Furthermore, the need to increase clarity and pragmatic instruction for health care providers regarding how best to perform fluid resuscitation is relevant to the management of all forms

of non-cardiogenic shock. Conclusions Our results support use of 30 and 60 mL syringes for the purposes of rapid pediatric fluid resuscitation when the ‘disconnect-reconnect’ technique is utilized. Further studies are needed to evaluate the comparative efficiency of other fluid resuscitation techniques, the potential problem of provider fatigability, and how fluid resuscitation is best performed in the context of multi-provider Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical teams. An improved body of evidence should assist with generating clear best practice recommendations as to how pediatric fluid resuscitation Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical is best performed. Key messages 1) When using a syringe for pediatric fluid resuscitation, choose a 30 – 60 mL syringe. 2) Regular infusion pumps are not adequate for performing fluid resuscitation for children in shock. 3) Further studies are needed to support comprehensive and pragmatic recommendations regarding best practice pediatric fluid resuscitation techniques. Abbreviations ACCM: American College of Critical Care Medicine; HCP: Health care provider; PALS: Pediatric Advanced Life Support. Competing

Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical interests Greg Harvey – No competing interests to declare, Gary Foster – No competing interests to declareAsmaa Manan – No competing interests to declare, Lehana Thabane – No competing Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical interests to declare, Melissa Parker – Dr. Parker has received research start-up funding from McMaster and some of these funds may be used if required to cover publication costs in relation to this article. McMaster University and McMaster Children’s Hospital may benefit in

reputation from publication of this article. Authors’ contributions GH was primarily responsible for developing the trial protocol, learn more including all study instruments, under the mentorship of MP. He prepared the REB submission, responded to comments, and revised all documents as required. GH Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical assisted with the training of the research assistants and subject recruitment and was responsible for inputting all of the study data into the database. GH was involved in the data analysis and interpretation of study findings, assisted with the preparation of figures, and he drafted the first version Calpain of the manuscript. AM was responsible for trial logistical organization including the scheduling and coordination of all subject testing. AM worked under the supervision of MP and ensured that subject testing was conducted under the appropriate conditions and with scientific rigor. GF and LT assisted with trial design and statistical analysis planning. GF verified sample size requirements and provided feedback on study instruments such as the questionnaire. GF also was primarily responsible for the final data analyses. MP conceived of the research question, including the study objectives and hypotheses.