Pediatric Critical Care Medicine

Association of Organ Dysfunction Scores and Functional Outcomes Following Pediatric Critical Illness Objectives: Short-term and long-term morbidity and mortality are common following pediatric critical illness. Severe organ dysfunction is associated with significant in-hospital mortality in critically ill children; however, the performance of pediatric organ dysfunction scores as predictors of functional outcomes after critical illness has not been previously assessed. Design: Secondary analysis of a prospective observational cohort. Setting: A multidisciplinary, tertiary, academic PICU. Patients: Patients less than or equal to 18 years old admitted between June 2012 and August 2012. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: The maximum pediatric Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction-2 scores during admission were calculated. The Functional Status Scale score was obtained at baseline, 6 months and 3 years following discharge. New morbidity was defined as a change in Functional Status Scale greater than or equal to 3 points from baseline. The performance of organ dysfunction scores at discriminating new morbidity or mortality at 6 months and 3 years was measured using the area under the curve. Seventy-three patients met inclusion criteria. Fourteen percent had new morbidity or mortality at 6 months and 23% at 3 years. The performance of the maximum pediatric Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction-2 scores at discriminating new morbidity or mortality was excellent at 6 months (areas under the curves 0.9 and 0.88, respectively) and good at 3 years (0.82 and 0.79, respectively). Conclusions: Severity of organ dysfunction is associated with longitudinal change in functional status and short-term and long-term development of new morbidity and mortality. Maximum pediatric Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction-2 scores during critical illness have good to excellent performance at predicting new morbidity or mortality up to 3 years after critical illness. Use of these pediatric organ dysfunction scores may be helpful for prognostication of longitudinal functional outcomes in critically ill children. All authors conceptualized, designed, analyzed, drafted the article for important intellectual content, and collected the data. The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest. For information regarding this article, E-mail: travis.matics@advocatehealth.com ©2019The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies

The Inadequate Oxygen Delivery Index and Low Cardiac Output Syndrome Score As predictors of Adverse Events Associated With Low Cardiac Output Syndrome Early After Cardiac Bypass Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of two scoring systems, the inadequate oxygen delivery index, a risk analytics algorithm (Etiometry, Boston, MA) and the Low Cardiac Output Syndrome Score, in predicting adverse events recognized as indicative of low cardiac output syndrome within 72 hours of surgery. Design: A retrospective observational pair-matched study. Setting: Tertiary pediatric cardiac ICU. Patients: Children undergoing cardiac bypass for congenital heart defects. Cases experienced an adverse event linked to low cardiac output syndrome in the 72 hours following surgery (extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, renal replacement therapy, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and necrotizing enterocolitis) and were matched with a control patient on criteria of procedure, diagnosis, and age who experienced no such event. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Of a total 536 bypass operations in the study period, 38 patients experienced one of the defined events. Twenty-eight cases were included in the study after removing patients who suffered an event after 72 hours or who had insufficient data. Clinical and laboratory data were collected to derive scores for the first 12 hours after surgery. The inadequate oxygen delivery index was calculated by Etiometry using vital signs and laboratory data. A modified Low Cardiac Output Syndrome Score was calculated from clinical and therapeutic markers. The mean inadequate oxygen delivery and modified Low Cardiac Output Syndrome Score were compared within each matched pair using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Inadequate oxygen delivery correctly differentiated adverse events in 13 of 28 matched pairs, with no evidence of inadequate oxygen delivery being higher in cases (p = 0.71). Modified Low Cardiac Output Syndrome Score correctly differentiated adverse events in 23 of 28 matched pairs, with strong evidence of a raised score in low cardiac output syndrome cases (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Although inadequate oxygen delivery is an Food and Drug Administration approved indicator of risk for low mixed venous oxygen saturation, early postoperative average values were not linked with medium-term adverse events. The indicators included in the modified Low Cardiac Output Syndrome Score had a much stronger association with the specified adverse events. This work was undertaken at Great Ormond Street Hospital/UCL Institute of Child Health, which received a proportion of funding from the Department of Health's National Institute of Health Research Biomedical Research Centre's funding scheme. Drs. Ray and Peters' institutions received funding from Great Ormond Street Hospital Children's Charity (GOSHCC). Dr. Peters received funding from Faron pharmaceuticals (advisory board) and Therakind. Drs. Peters and Brown received support for article research from GOSHCC. Dr. Brown received other support from GOSHCC PICU infrastructure grant supporting Libby Rogers. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest. For information regarding this article, E-mail: samiran.ray@gosh.nhs.uk ©2019The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies

