Iatrogenic Opiate Withdrawal in Pediatric Patients: Implementation of a Standardized Methadone Weaning Protocol and Withdrawal Assessment Tool

Impact of Intravenous Methadone Dosing Schedule on Iatrogenic Withdrawal Syndrome in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

OBJECTIVE

To compare median Sophia Observation withdrawal Symptoms scale (SOS) scores between -intravenous methadone dosing scheduled every 6 hours or every 8 hours for iatrogenic withdrawal -syndrome (IWS).

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective chart review evaluated patients aged 4 weeks through 18 years treated with intravenous methadone for IWS. Children admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of a tertiary care children's hospital between August 2017 and July 2021 and treated for IWS for at least 48 hours were eligible for inclusion. Methadone dosing schedules were compared, with a primary outcome of median Sophia Observation withdrawal Symptoms (SOS) score during the first 24 hours after cessation of continuous fentanyl infusion. Secondary outcomes included PICU and general pediatric unit lengths of stay, extubation failure rates, and mortality.

RESULTS

Twenty patients met inclusion criteria, with 9 in the 6-hour dosing group. There was no difference in median SOS score, extubation failure, length of stay, or mortality between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

During the first 24 hours after cessation of continuous fentanyl, there appears to be no -difference in IWS severity, as determined by bedside nurse scoring, between patients treated with -intravenous methadone every 6 hours compared with every 8 hours.

A survey of current practices in sedation, analgesia, withdrawal, and delirium management in paediatric cardiac ICUs

OBJECTIVE

To characterise the current approach to sedation, analgesia, iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome and delirium in paediatric cardiac ICUs.

DESIGN

A convenience sample survey of practitioners at institutions participating in the Pediatric Cardiac Critical Care Consortium conducted from September to December 2020.

SETTING

Paediatric cardiac ICUs.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Survey responses were received from 33 of 42 institutions contacted. Screening for pain and agitation occurs commonly and frequently. A minority of responding centres (39%) have a written analgesia management protocol/guideline. A minority (42%) of centres have a written protocol for sedation. Screening for withdrawal occurs commonly, although triggers for withdrawal screening vary. Only 42% of respondents have written protocols for withdrawal management. Screening for delirium occurs "always" in 46% of responding centres, "sometimes" in 36% of centres and "never" 18%. Nine participating centres (27%) have written protocols for delirium management.

CONCLUSIONS

Our survey identified that most responding paediatric cardiac ICUs lack a standardised approach to the management of analgesia, sedation, iatrogenic withdrawal, and delirium. Screening for pain and agitation occurs regularly, while screening for withdrawal occurs fairly frequently, and screening for delirium is notably less consistent. Only a minority of centres use written protocols or guidelines for the management of these problems. We believe that this represents an opportunity to significantly improve patient care within the paediatric cardiac ICU.

Effectiveness, quality and implementation of pain, sedation, delirium, and iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome algorithms in pediatric intensive care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Pain, sedation, delirium, and iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome are conditions that often coexist, algorithms can be used to assist healthcare professionals in decision making. However, a comprehensive review is lacking. This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness, quality, and implementation of algorithms for the management of pain, sedation, delirium, and iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome in all pediatric intensive care settings.

Methods

A literature search was conducted on November 29, 2022, in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, and Google Scholar to identify algorithms implemented in pediatric intensive care and published since 2005. Three reviewers independently screened the records for inclusion, verified and extracted data. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias using the JBI checklists, and algorithm quality was assessed using the PROFILE tool (higher % = higher quality). Meta-analyses were performed to compare algorithms to usual care on various outcomes (length of stay, duration and cumulative dose of analgesics and sedatives, length of mechanical ventilation, and incidence of withdrawal).

