A Core Outcome Set for Pediatric Critical Care∗

Ericka L. Fink; Aline B. Maddux; Neethi Pinto; Samuel Sorenson; Daniel Notterman; J. Michael Dean; Joseph A. Carcillo; Robert A. Berg; Athena Zuppa; Murray M. Pollack; Kathleen L. Meert; Mark W. Hall; Anil Sapru; Patrick S. Mcquillen; Peter M. Mourani; David Wessel; Deborah Amey; Andrew Argent; Werther Brunow De Carvalho; Warwick Butt; Karen Choong; Martha A.Q. Curley; Maria Del Pilar Arias Lopez; Demet Demirkol; Ruth Grosskreuz; Amy J. Houtrow; Hennie Knoester; Jan Hau Lee; Debbie Long; Joseph C. Manning; Brenda Morrow; Jhuma Sankar; Beth S. Slomine; McKenna Smith; Lenora M. Olson; R. Scott Watson

doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000004660

A Core Outcome Set for Pediatric Critical Care∗

Ericka L. Fink, Aline B. Maddux, Neethi Pinto, Samuel Sorenson, Daniel Notterman, J. Michael Dean, Joseph A. Carcillo, Robert A. Berg, Athena Zuppa, Murray M. Pollack, Kathleen L. Meert, Mark W. Hall, Anil Sapru, Patrick S. Mcquillen, Peter M. Mourani, David Wessel, Deborah Amey, Andrew Argent, Werther Brunow De Carvalho, Warwick ButtKaren Choong, Martha A.Q. Curley, Maria Del Pilar Arias Lopez, Demet Demirkol, Ruth Grosskreuz, Amy J. Houtrow, Hennie Knoester, Jan Hau Lee, Debbie Long, Joseph C. Manning, Brenda Morrow, Jhuma Sankar, Beth S. Slomine, McKenna Smith, Lenora M. Olson, R. Scott Watson

Kennedy Krieger Institute

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objectives: More children are surviving critical illness but are at risk of residual or new health conditions. An evidence-informed and stakeholder-recommended core outcome set is lacking for pediatric critical care outcomes. Our objective was to create a multinational, multistakeholder-recommended pediatric critical care core outcome set for inclusion in clinical and research programs. Design: A two-round modified Delphi electronic survey was conducted with 333 invited research, clinical, and family/advocate stakeholders. Stakeholders completing the first round were invited to participate in the second. Outcomes scoring greater than 69% "critical" and less than 15% "not important" advanced to round 2 with write-in outcomes considered. The Steering Committee held a virtual consensus conference to determine the final components. Setting: Multinational survey. Patients: Stakeholder participants from six continents representing clinicians, researchers, and family/advocates. Measurements and Main Results: Overall response rates were 75% and 82% for each round. Participants voted on seven Global Domains and 45 Specific Outcomes in round 1, and six Global Domains and 30 Specific Outcomes in round 2. Using overall (three stakeholder groups combined) results, consensus was defined as outcomes scoring greater than 90% "critical" and less than 15% "not important" and were included in the final PICU core outcome set: Four Global Domains (Cognitive, Emotional, Physical, and Overall Health) and four Specific Outcomes (Child Health-Related Quality of Life, Pain, Survival, and Communication). Families (n = 21) suggested additional critically important outcomes that did not meet consensus, which were included in the PICU core outcome set-extended. Conclusions: The PICU core outcome set and PICU core outcome set-extended are multistakeholder-recommended resources for clinical and research programs that seek to improve outcomes for children with critical illness and their families.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	1819-1828
Number of pages	10
Journal	Critical care medicine
Volume	48
Issue number	12
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000004660
State	Published - Dec 1 2020

Keywords

child
critical care
family
outcome assessment
postintensive care syndrome

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Access to Document

10.1097/CCM.0000000000004660

Cite this

Fink, E. L., Maddux, A. B., Pinto, N., Sorenson, S., Notterman, D., Dean, J. M., Carcillo, J. A., Berg, R. A., Zuppa, A., Pollack, M. M., Meert, K. L., Hall, M. W., Sapru, A., Mcquillen, P. S., Mourani, P. M., Wessel, D., Amey, D., Argent, A., Brunow De Carvalho, W., ... Watson, R. S. (2020). A Core Outcome Set for Pediatric Critical Care∗. Critical care medicine, 48(12), 1819-1828. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000004660

