Use of a Rubric for Pediatric Emergency Medicine Fellowship Application Review

BACKGROUND

There is a need to review a large number of applications for pediatric emergency medicine fellowship in a holistic and systemic, unbiased manner. There exists a need to restructure the application process. We sought to develop and implement a rubric screening rubric for initial evaluation of pediatric emergency medicine fellowship applications that avoided traditionally used metrics that may be biased against racially underrepresented groups who are historically excluded from medicine.

METHODS

An interactive process was used by key program leadership with review of prior literature and input from Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity departmental chair to develop a holistic screening rubric with consensus reached around key factors that aligned with our fellowship program mission. All applications were reviewed with the rubric by the program director or the associate program director. A subset of applications being considered for review were additionally scored by members of the fellowship selection committee.

RESULTS

Numerical scores ranged from 2 to 14, with the maximum potential score being 14. Seventy percent of those applicants invited for interview scored 9 or higher. Reliability of scores between the program director and the associate program director was high (intraclass coefficient, 0.89); however, reliability between the program director or associate program director and the selection committee members was low to moderate (intraclass coefficient, 0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

Developmental and use of a rubric screening allowed our institution to reflect on our priorities, as well as avoid potential bias. The use of the tool allowed us to communicate about applications in an objective and consistent manner. As we continue to iterate on the rubric, we hope to incorporate additional criteria to better identify highly qualified applicants who may otherwise be overlooked in a traditional screening process and gain familiarity in reviewers use.

Pathogen-Specific Effects of Probiotics in Children With Acute Gastroenteritis Seeking Emergency Care: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

It is unknown if probiotics exert pathogen-specific effects in children with diarrhea secondary to acute gastroenteritis.

METHODS

Analysis of patient-level data from 2 multicenter randomized, placebo controlled trials conducted in pediatric emergency departments in Canada and the United States. Participants were 3-48 months with >3 diarrheal episodes in the preceding 24 hours and were symptomatic for <72 hours and <7 days in the Canadian and US studies, respectively. Participants received either placebo or a probiotic preparation (Canada-Lactobacillus rhamnosus R0011/Lactobacillus helveticus R0052; US-L. rhamnosus GG). The primary outcome was post-intervention moderate-to-severe disease (ie, ≥9 on the Modified Vesikari Scale [MVS] score).

RESULTS

Pathogens were identified in specimens from 59.3% of children (928/1565). No pathogen groups were less likely to experience an MVS score ≥9 based on treatment allocation (test for interaction = 0.35). No differences between groups were identified for adenovirus (adjusted relative risk [aRR]: 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI]: .62, 3.23), norovirus (aRR: 0.98; 95% CI: .56, 1.74), rotavirus (aRR: 0.86; 95% CI: .43, 1.71) or bacteria (aRR: 1.19; 95% CI: .41, 3.43). At pathogen-group and among individual pathogens there were no differences in diarrhea duration or the total number of diarrheal stools between treatment groups, regardless of intervention allocation or among probiotic sub-groups. Among adenovirus-infected children, those administered the L. rhamnosus R0011/L. helveticus R0052 product experienced fewer diarrheal episodes (aRR: 0.65; 95% CI: .47, .90).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither probiotic product resulted in less severe disease compared to placebo across a range of the most common etiologic pathogens. The preponderance of evidence does not support the notion that there are pathogen specific benefits associated with probiotic use in children with acute gastroenteritis.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT01773967 and NCT01853124.

Lack of Association of Household Income and Acute Gastroenteritis Disease Severity in Young Children: A Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To determine if low household income is associated with disease severity following emergency department (ED) discharge in children with acute gastroenteritis (AGE).

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis employing data collected in 10 US-based tertiary-care, pediatric EDs between 2014 and 2017. Participants were aged 3 to 48 months and presented for care due to AGE. Income status was defined based on 1) home ZIP Code median annual home income and 2) percentage of home ZIP Code households below the poverty threshold. The primary outcome was moderate-to-severe AGE, defined by a post-ED visit Modified Vesikari Scale (MVS) score ≥9. Secondary outcomes included in-person revisits, revisits with intravenous rehydration, hospitalization, and etiologic pathogens.

RESULTS

About 943 (97%) participants with a median age of 17 months (interquartile range 10, 28) completed follow-up. Post-ED visit MVS scores were lower for the lowest household income group (adjusted: -0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.13, -0.07). Odds of experiencing an MVS score ≥9 did not differ between groups (adjusted odds ratio: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.54, 1.52). No difference in the post-ED visit MVS score or the proportion of participants with scores ≥9 was observed using the national poverty threshold definition. For both income definitions, there were no differences in terms of revisits following discharge, hospitalizations, and intravenous rehydration. Bacterial enteropathogens were more commonly identified in the lowest socioeconomic group using both definitions.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower household income was not associated with increased disease severity or resource use. Economic disparities do not appear to result in differences in the disease course of children with AGE seeking ED care.

Controversies in rapid sequence intubation in children

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Rapid sequence intubation is the method of choice for intubation of the emergency department patient. The purpose of the present review is to address several controversies pertaining to emergency department rapid sequence intubation of children.

RECENT FINDINGS

The topics covered in this review include the determination of the appropriate clinician to perform emergency department intubation, the use of atropine and lidocaine as premedications, the choice of sedative agents depending upon the clinical scenario, and the choice of neuromuscular blockade agent. Concerning these topics: The literature supports that emergency department physicians, with appropriate training, successfully perform intubation in most patients. Limited data exist to determine the appropriate use of atropine and lidocaine for rapid sequence intubation. Etomidate has clearly become a preferred sedative for rapid sequence intubation with a low risk of cardiovascular side effects. Thiopental and propofol may more readily provide adequate sedation as compared with etomidate but both have the potential to reduce blood pressure. Succinylcholine arguably remains the preferred neuromuscular blockade agent for rapid sequence intubation in most children. The side effects of succinylcholine occur in relatively predictable circumstances. Rocuronium is a commonly used nondepolarizing paralytic agent but its prolonged duration of action must be weighed against the risk of side effects associated with succinylcholine.

SUMMARY

Though more research is needed, the available data allow for the development of protocols that will result in a rational, scenario-based approach to rapid sequence intubation in children.