Decision-Making About Intracranial Pressure Monitor Placement in Children With Traumatic Brain Injury Objectives: Little is known about how clinicians make the complex decision regarding whether to place an intracranial pressure monitor in children with traumatic brain injury. The objective of this study was to identify the decisional needs of multidisciplinary clinician stakeholders. Design: Semi-structured qualitative interviews with clinicians who regularly care for children with traumatic brain injury. Setting: One U.S. level I pediatric trauma center. Subjects: Twenty-eight clinicians including 17 ICU nurses, advanced practice providers, and physicians and 11 pediatric surgeons and neurosurgeons interviewed between August 2017 and February 2018. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Participants had a mean age of 43 years (range, 30–66 yr), mean experience of 10 years (range, 0–30 yr), were 46% female (13/28), and 96% white (27/28). A novel conceptual model emerged that related the difficulty of the decision about intracranial pressure monitor placement (y-axis) with the estimated outcome of the patient (x-axis). This model had a bimodal shape, with the most difficult decisions occurring for patients who 1) had a good opportunity for recovery but whose neurologic examination had not yet normalized or 2) had a low but uncertain likelihood of neurologically functional recovery. Emergent themes included gaps in medical knowledge and information available for decision-making, differences in perspective between clinical specialties, and ethical implications of decision-making about intracranial pressure monitoring. Experienced clinicians described less difficulty with decision-making overall. Conclusions: Children with severe traumatic brain injury near perceived transition points along a spectrum of potential for recovery present challenges for decision-making about intracranial pressure monitor placement. Clinician experience and specialty discipline further influence decision-making. These findings will contribute to the design of a multidisciplinary clinical decision support tool for intracranial pressure monitor placement in children with traumatic brain injury. Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal's website (http://journals.lww.com/pccmjournal). Dr. Bennett's institution also received funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and NIH/National Center for Advancing Translational Science. Drs. Bennett's and Rutebemberwa's institutions received funding from Mindsource Brain Injury Network of the Colorado Department of Human Services. Ms. Marsh's and Dr. Maertens's institutions received funding from the Colorado Department of Human Services. Dr. Hankinson's institution received funding from Colorado Traumatic Brain Injury Trust Fund. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest. For information regarding this article, E-mail: tell.bennett@ucdenver.edu ©2019The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies

Development of an Antibiotic Guideline for Children With Suspected Ventilator-Associated Infections Objectives: To develop a guideline for the decision to continue or stop antibiotics at 48–72 hours after their initiation in children with suspected ventilator-associated infection. Design: Prospective, multicenter observational data collection and subsequent development of an antibiotic guideline. Setting: Twenty-two PICUs. Patients: Children less than 3 years old receiving mechanical ventilation who underwent clinical testing and initiation of antibiotics for suspected ventilator-associated infection. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Phase 1 was a prospective data collection in 281 invasively ventilated children with suspected ventilator-associated infection. The median age was 8 months (interquartile range, 4–16 mo) and 75% had at least one comorbidity. Phase 2 was development of the guideline scoring system by an expert panel employing consensus conferences, literature search, discussions with institutional colleagues, and refinement using phase 1 data. Guideline scores were then applied retrospectively to the phase 1 data. Higher scores correlated with duration of antibiotics (p < 0.001) and higher PEdiatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction 2 scores (p < 0.001) but not mortality, PICU-free days or ventilator-free days. Considering safety