Thomas E Pearson1, Meg A Frizzola2, Henry H Khine3. 1. Department of Nursing, Nemours/Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, DE. Electronic address: tpearson@nemours.org. 2. Division of Critical Care Medicine, Nemours/Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, DE. 3. Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Nemours/Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, DE.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The effect of using uncuffed endotracheal tubes in children during interfacility critical care transport has not yet been assessed. We hypothesized that many children with uncuffed endotracheal tubes experience complications leading to replacement with a cuffed tube after arrival at a tertiary pediatric care facility. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case review of all intubated patients transported by our dedicated pediatric critical care transport team to our pediatric intensive care unit over a 3-year period. The incidence of urgent reintubation was studied. RESULTS: A total of 213 children were referred for transport with an endotracheal tube in place, with 55 of those with an uncuffed endotracheal tube (25.8% of all intubated patients). Of those with uncuffed tubes, 24 patients needed their tubes replaced on an urgent basis by the medical team because of issues with ineffective ventilation (43.6% of patients with uncuffed tubes or 11.3% of all intubated patients). No cuffed tubes required replacement. CONCLUSION: Placing an uncuffed endotracheal tube in the critically ill child who is referred to tertiary pediatric care results in a significant number of these patients undergoing a repeat laryngoscopy, with all associated risks, to replace the uncuffed tube with a cuffed tube.
OBJECTIVE: The effect of using uncuffed endotracheal tubes in children during interfacility critical care transport has not yet been assessed. We hypothesized that many children with uncuffed endotracheal tubes experience complications leading to replacement with a cuffed tube after arrival at a tertiary pediatric care facility. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case review of all intubated patients transported by our dedicated pediatric critical care transport team to our pediatric intensive care unit over a 3-year period. The incidence of urgent reintubation was studied. RESULTS: A total of 213 children were referred for transport with an endotracheal tube in place, with 55 of those with an uncuffed endotracheal tube (25.8% of all intubated patients). Of those with uncuffed tubes, 24 patients needed their tubes replaced on an urgent basis by the medical team because of issues with ineffective ventilation (43.6% of patients with uncuffed tubes or 11.3% of all intubated patients). No cuffed tubes required replacement. CONCLUSION: Placing an uncuffed endotracheal tube in the critically illchild who is referred to tertiary pediatric care results in a significant number of these patients undergoing a repeat laryngoscopy, with all associated risks, to replace the uncuffed tube with a cuffed tube.