The preparedness of pediatricians for emergencies in the office. What is broken, should we care, and how can we fix it?

The Role of Clinic Preparedness to Support Patients and Strengthen the Medical System During and After a Pandemic

Pediatric clinic preparedness is essential to improve the care and health outcomes for children during a pandemic and to decrease the burden on hospital systems. Clinic preparedness is a process that involves a well thought out plan that includes coordination with staff, open communication between the clinic and patient families, and collaboration with community partners. Planning for disasters can decrease some of the risks for our most vulnerable patients, including children and youth with special health care needs. There are plans, coalitions, and community partners that can help clinics in their preparedness journey.

Pediatric Utilization of Emergency Medical Services from Outpatient Offices and Urgent Care Centers

OBJECTIVE

National efforts have highlighted the need for pediatric emergency readiness across all settings where children receive care. Outpatient offices and urgent care centers are frequent starting points for acutely injured and ill children, emphasizing the need to maintain pediatric readiness in these settings. We aimed to characterize emergency medical services (EMS) utilization from outpatient offices and urgent care centers to better understand pediatric readiness needs.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of EMS encounters using the National Emergency Medical Services Information System, a nationally representative EMS registry (2019-2022). We included four years of EMS encounters of children (<18 years old) that originated from an outpatient office or urgent care center. We described characteristics, including patient demographics, prehospital clinician impression, therapies, and procedures performed.

RESULTS

Of 179,854,336 EMS encounters during the study period, 164,387 pediatric encounters originated at an outpatient setting. Most EMS encounters originated from outpatient offices. Evening and weekend EMS encounters more frequently originated from urgent care centers. The most common impressions were respiratory distress (n = 60,716), systemic illness (n = 23,583), and psychiatric/behavioral health (n = 13,273). Ninety-four percent of EMS encounters resulted in transportation to a hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

EMS encounters from outpatient settings most commonly originate from outpatient offices, relative to urgent care settings, where pediatric emergency readiness may be limited. It is important that outpatient settings and providers are ready for varied emergencies, including those occurring for a behavioral health concern, and that readiness guidelines are updated to address these needs.

Preparedness for Pediatric Office Emergencies: A Multicenter, Simulation-Based Study

OBJECTIVES

Pediatric emergencies can occur in pediatric primary care offices. However, few studies have measured emergency preparedness, or the processes of emergency care, provided in the pediatric office setting. In this study, we aimed to measure emergency preparedness and care in a national cohort of pediatric offices.

METHODS

This was a multicenter study conducted over 15 months. Emergency preparedness scores were calculated as a percentage adherence to 2 checklists on the basis of the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines (essential equipment and supplies and policies and protocols checklists). To measure the quality of emergency care, we recruited office teams for simulation sessions consisting of 2 patients: a child with respiratory distress and a child with a seizure. An unweighted percentage of adherence to checklists for each case was calculated.

RESULTS

Forty-eight teams from 42 offices across 9 states participated. The mean emergency preparedness score was 74.7% (SD: 12.9). The mean essential equipment and supplies subscore was 82.2% (SD: 15.1), and the mean policies and protocols subscore was 57.1% (SD: 25.6). Multivariable analyses revealed that independent practices and smaller total staff size were associated with lower preparedness. The median asthma case performance score was 63.6% (interquartile range: 43.2-81.2), whereas the median seizure case score was 69.2% (interquartile range: 46.2-80.8). Offices that had a standardized process of contacting emergency medical services (EMS) had a higher rate of activating EMS during the simulations.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric office preparedness remains suboptimal in a multicenter cohort, especially in smaller, independent practices. Academic and community partnerships using simulation can help address gaps and implement important processes like contacting EMS.

Primary Health Care Pediatricians' Self-Perception of Theoretical Knowledge and Practical Skills in Life-Threatening Emergencies: A Cross-Sectional Study

INTRODUCTION

Within out-of-hospital emergencies, Primary Health Care (PHC) pediatricians will likely be the first to provide health care at the scene of a life-threatening emergency (LTE) in children. Pediatricians should be trained to initially intervene, safely and effectively the LTEs, including the activation of Emergency Medical Systems (EMS), an adequate stabilization of patients and transport to the hospital.