and outcomes based on the phase 1 data and aiming for a 25% reduction in antibiotic use, the panel recommended stopping antibiotics at 48–72 hours for guideline scores less than or equal to 2, continuing antibiotics for scores greater than or equal to 6, and offered no recommendation for scores 3, 4, and 5. The acceptability and effect of these recommendations on antibiotic use and outcomes will be prospectively tested in phase 3 of the study. Conclusions: We developed a scoring system with recommendations to guide the decision to stop or continue antibiotics at 48–72 hours in children with suspected ventilator-associated infection. The safety and efficacy of the recommendations will be prospectively tested in the planned phase 3 of the study. Members of the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigator (PALISI) Network are listed in Appendix 1. Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal's website (http://journals.lww.com/pccmjournal). This study was supported, in part, by the Gerber Grant (number 4156) as well as the Clinical and Translational Science Awards number UL1TR000058 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (for access to Research Electronic Data Capture). Dr. Shein received funding from Accelerate Diagnostics. Drs. Karam's, Beardsley's, Karsies's, Prentice's, and Willson's institutions received funding from Gerber Foundation. Drs. Prentice and Willson received support for article research from Gerber Foundation. Dr. Tarquinio disclosed that she does not have any potential conflicts of interest. Address requests for reprints to: Steven L. Shein, MD, Division of Pediatric Critical Care, Rainbow Babies and Children's Hospital, 11100 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland OH, 44106. E-mail: Steven.shein@uhhospitals.org ©2019The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies

Informed Consent for Bedside Procedures in Pediatric and Neonatal ICUs: A Nationwide Survey Objectives: Primary objectives were to discover current practices of informed consent for bedside procedures in the PICU and neonatal ICU and how trainees learn to obtain consent. We also attempted to gauge if program directors felt that one method of consent was subjectively superior to another in the way it fulfilled established ethical criteria for informed consent. Design: An online anonymous survey. Participants were asked about how and by whom informed consent is currently obtained, training practices for fellows, and attitudes about how different consent methods fulfill ethical criteria. Setting: All U.S. fellowship programs for neonatology (n = 98) and pediatric critical care (n = 66) in the fall of 2017. Subjects: Neonatal and pediatric critical care fellowship program directors. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: The overall response rate was 50% (82 of 164). The most common method for obtaining consent in both ICU types was via a written, separate (procedure-specific) consent (63% neonatal ICUs, 83% PICUs); least common was verbal consent (8% neonatal ICUs and 6% PICUs). Fellows were reported as obtaining consent most often (91%), followed by mid-level practitioners (71%) and residents (66%). Residents were one-fifth as likely to obtain consent in the PICU as compared with the neonatal ICU. Sixty-three percent of fellowship directors rated their programs as "strong" or "very strong" in preparing trainees to obtain informed consent. Twenty-eight percent of fellowship directors reported no formal training on how to obtain informed consent. Conclusions: Most respondents' ICUs use separate procedure-specific written consents for common bedside procedures, although considerable variability exists. Trainees reportedly most often obtain informed consent for procedures. Although most fellowship directors report their program as strong in preparing trainees to obtain consent, this study reveals areas warranting improvement. Dr. Feltman disclosed that an internal grant supports the use of Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap). Dr. Arnolds has disclosed that she does not have any potential conflicts of interest. This study was performed at Evanston Hospital, Evanston, IL. For information regarding this article, E-mail: marnolds@northshore.org ©2019The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies

Role of IV Immunoglobulin in Indian Children With Guillain-Barré Syndrome Objectives: To evaluate the outcome of Indian children with Guillain-Barré syndrome who received IV immunoglobulin compared with those who did not receive any specific therapy. Design: Single center, prospective cross-sectional study. Setting: Tertiary care neurology teaching hospital. Patients: Children (≤ 18 yr old) with Guillain-Barré syndrome were included from a prospectively maintained Guillain-Barré syndrome registry from January 2008 to April 2017. Children were classified into acute inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy, acute motor axonal neuropathy, acute motor-sensory axonal neuropathy, and inexcitable motor nerves based on nerve conduction study. Interventions: Out of 138 pediatric Guillain-Barré syndrome, 50 received IV immunoglobulin and another 50 age and peak disability matched controls (who did not receive IV immunoglobulin or plasmapheresis) were selected from the same registry for comparison. Measurements and Main Results: Outcome at 3 and 6 months was defined on the basis of a 0–10 Clinical Grading Scale into complete (Clinical Grading Scale < 3), partial (Clinical Grading Scale 3–5), and poor (Clinical Grading Scale > 5) recovery. The primary outcome was proportion of patients with complete recovery at 3 and 6 months in IV immunoglobulin and non-IV immunoglobulin groups. