ABSTRACT The objective of this study is to present the protocol of a cluster randomized clinical trial to be conducted through the TeleICU project - Qualification of Intensive Care by Telemedicine. The study will consist of a cluster randomized clinical trial, open label, in pediatric intensive care units, with an allocation ratio of 1:1, to compare the intervention group (support of Telemedicine for patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit) with a control group (pediatric intensive care unit usual care). The study proposed to select 16 pediatric intensive care units, including 100 participants per site, with a total of 1,600 participants. The intervention group will receive telerounds from Monday to Friday and will have specialists and continuing education activities available. The primary outcome measure will be the length of stay in the pediatric intensive care unit, defined as the difference between the date of discharge of the participant and the date of admission to the intensive care unit. The secondary outcomes will be mortality rate, invasive mechanical ventilation-free days, days using antibiotics, days using vasoactive drugs and days using sedoanalgesia. This study will be conducted in accordance with Resolution 466/12 of the National Health Council, with approval by the Research Ethics Committee of the institutions involved. The present study has the potential to reproduce studies on Telemedicine in intensive care and may make important contributions to care in intensive care units in Brazil and other settings. If Telemedicine shows positive clinical care results compared to conventional treatment, more pediatric patients may benefit. ClinicalTrials.gov registry: NCT05260710

RESUMO O objetivo deste estudo será apresentar o protocolo de um ensaio clínico randomizado em cluster a ser realizado por meio do projeto TeleUTI - Qualificação da Assistência em Terapia Intensiva por Telemedicina. O estudo consistirá em um ensaio clínico randomizado por cluster, open label, em unidades de terapia intensiva pediátricas, com proporção de alocação de 1:1, com o intuito de comparar o grupo de intervenção (apoio da telemedicina para os pacientes internados na unidade de terapia intensiva pediátrica) com um grupo controle (cuidados habituais da unidade de terapia intensiva pediátrica). O estudo se propõe a selecionar 16 unidades de terapia intensiva pediátricas, incluindo 100 participantes por local, com o total de 1.600 participantes. O grupo intervenção receberá telerounds de segunda-feira a sexta-feira e terá à disposição especialistas e atividades de educação continuada. O desfecho primário a ser avaliado será o tempo de permanência nas unidades de terapia intensiva pediátricas, definido pela diferença entre a data de alta do participante com a data de admissão na unidade de terapia intensiva. Os desfechos secundários serão: taxa de mortalidade; dias livres de ventilação mecânica, dias de uso de antibióticos, dias de uso de drogas vasoativas e dias de uso de sedoanalgesia. Este estudo será conduzido em conformidade com a resolução 466/12 do Conselho Nacional de Saúde, com aprovação pelo Comitê de Ética em Pesquisa das instituições hospitalares envolvidas. O trabalho tem o potencial de reproduzir estudos sobre Telemedicina em cuidados intensivos, podendo trazer contribuições importantes ao atendimento em unidades de terapia intensiva no Brasil e em outras realidades. Se a Telemedicina mostrar resultados clínicos assistenciais positivos em relação ao tratamento convencional, mais pacientes pediátricos poderão ser beneficiados. Registro ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05260710

Abstract Objective To verify the performance of the Net Promoter Score (NPS) as a tool to assess parental satisfaction in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). Methods The authors conducted an observational cross-sectional multicenter study in the PICUs of 5 hospitals in Brazil. Eligible participants were all parents or legal guardians of PICU-admitted children, aged 18 years or over. The NPS was administered together with the EMpowerment of PArents in THe Intensive Care (EMPATHIC-30), used as the gold standard, and a sociodemographic questionnaire. For analysis, the results were dichotomized into values greater than or equal to the median of the tests. The associations between the 2 tools were evaluated and the distribution of their results was compared. Results The parents or legal guardians of 78 PICU-admitted children were interviewed. Of the respondents, 85% were women and 62% were in a private hospital. The median NPS was 10 (IQR, 10-10), and the median EMPATHIC-30 score was 5.7 (IQR, 5.4-5.9). Compared with the gold standard, the NPS had a sensitivity of 100% at all cutoff points, except at cutoff 10, where the sensitivity was slightly lower (97.5%). As for specificity, NPS performance was poorer, with values ranging from 0% (NPS ≥ 5) to 47.4% (NPS = 10). Conclusions NPS proved to be a sensitive tool to assess parental satisfaction, but with poor ability to identify dissatisfied users in the sample.

Abstract Objective: to evaluate the accuracy of an antibody point-of-care lateral flow immunoassay (LFI -Wondfo Biotech Co., Guangzhou, China) in a pediatric population. Methods: children and adolescents (2 months to 18 years) with signs and symptoms suggestive of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection were prospectively investigated with nasopharyngeal RT-PCR and LFI at the emergency room. RT-PCR was performed at baseline, and LFI at the same time or scheduled for those with less than 7 days of the clinical picture. Overall accuracy, sensitivity and specificity were assessed, as well as according to the onset of symptoms (7-13 or ≥14 days) at the time of the LFI test. Results: In 175 children included, RT-PCR and LFI were positive in 51 (29.14%) and 36 (20.57%), respectively. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value was 70.6% (95%CI 56.2-82.5), 96.8% (95%CI 91.9-99.1), 90.0% (95%CI 77.2-96.0), and 88.9% (95%CI 83.9-92.5), respectively. At 7-13 and ≥14 days after the onset of symptoms, sensitivity was 60.0% (95%CI 26.2-87.8) and 73.2% (95%CI 57.1-85.8) and specificity was 97.9% (95%CI 88.7-99.9) and 96.1% (95%CI 89.0-99.2), respectively. Conclusion: Despite its high specificity, in the present study the sensitivity of LFI in children was lower (around 70%) than most reports in adults. Although a positive result is informative, a negative LFI test cannot rule out COVID-19 in children.