Knowledge and practices of Brazilian pediatric intensivists of PALICC-2 definitions and management of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Critical care science Pub Date : 2026-08-17 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.62675/2965-2774.20260056
Ivone Maria da Rocha Meneguella, José Colleti Junior
{"title":"Knowledge and practices of Brazilian pediatric intensivists of PALICC-2 definitions and management of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome.","authors":"Ivone Maria da Rocha Meneguella, José Colleti Junior","doi":"10.62675/2965-2774.20260056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the knowledge and clinical practices of pediatric intensivists in Brazil regarding the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference 2 (PALICC-2) definitions and management of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A nationwide online survey was conducted between February and August 2025 among pediatric intensive care unit physicians. The questionnaire assessed demographics, training, knowledge of the PALICC-2 diagnostic criteria, and preferred management strategies in response to a case vignette. Responses were analyzed descriptively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 212 intensivists participated, of whom 158 completed the survey. Most respondents were female (67%), aged 31 - 40 years (50%), and had been out of school for 11 - 20 years (39%). The majority completed both general pediatrics and pediatric intensive care residency training (70%). For ventilatory management, 48.5% used a tidal volume of 4 - 6mL/kg, while 46.3% used 6 - 8mL/kg; 81% selected titration of optimal positive end-expiratory pressure; only 39% used a protective plateau pressure; 71.3% used a driving pressure limited to 15cmH2O. Analgesia strategies most frequently included neuromuscular blockade optimization (85%). In a case vignette, 88.8% correctly recognized severe pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome according to PALICC-2 criteria, and nearly all (98.9%) classified the case as severe. In the event of deterioration despite optimized conventional therapies, 87% indicated extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as their rescue strategy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Brazilian pediatric intensivists demonstrated fair knowledge of PALICC-2 definitions, though they had some concerns about recognizing pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome. Variability in management strategies underscores the need for continued dissemination of standardized guidelines and training to improve adherence and optimize outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":72721,"journal":{"name":"Critical care science","volume":"38 ","pages":"e20260056"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13518011/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.62675/2965-2774.20260056","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the knowledge and clinical practices of pediatric intensivists in Brazil regarding the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference 2 (PALICC-2) definitions and management of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Methods: A nationwide online survey was conducted between February and August 2025 among pediatric intensive care unit physicians. The questionnaire assessed demographics, training, knowledge of the PALICC-2 diagnostic criteria, and preferred management strategies in response to a case vignette. Responses were analyzed descriptively.

Results: A total of 212 intensivists participated, of whom 158 completed the survey. Most respondents were female (67%), aged 31 - 40 years (50%), and had been out of school for 11 - 20 years (39%). The majority completed both general pediatrics and pediatric intensive care residency training (70%). For ventilatory management, 48.5% used a tidal volume of 4 - 6mL/kg, while 46.3% used 6 - 8mL/kg; 81% selected titration of optimal positive end-expiratory pressure; only 39% used a protective plateau pressure; 71.3% used a driving pressure limited to 15cmH2O. Analgesia strategies most frequently included neuromuscular blockade optimization (85%). In a case vignette, 88.8% correctly recognized severe pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome according to PALICC-2 criteria, and nearly all (98.9%) classified the case as severe. In the event of deterioration despite optimized conventional therapies, 87% indicated extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as their rescue strategy.

Conclusion: Brazilian pediatric intensivists demonstrated fair knowledge of PALICC-2 definitions, though they had some concerns about recognizing pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome. Variability in management strategies underscores the need for continued dissemination of standardized guidelines and training to improve adherence and optimize outcomes.

巴西儿科重症医师对PALICC-2定义和儿科急性呼吸窘迫综合征管理的知识和实践
目的:评估巴西儿科重症医师对儿科急性肺损伤共识会议2 (PALICC-2)儿科急性呼吸窘迫综合征的定义和处理的知识和临床实践。方法:在2025年2月至8月期间,对儿科重症监护病房的医生进行了全国性的在线调查。问卷评估了人口统计、培训、对PALICC-2诊断标准的了解,以及针对病例的首选管理策略。对反应进行描述性分析。结果:共有212名重症医师参与,其中158人完成问卷调查。大多数受访者为女性(67%),年龄在31 - 40岁之间(50%),失学11 - 20年(39%)。大多数完成了普通儿科和儿科重症住院医师培训(70%)。48.5%采用潮气量4 ~ 6mL/kg, 46.3%采用潮气量6 ~ 8mL/kg;81%选择最佳呼气末正压滴定法;只有39%的人使用保护平台压力;71.3%使用的驱动压力限制在15cmH2O。最常见的镇痛策略包括神经肌肉阻断优化(85%)。在病例简介中,88.8%的人根据PALICC-2标准正确识别出严重的儿科急性呼吸窘迫综合征,几乎所有(98.9%)的人都将该病例归类为严重。尽管采用了优化的常规治疗方法,但在病情恶化的情况下,87%的患者表示体外膜氧合是他们的拯救策略。结论:巴西儿科重症医师对PALICC-2定义有相当的了解,尽管他们对儿科急性呼吸窘迫综合征的识别有一些担忧。管理策略的可变性强调了继续传播标准化指南和培训以提高依从性和优化结果的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书