• Hôpital Armand-Trousseau, groupe hospitalier HUEP, UPMC, AP-HP, 26, avenue Arnold-Netter, 75012 Paris, France. Isabelle.constant@trs.aphp.fr
• Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2012 Sep 1;31(9):709-23.

IntroductionThe practice of pediatric anesthesia requires a regular update of scientific knowledge and technical skills. To provide the most adequate Continuing Medical Education programs, it is necessary to assess the practices of pediatric anesthesiologists. Thus, the objective of this survey was to draw a picture of the current clinical practices of general anesthesia in children, in France.Material And MethodsOne thousand one hundred and fifty questionnaires were given to anesthesiologists involved in pediatric cases. These questionnaires collected information on various aspects of clinical practice relative to induction, maintenance, recovery from general anaesthesia and also classical debated points such as children with Upper Respiratory Infection (URI), emergence agitation, epileptoid signs or anaesthetic management of adenoidectomy. Differences in practices between CHG (general hospital), CHU (teaching hospital), LIBERAL (private) and PSPH (semi-private) hospitals were investigated.ResultsThere were 1025 questionnaires completed. Fifty-five percent of responders worked in public hospitals (CHG and CHU); 77% had a practice that was 25% or less of pediatric cases. In children from 3 to 10 years: 72% of respondents used always premedication and two thirds performed inhalation induction in more than 50% of cases. For induction, 53% used sevoflurane (SEVO) at 7 or 8%. Respondents from LIBERAL used higher SEVO concentrations. Tracheal intubation was performed with SEVO alone (37%), SEVO and propofol (55%) and SEVO with myorelaxant (8%), 93% of respondents used a bolus of opioid. For maintenance, the majority of respondents used SEVO associated with sufentanil; desflurane and remifentanil were more frequently used in CHU. Two thirds of respondents used N(2)O. Depth of anesthesia was commonly assessed by hemodynamic changes (52%), end tidal concentration of halogenated (38%) or automated devices based on EEG (7%). In children with URI, 98% of respondents used SEVO for anesthesia. To control the airway 42% used a tracheal tube, 30% a laryngeal mask and 20% a facial mask. Emergence agitation was an important concern for two thirds of respondents, while epileptoid signs were considered as important by only 20%. Eighty-nine percent of respondents practiced anesthesia for adenoidectomy. Anesthesia was induced by inhalation of SEVO 7-8% (41%), 6% (39%) or 4% (12%), 66% put an intravenous line (less frequently in LIBERAL). 67% of the responders managed adenoidectomy without any device to control the airway (more frequently in LIBERAL), 32% administrated a bolus of opioid (less frequently in LIBERAL).DiscussionThis survey demonstrated that the practices regarding general anesthesia in children are relatively homogenous. Most of the differences appeared between LIBERAL and the others structures; the anaesthetic management for adenoidectomy illustrates these findings.Copyright © 2012 Société française d’anesthésie et de réanimation (Sfar). Published by Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.

44 keywords...

hide…