Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objectives: Nitrous oxide (NO) is an inhaled analgesic/ anxiolytic gas with evidence supporting its safety and efficacy for distressing procedures in children. Despite this, its use is not consistent across Canadian pediatric emergency departments (EDs). We aimed to characterize a) physicians' knowledge and practices with NO and b) site-specific NO protocols in Canadian pediatric EDs to help optimize its use nationally.
Methods: This cross-sectional survey was distributed to physician members of Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC) in early 2021. Survey items addressed practice patterns, clinician comfort, and perceived barriers/ facilitators to use. Further, a representative from each ED completed a site-specific inventory of NO policies and procedures.
Results: NO was available in 40.0% of 15 pediatric EDs, with 83.3% of these sites having written policies in place. Of 230 distributed surveys, 67.8% were completed with mean (SD) attending experience of 14.7 (8.6) years and 70.1% having pediatric emergency subspecialty training. Of the 156 respondents, 48.7% used NO in their clinical practice. The most common indications for use were digit fracture/ dislocation reduction (69.7%), wound closure (60.5%), and incision & drainage (59.2%). Commonly perceived facilitators were NO equipment availability (73.0% of 156) and previous clinical experience (71.7% of 156). Of the 51.3% of physicians who reported not using NO, 93.7% did not have availability at their site; importantly, the majority indicated a desire to acquire access. They identified concerns about ventilation/ scavenging systems (71.2% of 80) and unfamiliarity with equipment (52.5% of 80) as the most common barriers to use.
Conclusions: Despite evidence to support its use, only half of Canadian pediatric ED physicians surveyed use NO in their clinical practice for treating procedure-related pain and distress. Increased availability of NO equipment, protocols, and training may improve clinicians' abilities to better manage pediatric acute pain and distress in the ED.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43678-023-00602-2 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!