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study are to know the training received for out-of-hospital LTEs by PHC pediatricians of the Principality of Asturias (Spain) and the perception they have about their own theoretical knowledge and practical skills in a series of emergency procedures used in LTEs; also, to analyze the differences according to the geographical context of their work.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional, descriptive, and observational study of a sample of 27 PHC pediatricians from PHC Service of Asturias, Spain, from among the total of 88 pediatricians who make up the staff of pediatricians, conducted from April through May 2019. The survey was designed ad hoc using the Curriculum in Primary Care Pediatrics (CPCP) proposed by the European Confederation of Primary Care Pediatricians (ECPCP; Europe), which indicates the theoretical and practical procedures that must be acquired by the PHC pediatricians. It is composed of 30 procedures or techniques employed in LTEs using a 11-point Likert scale rating to detect their self-perception about theoretical knowledge and practical skills from zero ("Minimum") to 10 ("Maximum").

RESULTS

There are significant differences in the mean of theoretical knowledge and practical skills in many procedures or techniques studied, depending on the different areas of work.

CONCLUSION

Asturian pediatricians are generally well-prepared to solve LTEs with a few exceptions. The degree of self-perception and acquisition of general theoretical knowledge and general practical skills in LTEs is heterogeneous, with differences according to the scope of work.

Pediatric Referrals to an Emergency Department From Urgent Care Centers

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to describe pediatric emergency department (ED) referrals from urgent care centers and to determine the percentage of referrals considered essential and serious.

METHODS

A prospective study was conducted between April 2013 and April 2015 on patients younger than 21 years referred directly to an ED in central Pennsylvania from surrounding urgent care centers. Referrals were considered essential or serious based on investigations/procedures performed or medications/consultations received in the ED.

RESULTS

Analysis was performed on 455 patient encounters (mean age, 8.7 y), with 347 (76%) considered essential and 40 (9%) considered serious. The most common chief complaints were abdominal pain (83 encounters), extremity injury (76), fever (39), cough/cold (29), and head/neck injury (29). Thirty-three percent of the patients received laboratory diagnostic investigations (74% serum, 56% urine), and 52% received radiologic investigations (67% x-ray, 17% computed tomography scan, 13% ultrasound, 11% magnetic resonance imaging). Forty-four percent of the patients received a procedure, with the most common being intravenous (IV) placement (66%); reduction, casting, or splinting of extremity fracture/dislocation (18%); and laceration repair (14%). The most common medications administered were IV fluids (33%), oral analgesics (30%), and IV analgesics (26%). Eighty-three percent of the patients were discharged home, 12% were hospitalized, and 4% had emergent surgical intervention. The most common primary diagnoses were closed extremity fracture (60 encounters), gastroenteritis (42), brain concussion (28), upper respiratory infection (24), and nonsurgical, unspecified abdominal pain (24).

CONCLUSIONS

Many ED referrals directed from urgent care centers in our sample were considered essential, and few were considered serious. Urgent care centers should develop educational and preparedness strategies based on the epidemiology of emergencies that may occur.

Pediatric Simulation Cases for Primary Care Providers: Asthma, Anaphylaxis, Seizure in the Office

Introduction

Although pediatric emergencies commonly occur in the outpatient setting, studies show that primary care providers often rely on hospitals or the emergency medical system to evaluate the distressed patient. This simulation-based curriculum addresses pediatric emergencies encountered by primary care providers. The cases were facilitated by faculty at an annual conference on urgent pediatric problems.

Methods

Three cases are included in this curriculum: asthma, anaphylaxis, and seizure. Each features a brief narrative description of the case, learning objectives, instructor notes, an example of the ideal flow of the scenario, and anticipated management mistakes. Also provided are tools on optimizing the simulation environment, teamwork and communication, and the debrief. Educational materials are included in the respective medical pathologies. The simulations can be run using a high- or low-fidelity mannequin.