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital deaths, duration of mechanical ventilation, and hospital stay. Subgroup analysis was done in acute motor axonal neuropathy and acute inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy groups. The baseline characteristics were similar except for shorter duration of illness and higher proportion of facial palsy in IV immunoglobulin group. Hospital deaths, duration of mechanical ventilation, hospital stay, and outcome at 3 and 6 months were not different between the two groups. Children with acute motor axonal neuropathy had better recovery at 6 months on IV immunoglobulin (58.3% vs 11.1%; p = 0.03), but not those with acute inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (58.3% vs 72.2%; p = 0.22). In nonambulatory Guillain-Barré syndrome children, complete recovery at 6 months was similar in IV immunoglobulin and non-IV immunoglobulin group (57.4% vs 57.1%; p = 0.98). Conclusions: In Indian children with Guillain-Barré syndrome, the outcome at 6 months in IV immunoglobulin treated group was similar to non-IV immunoglobulin group. Children with acute motor axonal neuropathy responded better to IV immunoglobulin. Dr. Kalita was involved in study supervision, statistical analysis, data interpretation, and writing the article. She had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Dr. Kumar was involved in the data collection, follow-up, statistical analysis, literature search, construction of figures and tables, and writing the article. Dr. Misra was involved in planning, project supervision, and writing the article. Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal's website (http://journals.lww.com/pccmjournal). This study was approved by Institutional Ethics Committee, Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, India. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest. For information regarding this article, E-mail: jayanteek@yahoo.com; jkalita@sgpgi.ac.in ©2019The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies

Relationship Between Time to Left Atrial Decompression and Outcomes in Patients Receiving Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support: A Multicenter Pediatric Interventional Cardiology Early-Career Society Study Objectives: To assess the variation in timing of left atrial decompression and its association with clinical outcomes in pediatric patients supported with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation across a multicenter cohort. Design: Multicenter retrospective study. Setting: Eleven pediatric hospitals within the United States. Patients: Patients less than 18 years on venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation who underwent left atrial decompression from 2004 to 2016. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 137 patients (median age, 4.7 yr) were included. Cardiomyopathy was the most common diagnosis (47%). Cardiac arrest (39%) and low cardiac output (50%) were the most common extracorporeal membrane oxygenation indications. Median time to left atrial decompression was 6.2 hours (interquartile range, 3.8–17.2 hr) with the optimal cut-point of greater than or equal to 18 hours for late decompression determined by receiver operating characteristic curve. In univariate analysis, late decompression was associated with longer extracorporeal membrane oxygenation duration (median 8.5 vs 5 d; p = 0.02). In multivariable analysis taking into account clinical confounder and center effects, late decompression remained significantly associated with prolonged extracorporeal membrane oxygenation duration (adjusted odds ratio, 4.4; p = 0.002). Late decompression was also associated with longer duration of mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio, 4.8; p = 0.002). Timing of decompression was not associated with in-hospital survival (p = 0.36) or overall survival (p = 0.42) with median follow-up of 3.2 years. Conclusions: In this multicenter study of pediatric patients receiving venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, late left atrial decompression (≥ 18 hr) was associated with longer duration of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support and mechanical ventilation. Although no survival benefit was demonstrated, the known morbidities associated with prolonged extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use may justify a recommendation for early left atrial decompression. Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal's website (http://journals.lww.com/pccmjournal). Supported, in part, by the CHAMPS for Mott Award, an institutional grant from the University of Michigan. Dr. Zampi's institution received funding from University of Michigan Department of Pediatrics (internal grant) and Siemens. Dr. Thiagarajan's institution received funding from Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer. Dr. Goldstein received funding from St. Jude Medical, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and W.L. Gore & Associates. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest. For information regarding this article, E-mail: jzampi@med.umich.edu ©2019The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies

