Infant with status epilepticus secondary to systemic lidocaine toxicity from topical application

Adverse Outcomes in Topical Lidocaine Exposure: A Pediatric Case Series From the United States National Poison Data System

To examine the clinical outcomes of topical lidocaine exposures in pediatric patients reported to the National Poison Data System (NPDS). We performed a retrospective review of the NPDS in pediatric patients with topical lidocaine toxicity from 2000 to 2020. Specific data analyzed were age, exposure chronicity, medical outcome, clinical effects, treatments, and disposition. Narrative case records were requested from poison centers. Of 37 cases identified, mean age was 5 years with age distribution of 1- to 0 days (n = 8), 1 to 24 months (n = 11), and 2-18 years (n = 18). Exposure chronicity was acute in 33 (89.2%) or chronic in 4 (10.8%). Moderate effects were seen in 25 (67.6%), major effects in 10 (27%), and 2 deaths (5.4%). The most common clinical effects included cyanosis (29.7%), seizures (18.9%), central nervous systems (CNS) depression (13.5%), drowsiness/lethargy (13.5%), and tachycardia (10.8%). The most common treatments were dilution/irrigation (35.1%), intravenous (IV) fluids (29.7%), oxygen (29.7%), methylene blue (27%), benzodiazepines (13.5%), and intubation (10.8%). Non-intensive care unit (ICU) disposition occurred for 23 patients (62.2%) and ICU admission for 14 (37.8%). Case details were requested for 37 cases, 16 cases (43.2%) were provided. Of the 2 deaths, 1 had significant cardiac history. The most common use of topical lidocaine was at home prior to a dermatologic procedure (37.5%). Topical lidocaine can induce serious outcomes resulting in ICU level care or death; however, moderate/major effects were well tolerated without comorbidities. Most patients discharged home. Given frequent use of topical, especially in outpatient settings, greater vigilance should be taken with prescriptions, instructions for use, and anticipatory guidance.

Approaches of 112 ambulance service staffers to children with burns: A survey assessment

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate the knowledge of 112 ambulance service staffers (doctors, nurses, emergency medical technicians [EMTs], and paramedics [PMs]) who were the first intervention to pediatric patients with burn injuries regarding first intervention and patient transfer.

METHODS

The study included 373 personnel working in 112 ambulance services in Ankara province. Participants were asked 17 questions to measure their knowledge of burns in children. Statistical analysis was performed with the Statistical Package for Social Sciences 21.0.

RESULTS

Of the participants, 26 (7%) were doctors, 25 (6.7%) nurses, 180 (48.3%) EMTs, and 142 (35.3%) PMs. Of the participants, 118 stated that they always calculate the burn surface area, while only five (1.3%) marked the correct choice of the Lund Browder scheme to the question by which method they calculated. One hundred twenty one personnel (32.4%) use the Parkland formula to calculate the amount of fluid to be given during transfer while only 7 (1.9%) use the Galveston formula, which is more suitable for chil-dren. Of the participants, 56 (15%) answered as lactated Ringer's solution which is the correct fluid to the question of which fluid do you give at the scene and during the transfer. One hundred fifty-three participants (41%) responded correctly to the scenario question expected to recognize inhalation damage while only 138 (37%) responded correctly as 'I do immediately intubate' to the inhalation injury described scenario question. One out of 373 (0.3%) participants marked the appropriate procedure for a patient who had a 50% scald burn during the first intervention and transfer. The rate of topical lidocaine use of participants was high (70.8%). Of the 373 participants, only 33 (8.8%) thought themselves competent for first aid and transfer of children with burns. If training on the subject was held, 333 personnel (89.3%) wanted to participate.

CONCLUSION

It is expected that the knowledge of 112 ambulance services who see pediatric burn patients first, perform the first intervention, and provide transfer would be suitable. However, our questionnaire shows that these personnel have insufficient knowledge and need to be trained.