Results

The simulations were carried out annually for 4 years with over 100 providers. Participants overall felt the curriculum was relevant to their practice in the realms of medical management and patient-provider communication.

Discussion

These simulation cases train primary care providers to recognize a decompensating patient, activate the emergency response system, and initiate appropriate treatment for acutely ill pediatric patients with asthma, anaphylaxis, or seizure. The cases also reinforce teamwork and communication skills with the intention of improving overall readiness in the office. The simulations have been found to be effective learning tools at the University of Washington, which continues to train outpatient providers in emergency response annually using this curriculum.

In-Situ Simulation Enhances Emergency Preparedness in Pediatric Care Practices

Background

It is not uncommon for emergencies to present at primary care offices. As such, it is necessary for those offices to be prepared to handle, at a minimum, the most common types of emergencies.

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of in-situ simulation training in improving emergency preparedness within pediatric primary care settings.

Methods

Simulation training was provided at 20 primary care offices in Central Florida. The participants were asked to complete a pre-simulation survey that utilized a five-point Likert-type scale to evaluate office preparedness and the confidence of staff members in managing emergency presentations within their settings. Subsequent to the simulation, participants were asked to complete a post-survey to evaluate the effectiveness of the simulation training.

Results

Primary care office staff members reported an enhanced preparedness in managing emergencies post-simulation training (pre-simulation 2.95 vs. post-simulation 4.02; p-value<0.05). They also reported higher levels of comfort in managing emergency situations after the simulation training (pre-simulation 3.22 vs. post-simulation 4.53; p-value<0.05). Overall, 100% of participants found the simulation to be effective or extremely effective.

Conclusions

Our data suggests that the simulation training has improved office preparedness in managing emergencies in a pediatric primary care setting. The simulation training has also been shown to improve the comfort level of pediatric primary care office staff in handling emergency situations. This study was limited to pediatric primary care settings in the Central Florida region, and it is unclear if the findings of this study are generalizable to all primary care practices. Further studies are required to explore whether such training can result in practice change and improve outcomes for more patients.

Evaluation and Impact of the "Advanced Pediatric Life Support" Course in the Care of Pediatric Emergencies in Spain

INTRODUCTION

The Advanced Pediatric Life Support (APLS) course was introduced in the training of professionals who care for pediatric emergencies in Spain in 2005.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the impact of the APLS course in the current clinical practice in Spanish PEDs.

METHODS

The directors of APLS courses were asked about information regarding the courses given to date, especially on the results of the satisfaction survey completed by students at the end of the course. Furthermore, in December 2014, a survey was conducted through Google Drive, specifically asking APLS students about the usefulness of the APLS course in their current clinical practice.

RESULTS

In the last 10 years since the APLS course was introduced in Spain, there have been 40 courses in 6 different venues. They involved a total of 1520 students, of whom 958 (63.0%) felt that the course was very useful for daily clinical practice. The survey was sent to 1,200 students and answered by 402 (33.5%). The respondent group most represented was pediatricians, 223 (55.5%), of whom 61 (27.3%) were pediatric emergency physicians, followed by pediatric residents, 122 (30.3%). One hundred three (25.6%) respondents had more than 10 years of professional practice and 291 (72.4%) had completed the course in the preceding four years. Three hundred forty-one of the respondents (84.9%: 95% confidence interval [CI], 81.9-87.9) said that they always use the pediatric assessment triangle (PAT) and 131 (32.6%: 95% CI, 28-37.1) reported that their organization has introduced this tool into their protocols. Two hundred twenty-three (55.5%: 95% CI, 50.6-60.3) believed that management of critically ill patients has improved, 328 (81.6%: 95% CI, 77.8-85.3) said that the PAT and the systematic approach, ABCDE, help to establish a diagnosis, and 315 (78.4%: 95% CI, 74.3-82.4) reported that the overall number of treatments has increased but that these treatments are beneficial for patients. Hospital professionals (191; 47.5%) include the PAT in their protocols more frequently than pre-hospital professionals (68.5% vs 55.4%; p <0.01) and consider PAT useful in the management of patients (60.2% vs 51.1%; p <0.05). Neither the time elapsed since the completion of the course, nor category and years of professional experience had any influence on the views expressed about the impact of the APLS course in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Most health professionals who have received the APLS course, especially those working in the hospital setting, think that the application of the systematic methods learned, the PAT and ABCDE, has a major impact on clinical practice.