Does an Antimicrobial Time-Out Impact the Duration of Therapy of Antimicrobials in the PICU? Objectives: Our aim was to perform an antimicrobial time-out 48–72 hours after commencing therapy in order to achieve a decrease in days of therapy per 1,000 patient days for vancomycin, meropenem, and piperacillin/tazobactam in all PICU patients during an 8-month period. Design: This is a pre- and postimplementation quality improvement study. Settings: A 30-bed PICU at a tertiary children's hospital. Patients: Patients less than 21 years old admitted to the PICU from July 1, 2015, until March 31, 2016, or from July 1, 2016, until March 31, 2017, who received antibiotics for greater than 48 hours were eligible for inclusion. Intervention: An antimicrobial time-out was performed after 48–72 hours of antimicrobials for all patients in the PICU during postimplementation. Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome measure was days of therapy per 1,000 patient-days for three target antibiotics: vancomycin, meropenem, and piperacillin/tazobactam. Ninety-five patients meeting inclusion criteria were admitted to the PICU during the pre–time-out period and 95 patients during the post–time-out period. The cohort that underwent time-outs had lower days of therapy for vancomycin (81.3 vs 138.1; p = 0.037) and meropenem (34.7 vs 67.1; p = 0.045). Total acquisition cost was 31 % lower for piperacillin/tazobactam and vancomycin and 46% for meropenem post implementation. Time-outs led to antimicrobial duration being defined 63% of the time and deescalation or discontinuation of antimicrobials 29% of the time. Conclusions: A 48–72-hour time-out process in rounds is associated with a reduction in days of therapy for antibiotics commonly used in the PICU and may lead to more appropriate usage. The time-outs are associated with discontinuation, deescalation, or duration being defined, which are key elements of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention–recommended antimicrobial stewardship programs. Dr. Morphew's institution received funding from Memorial Health Services (ongoing consultancy agreement with Morphew Consulting, LLC). Dr. Babbitt received funding from the Memorial Medical Foundation. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest. Dr. Morphew's institution received funding from Memorial Health Services (ongoing consultancy agreement with Morphew Consulting, LLC). Dr. Babbitt received funding from the Memorial Medical Foundation. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest. Address requests for reprints to: Christopher J. Babbitt, MD, FCCP, Pediatric Critical Care, Miller Children's and Women's Hospital of Long Beach, Long Beach, CA. E-mail: cbabbitt@memorialcare.org ©2019The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies

Clinical Profile and Predictors of Outcome of Pediatric Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in a PICU: A Prospective Observational Study Objectives: To study the clinical profile, predictors of mortality, and outcomes of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome. Design: A prospective observational study. Setting: PICU, Advanced Pediatric Centre, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India. Patients: All children (age > 1 mo to < 14 yr) admitted in PICU with a diagnosis of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (as per Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference definition) from August 1, 2015, to November 2016. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Out of 1,215 children admitted to PICU, 124 (11.4%) had pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome. Fifty-six children (45.2%) died. Median age was 2.75 years (1.0–6.0 yr) and 66.9% were male. Most common primary etiologies were pneumonia, severe sepsis, and scrub typhus. Ninety-seven children (78.2%) were invasively ventilated. On multiple logistic regressions, Lung Injury Score (p = 0.004), pneumothorax (p = 0.012), acute kidney injury at enrollment (p = 0.033), FIO2-D1 (p = 0.018), and PaO2/FIO2 ratio-D7 (p = 0.020) were independent predictors of mortality. Positive fluid balance (a cut-off value > 102.5 mL/kg; p = 0.016) was associated with higher mortality at 48 hours. Noninvasive oxygenation variables like oxygenation saturation index and saturation-FIO2 ratio were comparable to previously used invasive variables (oxygenation index and PaO2/FIO2 ratio) in monitoring the course of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome. Conclusions: Pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome contributes to a significant burden in the PICU of a developing country and is associated with significantly higher mortality. Infection remains the most common etiology. Higher severity of illness scores at admission, development of pneumothorax, and a positive fluid balance at 48 hours predicted poor outcome. This work was performed at the Department of Pediatrics, Advanced Pediatrics Centre, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest. Address requests for reprints to: Arun Bansal, MD, FCCM, FRCPCH, Department of Pediatrics, Advanced Pediatrics Centre, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India 160012. E-mail: drarunbansal@gmail.com ©2019The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies

