Background: Pediatric anesthesiology has been greatly impacted by COVID-19 in the delivery of care to patients and to the individual providers. With this study, we sought to survey pediatric centers and highlight the variations in care related to perioperative medicine during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the availability of protective equipment, the practice of pediatric anesthesia, and economic impact. Aim: The aim of the survey was to determine how COVID-19 directly impacted pediatric anesthesia practices during the study period. Methods: A survey concerning four major domains (testing, safety, clinical management/policy, economics) was developed. It was pilot tested for clarity and content by members of the Pediatric Anesthesia COVID-19 Collaborative. The survey was administered by email to all Pediatric Anesthesia COVID-19 Collaborative members on September 1, 2020. Respondents had six weeks to complete the survey and were instructed to answer the questions based on their institution's practice during September 1 - October 13, 2020. Results: Sixty-three institutions (100% response rate) participated in the COVID-19 Pediatric Anesthesia Survey. Forty-one hospitals (65%) were from the United States, and 35% included other countries. N95 masks were available to anesthesia teams at 91% of institutions (n = 57) (95% CI: 80%–96%). COVID-19 testing criteria of anesthesia staff and guidelines to return to work varied by institution. Structured simulation training aimed at improving COVID-19 safety and patient care occurred at 62% of institutions (n = 39). Pediatric anesthesiologists were economically affected by a reduction in their employer benefits and restriction of travel due to employer imposed quarantine regulations. Conclusion: Our data indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the testing, safety, clinical management, and economics of pediatric anesthesia practice. Further investigation into the long-term consequences for the specialty is indicated.

Background/Objectives:Esophageal button battery impactions (BBI) in children pose a significant danger to children. Although there are expert-opinion guidelines to help manage this population, few studies detail the impact of guidelines on the clinical care of these patients. With this study, we aimed to describe the care of these patients before and following adoption of guidelines at a single center.Methods:Retrospective cohort study of patients with esophageal BBI at a single center, large volume, urban academic pediatric hospital system before adoption of expert-opinion guidelines (2007-2017) and following adoption (2018-2020).Results:Cohort was comprised of 31 patients before adoption and 32 patients following adoption of guidelines. Patient characteristics did not differ between groups. After 2018, significantly more patients received acetic acid irrigation, initial cross-sectional imaging, and serial cross-sectional imaging. There was also an increase in intensive care unit (ICU) stays, number of intubations, nil per os time, and hospital length of stay. There was no difference in patient outcomes.Conclusion:This study describes a large cohort of pediatric esophageal BBI before and following adoption of guidelines. Findings detail increased adherence to guidelines resulting in more cross-sectional imaging which led to ICU stays, longer length of stays, and more nil per os time. This study emphasizes the need for multi-disciplinary guidelines as well as further multi-institutional study.

Introduction Regional anesthesia offers an alternative to general anesthesia and may be advantageous in low resource environments. There is a paucity of data regarding the practice of regional anesthesia in low- and middle-income countries. Using access data from a free Android app with curated regional anesthesia learning modules, we aimed to estimate global interest in regional anesthesia and potential applications to clinical practice stratified by World Bank income level. Methods We retrospectively analyzed data collected from the free Android app “Anesthesiologist” from December 2015 to April 2020. The app performs basic anesthetic calculations and provides links to videos on performing 12 different nerve blocks. Users of the app were classified on the basis of whether or not they had accessed the links. Nerve blocks were also classified according to major use (surgical block, postoperative pain adjunct, rescue block). Results Practitioners in low- and middle-income countries accessed the app more frequently than in high-income countries as measured by clicks. Users from low- and middle-income countries focused mainly on surgical blocks: ankle, axillary, infraclavicular, interscalene, and supraclavicular blocks. In high-income countries, more users viewed postoperative pain blocks: adductor canal, popliteal, femoral, and transverse abdominis plane blocks. Utilization of the app was constant over time with a general decline with the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion The use of an in app survey and analytics can help identify gaps and opportunities for regional anesthesia techniques and practices. This is especially impactful in limited-resource areas, such as lower-income environments and can lead to targeted educational initiatives.