Fink, EL, Maddux, AB, Pinto, N, Sorenson, S, Notterman, D, Dean, JM, Carcillo, JA, Berg, RA, Zuppa, A, Pollack, MM, Meert, KL, Hall, MW, Sapru, A, Mcquillen, PS, Mourani, PM, Wessel, D, Amey, D, Argent, A, Brunow De Carvalho, W, Butt, W, Choong, K, Curley, MAQ, Del Pilar Arias Lopez, M, Demirkol, D, Grosskreuz, R, Houtrow, AJ, Knoester, H, Lee, JH, Long, D, Manning, JC, Morrow, B, Sankar, J, Slomine, BS, Smith, M, Olson, LM & Watson, RS 2020, 'A Core Outcome Set for Pediatric Critical Care∗', Critical care medicine, vol. 48, no. 12, pp. 1819-1828. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000004660

@article{e346fe6ffa844f849a1e7069ad1d5c41,

title = "A Core Outcome Set for Pediatric Critical Care∗",

abstract = "Objectives: More children are surviving critical illness but are at risk of residual or new health conditions. An evidence-informed and stakeholder-recommended core outcome set is lacking for pediatric critical care outcomes. Our objective was to create a multinational, multistakeholder-recommended pediatric critical care core outcome set for inclusion in clinical and research programs. Design: A two-round modified Delphi electronic survey was conducted with 333 invited research, clinical, and family/advocate stakeholders. Stakeholders completing the first round were invited to participate in the second. Outcomes scoring greater than 69% {"}critical{"} and less than 15% {"}not important{"} advanced to round 2 with write-in outcomes considered. The Steering Committee held a virtual consensus conference to determine the final components. Setting: Multinational survey. Patients: Stakeholder participants from six continents representing clinicians, researchers, and family/advocates. Measurements and Main Results: Overall response rates were 75% and 82% for each round. Participants voted on seven Global Domains and 45 Specific Outcomes in round 1, and six Global Domains and 30 Specific Outcomes in round 2. Using overall (three stakeholder groups combined) results, consensus was defined as outcomes scoring greater than 90% {"}critical{"} and less than 15% {"}not important{"} and were included in the final PICU core outcome set: Four Global Domains (Cognitive, Emotional, Physical, and Overall Health) and four Specific Outcomes (Child Health-Related Quality of Life, Pain, Survival, and Communication). Families (n = 21) suggested additional critically important outcomes that did not meet consensus, which were included in the PICU core outcome set-extended. Conclusions: The PICU core outcome set and PICU core outcome set-extended are multistakeholder-recommended resources for clinical and research programs that seek to improve outcomes for children with critical illness and their families.",

keywords = "child, critical care, family, outcome assessment, postintensive care syndrome",

author = "Fink, {Ericka L.} and Maddux, {Aline B.} and Neethi Pinto and Samuel Sorenson and Daniel Notterman and Dean, {J. Michael} and Carcillo, {Joseph A.} and Berg, {Robert A.} and Athena Zuppa and Pollack, {Murray M.} and Meert, {Kathleen L.} and Hall, {Mark W.} and Anil Sapru and Mcquillen, {Patrick S.} and Mourani, {Peter M.} and David Wessel and Deborah Amey and Andrew Argent and {Brunow De Carvalho}, Werther and Warwick Butt and Karen Choong and Curley, {Martha A.Q.} and {Del Pilar Arias Lopez}, Maria and Demet Demirkol and Ruth Grosskreuz and Houtrow, {Amy J.} and Hennie Knoester and Lee, {Jan Hau} and Debbie Long and Manning, {Joseph C.} and Brenda Morrow and Jhuma Sankar and Slomine, {Beth S.} and McKenna Smith and Olson, {Lenora M.} and Watson, {R. Scott}",

year = "2020",

month = dec,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1097/CCM.0000000000004660",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "48",

pages = "1819--1828",

journal = "Critical care medicine",

issn = "0090-3493",

publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",

number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Core Outcome Set for Pediatric Critical Care∗

AU - Fink, Ericka L.

AU - Maddux, Aline B.

AU - Pinto, Neethi

AU - Sorenson, Samuel

AU - Notterman, Daniel

AU - Dean, J. Michael

AU - Carcillo, Joseph A.

AU - Berg, Robert A.

AU - Zuppa, Athena

AU - Pollack, Murray M.

AU - Meert, Kathleen L.

AU - Hall, Mark W.

AU - Sapru, Anil

AU - Mcquillen, Patrick S.

AU - Mourani, Peter M.

