Introduction
Modern healthcare systems continuously seek to improve patient outcomes by implementing various tools and systems designed to identify and respond to clinical deterioration. This is particularly vital in pediatric care, where children’s responses to illness can be subtler and progress more rapidly compared to adults. In recent years, Pediatric Track and Trigger Tools (PTTTs) and broader Pediatric Early Warning Systems (PEWS) have gained traction as proactive measures to identify and reduce clinical deterioration in hospitalized children. However, the effectiveness and validation of these systems remain a subject of debate within the medical community. This article presents a detailed analysis of a systematic review published in BMJ Open that assessed the validity and effectiveness of PTTTs and PEWS in reducing adverse outcomes for hospitalized children.
Main Body
To evaluate the existing literature on pediatric early warning systems, Trubey et al. (2019) conducted a methodical review with searches through multiple databases, including the British Nursing Index, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, and others (Trubey et al., 2019). Their search criteria involved studies that either reported on the development/validation of a PTTT or the implementation of a PEWS in pediatric units. The authors identified 36 validation studies and 30 effectiveness studies, spotlighting 27 unique PTTTs. This study is registered with the PROSPERO (registration number CRD42015015326) and is made available for re-use under the CC BY license, DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022105.
Validation Studies
The review highlighted that most validation studies were retrospective case-control studies or chart reviews. PTTTs generally demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy, particularly in retrospective case-control studies for predicting transfers to pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). However, the overall positive predictive value was consistently low, which the authors suggest could lead to alarm fatigue, a condition where the frequency of alarms causes desensitization among healthcare providers, potentially leading to missed critical alerts (Trubey et al., 2019).
Effectiveness Studies
Effectiveness studies predominantly comprised uncontrolled before-and-after studies. Some reported significant decreases in metrics like mortality and code calls. However, the authors identified methodological concerns, such as the lack of control groups and the potential influence of other changes in practice that may have occurred simultaneously with the implementation of the early warning systems.
Overall Findings
Trubey et al. (2019) concluded that there is limited evidence to support that PEWS interventions lead to reductions in clinical deterioration. The review pointed out several methodological limitations within the PTTT literature and noted the predominance of single-site studies, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. Given this limited evidence of effectiveness, the authors advise against making PTTT mandatory across all pediatric units, stating that the current evidence does not support such a widespread implementation (Trubey et al., 2019).
Challenges and Considerations
The findings of this systematic review point to several challenges in the current state of PTTTs and PEWS. One key issue is the variability in metrics used to measure adverse outcomes, which makes it difficult to compare studies and draw general conclusions. Additionally, the potential for alarm fatigue raises concerns about the practical implementation of these systems in a busy clinical setting.
Future Directions
The authors suggest that future research should focus on large-scale, multicenter studies with robust methodologies to better evaluate the effectiveness of PTTT and PEWS. This could include randomized controlled trials, which are less susceptible to confounding variables and provide a higher level of evidence.
Conclusion
The evidence base for the validation and effectiveness of pediatric early warning systems is complex and limited in certain aspects but holds potential for improving the care of hospitalized children. Further research is warranted to address the gaps identified and to develop more robust and generalizable findings that can influence clinical practice and policy decisions.
Keywords
1. Pediatric Early Warning System
2. PEWS Effectiveness
3. Pediatric Track and Trigger Tools
4. Clinical Deterioration in Children
5. Hospitalized Children Outcomes
References
1. Trubey, R., Huang, C., Lugg-Widger, F. V., et al. (2019). Validity and effectiveness of paediatric early warning systems and track and trigger tools for identifying and reducing clinical deterioration in hospitalised children: a systematic review. BMJ Open, 9(5), e022105. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022105
2. Pearson, G. A. (2008). Why children die: A pilot study 2006. England (South West, North East and West Midlands), Wales and Northern Ireland.
3. Chapman, S. M., Wray, J., Oulton, K., et al. (2016). Systematic review of paediatric track and trigger systems for hospitalised children. Resuscitation, 109, 87–109. DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.07.230
4. Lambert, V., Matthews, A., MacDonell, R., et al. (2017). Paediatric early warning systems for detecting and responding to clinical deterioration in children: a systematic review. BMJ Open, 7(3), e014497. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014497
5. Parshuram, C. S., Dryden-Palmer, K., Farrell, C., et al. (2018). Effect of a pediatric early warning system on all-cause mortality in hospitalized pediatric patients: the EPOCH randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 319(10), 1002–1012. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2018.0948