Primary Care Office Preparedness for Pediatric Emergencies

Emergencies do occur in pediatric primary care offices. The American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Pediatric Emergency Medicine recommends that primary care offices perform a self-assessment of office readiness for emergencies. Primary care offices should develop an emergency response plan to recognize, stabilize, and transfer sick children. They should also ensure their offices have the essential equipment, supplies, and medications readily available in case of emergencies. Primary care offices can prepare and practice for office emergencies through "mock codes" and by maintaining certification in basic and advanced life support courses. Partnership with local emergency medical services and emergency departments will allow seamless transfer of an acutely ill child. Careful planning and preparation will help improve outcomes for emergencies in the primary care setting. [Pediatr Ann. 2018;47(3):e93-e96.].

EMS Activations for School-Aged Children From Public Buildings, Places of Recreation or Sport, and Health Care Facilities in Pennsylvania

OBJECTIVES

To determine the etiology of emergency medical services (EMS) activations in 2011 to public buildings, places of recreation or sport, and health care facilities involving children aged 5 to 18 years in Pennsylvania.

METHODS

Electronic records documenting 2011 EMS activations as provided by the Pennsylvania Department of Health's Bureau of EMS were reviewed. Data elements (demographics, dispatch complaint, mechanism of injury, primary assessment) from patients aged 5 to 18 years involved in an EMS response call originating from either a public building, a place of recreation and sport, or health care facility were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 12,289 records were available for analysis. The most common primary assessments from public buildings were traumatic injury, behavioral/psychiatric disorder, syncope/fainting, seizure, and poisoning. The most common primary assessments from places of recreation or sport were traumatic injury, syncope/fainting, altered level of consciousness, respiratory distress, and abdominal pain. The most common primary assessments from health care facilities were behavioral/psychiatric disorder, traumatic injury, abdominal pain, respiratory distress, and syncope/fainting. When examining the mechanism of injury for trauma-related primary assessments, falls were the most common mechanism at all 3 locations, followed by being struck by an object. Of the 1335 serious-incident calls (11% of the total EMS activations meeting inclusion criteria), 61.2% were from public buildings, 14.1% from places of recreation or sport, and 24.7% from health care facilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Our identification of common EMS dispatch complaints, mechanisms of injury, and primary assessments can be used in the education of staff and preparation of facilities for medical emergencies and injuries where children spend time.

Specialty pediatric transport in primary care or urgent care settings

OBJECTIVE

We sought to describe a single center's experience with specialized critical care transport from non-hospital settings, including primary care offices and urgent care centers. We hypothesized that the majority of patients will require procedures outside the scope of practice of most EMS providers and will be better served by specialized pediatric critical care transport (SPCCT) teams.

METHODS

This study sought to retrospectively evaluate instances where children (0-18 years old) were transported by our SPCCT team from nonhospital settings, including primary care offices and urgent care centers, in 2009 and 2010. Data were extracted from a customized database and appropriate statistical tests were applied, including Fisher's exact test for categorical comparisons and Mann-Whitney U test for non-parametric data comparisons.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were included. Most of the children were transported for respiratory distress (78%), and many were treated with albuterol (42%) and steroids (42%) prior to the SPCCT team arrival. The most common interventions performed by the SPCCT team were obtaining IV access and administering IV fluid boluses; 4 (7.7%) patients required advanced critical care treatments unique to SPCCT. Most patients (n = 34; 65%) were directly admitted to the general care floor, but a high number of patients (n = 12; 23%; PICU = 11, NICU = 1) required pediatric or neonatal intensive care unit admission. Only 3 patients (5.7%) were discharged home without hospital admission. For the 11 patients admitted to the PICU, the median length of stay (LOS) was 2.5 days (IQR 0.14-13.2). All patients survived to hospital discharge with an additional hospital LOS of 1.3 days (IQR 0.2-6.7). Patients were billed for these critical care transports an average of $2,660.14 ± $940.