AU - Wessel, David

AU - Amey, Deborah

AU - Argent, Andrew

AU - Brunow De Carvalho, Werther

AU - Butt, Warwick

AU - Choong, Karen

AU - Curley, Martha A.Q.

AU - Del Pilar Arias Lopez, Maria

AU - Demirkol, Demet

AU - Grosskreuz, Ruth

AU - Houtrow, Amy J.

AU - Knoester, Hennie

AU - Lee, Jan Hau

AU - Long, Debbie

AU - Manning, Joseph C.

AU - Morrow, Brenda

AU - Sankar, Jhuma

AU - Slomine, Beth S.

AU - Smith, McKenna

AU - Olson, Lenora M.

AU - Watson, R. Scott

PY - 2020/12/1

Y1 - 2020/12/1

N2 - Objectives: More children are surviving critical illness but are at risk of residual or new health conditions. An evidence-informed and stakeholder-recommended core outcome set is lacking for pediatric critical care outcomes. Our objective was to create a multinational, multistakeholder-recommended pediatric critical care core outcome set for inclusion in clinical and research programs. Design: A two-round modified Delphi electronic survey was conducted with 333 invited research, clinical, and family/advocate stakeholders. Stakeholders completing the first round were invited to participate in the second. Outcomes scoring greater than 69% "critical" and less than 15% "not important" advanced to round 2 with write-in outcomes considered. The Steering Committee held a virtual consensus conference to determine the final components. Setting: Multinational survey. Patients: Stakeholder participants from six continents representing clinicians, researchers, and family/advocates. Measurements and Main Results: Overall response rates were 75% and 82% for each round. Participants voted on seven Global Domains and 45 Specific Outcomes in round 1, and six Global Domains and 30 Specific Outcomes in round 2. Using overall (three stakeholder groups combined) results, consensus was defined as outcomes scoring greater than 90% "critical" and less than 15% "not important" and were included in the final PICU core outcome set: Four Global Domains (Cognitive, Emotional, Physical, and Overall Health) and four Specific Outcomes (Child Health-Related Quality of Life, Pain, Survival, and Communication). Families (n = 21) suggested additional critically important outcomes that did not meet consensus, which were included in the PICU core outcome set-extended. Conclusions: The PICU core outcome set and PICU core outcome set-extended are multistakeholder-recommended resources for clinical and research programs that seek to improve outcomes for children with critical illness and their families.

AB - Objectives: More children are surviving critical illness but are at risk of residual or new health conditions. An evidence-informed and stakeholder-recommended core outcome set is lacking for pediatric critical care outcomes. Our objective was to create a multinational, multistakeholder-recommended pediatric critical care core outcome set for inclusion in clinical and research programs. Design: A two-round modified Delphi electronic survey was conducted with 333 invited research, clinical, and family/advocate stakeholders. Stakeholders completing the first round were invited to participate in the second. Outcomes scoring greater than 69% "critical" and less than 15% "not important" advanced to round 2 with write-in outcomes considered. The Steering Committee held a virtual consensus conference to determine the final components. Setting: Multinational survey. Patients: Stakeholder participants from six continents representing clinicians, researchers, and family/advocates. Measurements and Main Results: Overall response rates were 75% and 82% for each round. Participants voted on seven Global Domains and 45 Specific Outcomes in round 1, and six Global Domains and 30 Specific Outcomes in round 2. Using overall (three stakeholder groups combined) results, consensus was defined as outcomes scoring greater than 90% "critical" and less than 15% "not important" and were included in the final PICU core outcome set: Four Global Domains (Cognitive, Emotional, Physical, and Overall Health) and four Specific Outcomes (Child Health-Related Quality of Life, Pain, Survival, and Communication). Families (n = 21) suggested additional critically important outcomes that did not meet consensus, which were included in the PICU core outcome set-extended. Conclusions: The PICU core outcome set and PICU core outcome set-extended are multistakeholder-recommended resources for clinical and research programs that seek to improve outcomes for children with critical illness and their families.

KW - child

KW - critical care

KW - family

KW - outcome assessment

KW - postintensive care syndrome

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85097004323&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85097004323&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004660

DO - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004660

M3 - Article

C2 - 33048905

AN - SCOPUS:85097004323

SN - 0090-3493

VL - 48

SP - 1819

EP - 1828

JO - Critical care medicine

JF - Critical care medicine

IS - 12

ER -

A Core Outcome Set for Pediatric Critical Care∗

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this