressed in-person interactions (both professional and social), capable leadership, and trust. Another important theme was "getting started." Participants highlighted the importance of formal research training and high-quality experiential learning through collaboration on other's projects, guided by effective mentorship. Also important was "working within the system"-ensuring academic credit for a range of contributions, not only for the principal investigator role. The longitudinal notion of "building on success" was also underscored as a cross-cutting theme.

CONCLUSIONS

Coordinated, deliberate actions to build community and ensure key training and practical experiences for new investigators may strengthen the research enterprise in pediatric critical care. These strategies, potentially in combination with other novel approaches, may vitalize clinical research in this field.

The institutional development award states pediatric clinical trials network: building research capacity among the rural and medically underserved

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The institutional development award (IDeA) program was created to increase the competitiveness of investigators in states with historically low success rates for National Institutes of Health (NIH) research funding applications. IDeA states have high numbers of rural and medically underserved residents with disproportionately high rates of infant mortality, obesity, and poverty. This program supports the development and expansion of research infrastructure and research activities in these states. The IDeA States Pediatric Clinical Trials Network (ISPCTN) is part of the environmental influences on child health outcomes program. Its purpose is to build research capacity within IDeA states and provide opportunities for children in IDeA states to participate in clinical trials. This review describes the current and future activities of the network.

RECENT FINDINGS

In its initial year, the ISPCTN created an online series on clinical trials, initiated participation in a study conducted by the pediatric trials network, and proposed two novel clinical trials for obese children. Capacity building and clinical trial implementation will continue in future years.

SUMMARY

The ISPCTN is uniquely poised to establish and support new pediatric clinical research programs in underserved populations, producing both short and long-term gains in the understanding of child health.

High-Quality Randomized Controlled Trials in Pediatric Critical Care: A Survey of Barriers and Facilitators

OBJECTIVES

High-quality, adequately powered, randomized controlled trials are needed to inform the care of critically ill children. Unfortunately, such evidence is not always available. Our objective was to identify barriers and facilitators of conducting high-quality randomized controlled trials in pediatric critical care, from the perspective of trialists in this field.

DESIGN

Self-administered online survey. Respondents rated the importance of barriers and effectiveness of facilitators on seven-point scales.

SETTING

Authors of 294 pediatric critical care randomized controlled trials (published 1986 to June 2015).

SUBJECTS

One hundred sixteen researchers from 25 countries participated.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Respondents reported a median (Q1, Q3) of 21 years (15, 26 yr) of experience and 41 (36%) had authored more than one randomized controlled trial. More survey respondents, compared with nonrespondents, had published more than one trial (35% vs 26%; p = 0.002) and their trials were more often cited (median citations/yr, 2.4 vs 1.5; p < 0.001). Of the barriers listed, the five most important were primarily related to lack of funding. The five facilitators perceived as most effective were protected time for research, ability to recruit participants 24 hours per day/7 days per week, conducting randomized controlled trials in collaboration with a research network, funding from government agencies specifically for randomized controlled trials in critically ill children, and academic department support for conducting randomized controlled trials. Respondent experience and country income level were associated with differences in importance ratings for eight of 41 barriers. There were fewer such differences for facilitators.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of funding and time are major barriers to conducting pediatric critical care randomized controlled trials worldwide. Although barriers varied among country income levels, the facilitators of such trials were more consistent. In addition to increased funding, respondents identified other strategies such as research networks that are within the purview of the pediatric critical care research community, to facilitate the conduct of rigorous randomized controlled trials.

The intensive care medicine clinical research agenda in paediatrics

BACKGROUND

Intensive Care Medicine set us the task of outlining a global clinical research agenda for paediatric intensive care (PIC). In line with the clinical focus of this journal, we have limited this to research that may directly influence patient care.

METHODS

Clinician researchers from PIC research networks of varying degrees of formality from around the world were invited to answer two main questions: (1) What have been the major recent advances in paediatric critical care research? (2) What are the top 10 studies for the next 10 years?

RESULTS

(1) Inclusive databases are well established in many countries. These registries allow detailed observational studies and feasibility testing of clinical trial protocols. Recent trials are larger and more valuable, and (2) most common interventions in PIC are not evidenced-based. Clinical studies for the next 10 years should address this deficit, including: ventilation techniques and interfaces; fluid, transfusion and feeding strategies; optimal targets for vital signs; multiple organ failure definitions, mechanisms and treatments; trauma, prevention and treatment; improving safety; comfort of the patient and their family; appropriate care in the face of medical complexity; defining post-PICU outcomes; and improving knowledge generation and adoption, with novel trial design and implementation strategies. The group specifically highlighted the need for research in resource-limited environments wherein mortality remains often tenfold higher than in well-resourced settings.

CONCLUSION

Paediatric intensive care research has never been healthier, but many gaps in knowledge remain. We need to close these urgently. The impact of new knowledge will be greatest in resource-limited environments.