CONCLUSION

Our small cohort demonstrates infrequent application of advanced critical care interventions beyond those provided by the referring primary care office or urgent care centers. This supports the practice of SPCCT teams providing transport services for select critically ill children at primary care offices and urgent care centers, but not as a standard practice for most pediatric patients in these settings.

Pediatric office emergencies

Pediatricians regularly see emergencies in the office, or children that require transfer to an emergency department, or hospitalization. An office self-assessment is the first step in determining how to prepare for an emergency. The use of mock codes and skill drills make office personnel feel less anxious about medical emergencies. Emergency information forms provide valuable, quick information about complex patients for emergency medical services and other physicians caring for patients. Furthermore, disaster planning should be part of an office preparedness plan.

An education program on office medical emergency preparedness for primary care pediatricians

BACKGROUND

Pediatric clinics are ill-prepared in handling medical emergencies. Life-support education, though recommended, has not been evaluated in pediatric primary care.

PURPOSE

The objective is to evaluate effectiveness of education in improving knowledge and learner-perceived comfort in managing pediatric office emergencies.

METHODS

An education program was conducted at 6 pediatric practices. Pre-post program knowledge improvement (15-item questionnaire) and comfort (10-level Likert scale) was assessed using T tests and Cohen's d. Long-term knowledge was assessed.

RESULTS

Physicians demonstrated significant improvement in mean knowledge scores: 1.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.76, 2.91], effect size (d=0.98), whereas nurses had a smaller, nonsignificant improvement: 0.59, 95% CI [-0.19, 1.37], effect size (d=0.24). A significant improvement in mean comfort scores was observed among both physicians: 1.3, 95% CI [0.9, 1.7] and nurses, 1.4, 95% CI [0.7, 2.1]. Among physicians, percentage correct answers on the knowledge test was 79% (baseline), 91% (posttest), and 80% at 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Education in pediatric office emergency preparedness leads to short-term knowledge improvement among physicians, but gains are not sustained.

Pediatric emergency preparedness training: are we on a path toward national dissemination?

BACKGROUND

Emergency preparedness training is crucial for all health professionals, but the physiologic, anatomic, and psychologic differences between children and adults necessitates that health professionals receive training specific to pediatric emergencies. Before a standardized, nationally disseminated pediatric curriculum can be developed or endorsed, evidence-based evaluations of short- and long-term outcomes need to be conducted.

METHODS

A review of literature was conducted to identify developed courses and any evaluation of these courses.

RESULTS

Much has been published that supports the need for pediatric emergency preparedness, and many resources have been developed. However, very little literature presents evaluations of training courses.

DISCUSSION

To achieve evidence-based pediatric emergency preparedness training, existing training programs must be evaluated, standardized training guidelines need to be developed, and critical components of pediatric disaster response need to be captured in the academic literature.

New opportunity to improve pediatric emergency preparedness: pediatric emergency assessment, recognition, and stabilization course

The ideal first response to a life-threatening pediatric emergency includes early recognition of the emergency, activation of the appropriate emergency response system, performance of basic life support (cardiopulmonary resuscitation/automated external defibrillator treatment), and initiation of advanced life support, but the extent of resuscitation training among health care providers likely to be first at the side of a critically ill or injured child is often deficient. In the past, resuscitation courses beyond basic life support focused on training advanced providers. The Pediatric Emergency Assessment, Recognition, and Stabilization course was developed by the American Heart Association to target a broad range of health care providers who are likely to be first at the side of a child requiring resuscitation. It is hoped that training of health care providers through the Pediatric Emergency Assessment, Recognition, and Stabilization course will translate into early recognition of life-threatening pediatric emergencies and greater resuscitation success, but results will depend on the availability of instruction and the maintenance of skills.