Gastric Residual Volume Measurement in U.K. PICUs: A Survey of Practice Objectives: Despite little evidence, the practice of routine measurement of gastric residual volume to guide both the initiation and delivery of enteral feeding in PICUs is widespread internationally. In light of increased scrutiny of the evidence surrounding this practice, and as part of a trial feasibility study, we aimed to determine enteral feeding and gastric residual volume measurement practices in U.K. PICUs. Design: An online survey to 27 U.K. PICUs. Setting: U.K. PICUs. Subjects: A clinical nurse, senior doctor, and dietician were invited to collaboratively complete one survey per PICU and send a copy of their unit guidelines on enteral feeding and gastric residual volume. Interventions: None. Measurement and Main Results: Twenty-four of 27 units (89%) approached completed the survey. Twenty-three units (95.8%; 23/24) had written feeding guidelines, and 19 units (19/23; 83%) sent their guidelines for review. More units fed continuously (15/24; 62%) than intermittently (9/24; 37%) via the gastric route as their primary feeding method. All but one PICU routinely measured gastric residual volume, regardless of the method of feeding. Eighteen units had an agreed definition of feed tolerance, and all these included gastric residual volume. Gastric residual volume thresholds for feed tolerance were either volume based (mL/kg body weight) (11/21; 52%) or a percentage of the volume of feed administered (6/21; 29%). Yet only a third of units provided guidance about the technique of gastric residual volume measurement. Conclusions: Routine gastric residual volume measurement is part of standard practice in U.K. PICUs, with little guidance provided about the technique which may impact the accuracy of gastric residual volume. All PICUs that defined feed tolerance included gastric residual volume in the definition. This is important to know when proposing a standard practice arm of any future trial of no-routine gastric residual volume measurement in critically ill children. The views expressed are those of the author (s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute of Health Research or the Department of Health and Social Care. Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal's website (http://journals.lww.com/pccmjournal). Supported by the National Institute of Health Research (Health Technology Assessment reference 16/94/02). Drs. Tume's, Arch's, Latten's, Deja's, Roper's, Eccleson's, Hickey's, Brown's, and Gale's institutions received funding from National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme. Drs. Tume, Arch, Latten, Roper, Pathan, Eccleson, Hickey, and Brown received support for article research from NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme. Dr. Hickey's institution received funding from NIHR Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme (EME Ref (15):/20/01), and she received funding from University of Liverpool (personal fees relating to the production of a Clinical Study Report for University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust). Ms. Brown's institution received funding from the NIHR Doctoral Fellowship Programme. Dr. Gale's institution received funding from Medical Research Council, Chiesi Pharmaceuticals, Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR), and Department of Health (England); he has received support from Chiesi Pharmaceuticals to attend an educational conference; in the past 5 years, he has been an investigator on received research grants from Medical Research Council, NIHR, CIHR, Department of Health in England, Mason Medical Research Foundation, Westminster Medical School Research Trust, and Chiesi Pharmaceuticals; and he received support for article research from Research Councils UK. Dr. Valla received funding from Baxter, Fresenius Kabi, and Nutricia. Dr. Dorling's institution received funding from National Institute for Health Research and Nutricia in 2017 and 2018 for part of his salary to work as an expert advisor on a trial of enteral insulin; he disclosed he was a member of the NIHR HTA General Board (from 2017 to 2018) and the NIHR HTA Maternity, Newborn and Child Health Panel (from 2013 to 2018); and he received support for article research from NIHR. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest. For information regarding this article, E-mail: lyvonne.tume@uwe.ac.uk ©2019The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies