• Amanda B Hassinger, Sudha Garimella, Brian H Wrotniak, and Jo L Freudenheim.
• 1Department of Pediatrics, State University of New York at Buffalo, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Buffalo, NY. 2Division of Critical Care, Women and Children's Hospital of Buffalo, Buffalo, NY. 3Department of Pediatrics, State University of New York at Buffalo, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Buffalo, NY. 4Division of Nephrology, Women and Children's Hospital of Buffalo, Buffalo, NY. 5Department of Pediatrics, State University of New York at Buffalo, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Buffalo, NY. 6Department of Epidemiology and Environmental Health, School of Public Health and Health Professions, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY.
• Pediatr Crit Care Me. 2016 Aug 1; 17 (8): e362-70.

ObjectivesIncreasingly prevalent in pediatric intensive care, acute kidney injury imparts significant short- and long-term consequences. Despite advances in acute kidney injury research, clinical outcomes are worsening. We surveyed pediatric critical care physicians to describe the current state of acute kidney injury diagnosis and management in critically ill children.DesignAnonymous electronic questionnaire.ParticipantsPediatric critical care physicians from academic centers, the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators network, and/or the pediatric branch of Society of Critical Care Medicine.InterventionsNone.Measurements And Main ResultsOf 201 surveys initiated, 170 surveys were more than 50% completed and included in our results. The majority of physicians (74%) diagnosed acute kidney injury using serum creatinine and urine output. Acute kidney injury guidelines or criteria were used routinely by 54% of physicians; Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss, and End stage criteria were the most commonly used. Awareness of any acute kidney injury guideline or definition was associated with five-fold higher odds of using any guideline (odds ratio, 5.22; 95% CI, 1.84-14.83) and four-fold higher odds of being dissatisfied with available acute kidney injury biomarkers (odds ratio, 4.88; 95% CI, 1.58-15.05). Less than half of respondents recognized the limitations of serum creatinine. Physicians unaware of the limitations of serum creatinine had two-fold higher odds of being unaware of newer biomarker availability (odds ratio, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.14-4.79). Novel biomarkers were available to 37.6% of physicians for routine use. Physicians with access to novel biomarkers more often practiced in larger (odds ratio, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.18-8.12) and Midwestern (odds ratio, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.47-7.78) institutions. More physicians with access to a novel biomarker reported satisfaction with current acute kidney injury diagnostics (66%) than physicians without access (48%); this finding approached significance (p = 0.07).ConclusionsHalf of PICU attending physicians surveyed are not using recent acute kidney injury guidelines or diagnostic criteria in their practice. There is a positive association between awareness and clinical use of acute kidney injury guidelines. Serum creatinine and urine output are still the primary diagnostics; novel biomarkers are frequently unavailable.

25 keywords...

hide…