Bringing Pediatric Chronic Critical Illness Into Acute Focus
Robert J. Graham
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.1816
2024-03-16
JAMA Network Open
Abstract:Implicit in its name, pediatric critical care medicine focuses on acute stabilization and intensive management for children. Although this description is certainly accurate, clinicians and families are increasingly aware of the intersection with complex, chronic pediatric illness. 1 ,2 The spectrum of chronic disease among children spans all ages; origins range from congenital to acquired conditions and encompass those with static, slowly resolving, and progressive decreasing trajectories. However, heterogeneity in underlying conditions and the associated vulnerabilities make categorization, prediction modeling, research, bedside care, and coordination of family support challenging. Nelson et al 3 present findings of an 18-year, retrospective, population-based study of children with severe neurologic impairment (SNI) and pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) use and their long-term mortality. Of the 27 731 children in Ontario, Canada, with a preexisting SNI between 2002 and 2019, 4774 (17.2%) experienced at least 1 critical illness episode (CIE), which is consistent with historic use patterns 4 ; 1728 (36.2%) of those had recurrent PICU-CIEs within a short interval of 2.5 months (IQR, 0.3-11.3 months) from their reference PICU discharge. Overall survival was 90% at 1 year after discharge and 79% at 15 years. Mortality risk plateaued after 24 months but was higher, not surprisingly, among those with repeated CIEs and those younger than 1 year of age. Multivariate analysis identified that children with SNI and associated nonneurologic complex chronic conditions (CCCs) and/or medical technology dependence were at highest risks. Despite the methodological limitations of administrative database reviews and the limited scope of outcomes acknowledged by Nelson and colleagues, 3 the sheer number of children with SNI identified and their long-term survival rate, which is likely higher than most would assume, supports more rigorous, directed investigations to evaluate children with SNI and the broader population with CCCs. Continued emphasis on the intersection of acute and chronic care will allow for evidence-based advancements and a possible reframing of the care paradigm. In the near term, a multidisciplinary bedside team caring for the individual child with SNI might ask: what is the child's pre-PICU baseline, what will life after the PICU look like for this patient and their family, have we established a new health status, and what is the recovery trajectory? In the long term, the findings of Nelson et al 3 should be considered in the context of overall PICU outcomes as well as health services models. There is a clear need to look beyond survival, shortened length of stay, and reduction in readmission as markers of success. In fact, there is recognition that commonly used outcome measures may lack sensitivity and perhaps relevance in certain domains for individuals with antecedent disabilities. 5 The heterogeneity among the SNI cohort (eg, acquired injury from stroke, metabolic disorders, or epilepsy syndromes) and, certainly, the broader population with CCCs (eg, children with complex congenital heart disease, primary oncologic diagnoses, or acquired injuries) create challenges for study design and contribute to lengthy study duration but warrant further evaluation as we assist families with informed decision-making. Referencing "natural history" is also increasingly problematic; refinement of acute interventions and application of long-term technology support, novel surgical techniques (eg, endovascular approaches for congenital cerebral vascular lesions), and condition-specific therapies (eg, gene-targeted and replacement therapies) are altering outcomes. Ultimately, acknowledging and understanding the needs and outcomes, short and long term, of children with SNI and other CCCs are essential to improve our care models. Identifying the factors associated with hospital and PICU readmission will help clinicians and families devise contingency plans as well as advocate for home-based supports for those with increasing vulnerabilities and complex technology support. Within the PICU, programmatic adaptations could be considered to optimize communication, continuity, and partnership with families of children with CCCs, recognizing that they are a resource for their child and a conduit to specialists for their child's condition. Such efforts may mitigate complications, for which patients with CCCs are known to be at risk, and improve the family's lived experience. 6 ,7 Albeit indirectly, the long-term survival identified in the current study illustrates the need for robust outpatient services (eg, therapies, schools, adaptive technologies, and equity in access) for the population of patients with CCCs with or without SNI. One can also anticipate that this aging cohort of pediatric -Abstract Truncated-
medicine, general & internal