Perspectives of Pediatric Nephrologists, Intensivists and Nurses Regarding AKI Management and Expected Outcomes
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) in critically ill children is associated with increased risk for short- and long-term adverse outcomes. Currently, there is no systematic follow-up for children who develop AKI in intensive care unit (ICU). Objective: This study aimed to assess variation regarding management, perceived importance, and follow-up of AKI in the ICU setting within and between healthcare professional (HCP) groups. Design: Anonymous, cross-sectional, web-based surveys were administered nationally to Canadian pediatric nephrologists, pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) physicians, and PICU nurses, via professional listservs. Setting: All Canadian pediatric nephrologists, PICU physicians, and nurses treating children in the ICU were eligible for the survey. Patients: N/A. Measurements: Surveys included multiple choice and Likert scale questions on current practice related to AKI management and long-term follow-up, including institutional and personal practice approaches, and perceived importance of AKI severity with different outcomes. Methods: Descriptive statistics were performed. Categorical responses were compared using Chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests; Likert scale results were compared using Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Results: Surveys were completed by 34/64 (53%) pediatric nephrologists, 46/113 (41%) PICU physicians, and 82 PICU nurses (response rate unknown). Over 65% of providers reported hemodialysis to be prescribed by nephrology; a mix of nephrology, ICU, or a shared nephrology-ICU model was reported responsible for peritoneal dialysis and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Severe hyperkalemia was the most important renal replacement therapy (RRT) indication for both nephrologists and PICU physicians (Likert scale from 0 [not important] to 10 [most important]; median = 10, 10, respectively). Nephrologists reported a lower threshold of AKI for increased mortality risk; 38% believed stage 2 AKI was the minimum compared to 17% of PICU physicians and 14% of nurses. Nephrologists were more likely than PICU physicians and nurses to recommend long-term follow-up for patients who develop any AKI during ICU stay (Likert scale from 0 [none] to 10 [all patients]; mean=6.0, 3.8, 3.7, respectively) ( P < .05). Limitations: Responses from all eligible HCPs in the country could not obtained. There may be differences in opinions between HCPs that completed the survey compared to those that did not. Additionally, the cross-sectional design of our study may not adequately reflect changes in guidelines and knowledge since survey completion, although no specific guidelines have been released in Canada since survey dissemination. Conclusions: Canadian HCP groups have variable perspectives on pediatric AKI management and follow-up. Understanding practice patterns and perspectives will help optimize pediatric AKI follow-up guideline implementation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,015 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».