Results

From 6,779 records, 32 studies, including 28 algorithms, were included. The majority of algorithms (68%) focused on sedation in combination with other conditions. Risk of bias was low in 28 studies. The average overall quality score of the algorithm was 54%, with 11 (39%) scoring as high quality. Four algorithms used clinical practice guidelines during development. The use of algorithms was found to be effective in reducing length of stay (intensive care and hospital), length of mechanical ventilation, duration of analgesic and sedative medications, cumulative dose of analgesics and sedatives, and incidence of withdrawal. Implementation strategies included education and distribution of materials (95%). Supportive determinants of algorithm implementation included leadership support and buy-in, staff training, and integration into electronic health records. The fidelity to algorithm varied from 8.2% to 100%.

Conclusions

The review suggests that algorithm-based management of pain, sedation and withdrawal is more effective than usual care in pediatric intensive care settings. There is a need for more rigorous use of evidence in the development of algorithms and the provision of details on the implementation process.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021276053, PROSPERO [CRD42021276053].

Analgesia, Sedation, Paralytics, Delirium, and Iatrogenic Withdrawal

The care of the critically ill child often includes medications used for the relief of pain and anxiety. Children have key differences in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics compared with adults that should always be considered to achieve safe medication use in this population. Pain must be addressed, and sedative use should be minimized when possible. Our understanding of sedation safety is evolving, and studies have shown that minimizing exposure to multiple medications can reduce the burden of delirium and iatrogenic withdrawal.

Strategies for the Prevention and Treatment of Iatrogenic Withdrawal from Opioids and Benzodiazepines in Critically Ill Neonates, Children and Adults: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies

BACKGROUND

Critically ill patients are at high risk of iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome (IWS), due to exposure to high doses or prolonged periods of opioids and benzodiazepines.

PURPOSE

To examine pharmacological management strategies designed to prevent and/or treat IWS from opioids and/or benzodiazepines in critically ill neonates, children and adults.

METHODS

We included non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSI) and randomised controlled trials (RCTs), reporting on interventions to prevent or manage IWS in critically ill neonatal, paediatric and adult patients. Database searching included: PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane databases, TRIP, CMA Infobase and NICE evidence. Additional grey literature was examined. Study selection and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Data collected included: population, definition of opioid, benzodiazepine or mixed IWS, its assessment and management (drug or strategy, route of administration, dosage and titration), previous drug exposures and outcomes measures. Methodological quality assessment was performed by two independent reviewers using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for NRSI. A qualitative synthesis of the results is provided. For the subset of studies evaluating multifaceted protocolised care, we meta-analysed results for 4 outcomes and examined the quality of evidence using GRADE post hoc.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were eligible, including 10 NRSI and 3 RCTs; 11 of these included neonatal and paediatric patients exclusively. Eight studies evaluated multifaceted protocolised interventions, while 5 evaluated individual components of IWS management (e.g. clonidine or methadone at varying dosages, routes of administration and duration of tapering). IWS was measured using an appropriate tool in 6 studies. Ten studies reported upon occurrence of IWS, showing significant reductions (n = 4) or no differences (n = 6). Interventions failed to impact duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, and adverse effects. Impact on opioid and/or benzodiazepine total doses and duration showed no differences in 4 studies, while 3 showed opioid and benzodiazepine cumulative doses were significantly reduced by 20-35% and 32-66%, and treatment durations by 1.5-11 and 19 days, respectively. Variable effects on intervention drug exposures were found. Weaning durations were reduced by 6-12 days (n = 4) for opioids and/or methadone and by 13 days (n = 1) for benzodiazepines. In contrast, two studies using interventions centred on transition to enteral routes or longer tapering durations found significant increases in intervention drug exposures. Interventions had overall non-significant effects on additional drug requirements (except for one study). Included studies were at high risk of bias, relating to selection, detection and reporting bias.

CONCLUSION

Interventions for IWS management fail to impact duration of mechanical ventilation or ICU length of stay, while effect on occurrence of IWS and drug exposures is inconsistent. Heterogeneity in the interventions used and methodological issues, including inappropriate and/or subjective identification of IWS and bias due to study design, limited the conclusions.