Risk Factors for Candida Infection among Children Admitted to a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit in a Tertiary Care Centre in Southern India

Background

To describe the clinical profile, risk factors, and outcomes that are associated with candida infection among critically ill children.

Patients and methods

A retrospective case-control study wherein 109 children admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) in the years between 2015 and 2017 with the growth of candida from blood, urine, endotracheal (ET) aspirate, and pus swabs were included and compared to 97 age and sex-matched controls chosen from the same time period.

Results

Of the 124 candida isolates from 109 children, 37% were from blood, 24% from urine, and 14% in pus; 40% of the isolates were from ET aspirate. Candida non-albicans types (70%) predominated with Candida tropicalis causing 50% of the infections. Risk factors for candida infection were neutropenia [OR 20.01, 95% CI (0.94–422.32)], mechanical ventilation [OR 5.97, 95% CI (2.44–14.62)], peritoneal dialysis [OR 5.81, 95% CI (1.27–26.50)], institution of amino acids [OR 5.41, 95% CI (0.85–34.13)], presence of central venous catheter [OR 3.83, 95% CI (1.59–9.19)], antibiotic use >5 days [OR 3.58, 95% CI (1.38–9.29)]. Candida Cases (95.4%) had a septic shock with acute kidney injury in 34% and had significantly lower survival than controls [72 (66%) of 109 vs. 74 (80%) of 92] (p = 0.023).

Conclusions

The rate of candida infection in our PICU was 4.2% of PICU admissions. The most common species was C. tropicalis. The independent risk factors for candida infection were neutropenia, antibiotic duration >5 days, peritoneal dialysis, amino acid administration, mechanical ventilation, and presence of a central venous catheter (CVC).

How to cite this article

Rajeshwari R, Vyasam S, Chandran J, Porwal S, Ebenezer K, Thokchom M, et al. Risk Factors for Candida Infection among Children Admitted to a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit in a Tertiary Care Centre in Southern India. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(6):717–722.

Low-Cost "Telesimulation" Training Improves Real Patient Pediatric Shock Outcomes in India

INTRODUCTION

Pediatric shock, especially septic shock, is a significant healthcare burden in low-income countries. Early recognition and management of shock in children improves patient outcome. Simulation-based education (SBE) for shock recognition and prompt management prepares interdisciplinary pediatric emergency teams in crisis management. COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on in-person simulation led us to the development of telesimulation for shock. We hypothesized that telesimulation training would improve pediatric shock recognition, process of care, and patient outcomes in both simulated and real patient settings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective quasi-experimental interrupted time series cohort study over 9 months. We conducted 40 telesimulation sessions for 76 participants in teams of 3 or 4, utilizing the video telecommunication platform (Zoom©). Trained observers recorded time-critical interventions on real patients for the pediatric emergency teams composed of residents, fellows, and nurses. Data were collected on 332 pediatric patients in shock (72% of whom were in septic shock) before, during, and after the intervention. The data included the first hour time-critical intervention checklist, patient hemodynamic status at the end of the first hour, time for the resolution of shock, and team leadership skills in the emergency room.

RESULTS

There was a significant improvement in the percent completion of tasks by the pediatric emergency team in simulated scenarios (69% in scenario 1 vs. 93% in scenario 2; p < 0.001). In real patients, completion of tasks as per time-critical steps reached 100% during and after intervention compared to the pre-intervention phase (87.5%), p < 0.05. There was a significant improvement in the first hour hemodynamic parameters of shock patients: pre (71%), during (79%), and post (87%) intervention (p < 0.007 pre vs. post). Shock reversal time reduced from 24 h pre-intervention to 6 h intervention and to 4.5 h post intervention (p < 0.002). There was also a significant improvement in leadership performance assessed by modified Concise Assessment of Leader Management (CALM) instrument during the simulated (p < 0.001) and real patient care in post intervention (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Telesimulation training is feasible and improved the process of care, time-critical interventions, leadership in both simulated and real patients and resolution of shock in real patients. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the first studies where telesimulation has shown improvement in real patient outcomes.