Bridging the knowledge-resuscitation gap for children: Still a long way to go

The American Heart Association, along with the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, recently made changes to the paediatric resuscitation guidelines.Knowledge translation (KT) is imperative, but there is a lack of sufficient evidence for appropriate methodologies for implementation of these guidelines. Paediatric resuscitation presents many challenges; cases happen infrequently, affording few opportunities for implementation of the new guidelines, and are highly stressful and filled with uncertainty. Some KT strategies have shown some success in causing a notable degree of change in behaviour, but none have shown a striking difference when used alone.Previous efforts to disseminate current guidelines centred on development of courses for health care providers and preparing paediatric residents and paediatricians for circumstances they could encounter with paediatric acute illness. None of the studies assessing these techniques measured direct patient outcomes, and only a few demonstrated some long-term knowledge acquisition among trainees. The purpose of the present review was to illuminate the challenges, offer future directions for KT and outline potentially more effective methodologies and strategies to overcome current barriers.

Preparation for emergencies in the offices of pediatricians and pediatric primary care providers

High-quality pediatric emergency care can be provided only through the collaborative efforts of many health care professionals and child advocates working together throughout a continuum of care that extends from prevention and the medical home to prehospital care, to emergency department stabilization, to critical care and rehabilitation, and finally to a return to care in the medical home. At times, the office of the pediatric primary care provider will serve as the entry site into the emergency care system, which comprises out-of-hospital emergency medical services personnel, emergency department nurses and physicians, and other emergency and critical care providers. Recognizing the important role of pediatric primary care providers in the emergency care system for children and understanding the capabilities and limitations of that system are essential if pediatric primary care providers are to offer the best chance at intact survival for every child who is brought to the office with an emergency. Optimizing pediatric primary care provider office readiness for emergencies requires consideration of the unique aspects of each office practice, the types of patients and emergencies that might be seen, the resources on site, and the resources of the larger emergency care system of which the pediatric primary care provider's office is a part. Parent education regarding prevention, recognition, and response to emergencies, patient triage, early recognition and stabilization of pediatric emergencies in the office, and timely transfer to an appropriate facility for definitive care are important responsibilities of every pediatric primary care provider. In addition, pediatric primary care providers can collaborate with out-of-hospital and hospital-based providers and advocate for the best-quality emergency care for their patients.

The availability and accessibility of basic paediatric resuscitation equipment in primary healthcare centres: cause for concern?

BACKGROUND

Paediatric emergencies in primary healthcare centres are serious events that occur more commonly than envisaged. However, at present, these centres appear to lack the training and equipment to manage common paediatric emergencies.

AIM

To determine the availability and accessibility of basic resuscitation equipment in primary healthcare centres.

METHODS

A questionnaire survey of 27 primary healthcare centres within the Nottingham City region determined the availability and accessibility of basic paediatric resuscitation equipment and algorithms.

RESULTS

No practice had all 21 basic resuscitation items, with 59% of practices having < or =10 of these items. Only 11% of practices had all seven basic airway and breathing resuscitation items, with 52% of practices having < or =4 items. No practice had all eight basic items for circulation management, with 82% of practices having < or =4 of these items. Only two practices had all six basic drug items, with 85% of practices having < or =3 of these items. Only 26% of practices had algorithms for paediatric basic life support and common emergencies, and only 30% of practices kept their resuscitation equipment together. In the last 5 y, less than a fifth of general practitioners were trained in paediatric resuscitation.

CONCLUSION

Primary healthcare centres appear to lack the training and equipment to manage common paediatric emergencies. We recommend standardization of equipment and algorithms, training and assessment of key personnel, and critical incident reporting within primary healthcare centres.

Preparedness of selected pediatric offices to respond to critical emergencies in children

OBJECTIVE

To determine the preparedness of pediatric offices that had activated emergency medical services (EMS) for a critically ill child requiring airway management.

METHODS

Fifteen patients who initially presented to pediatric or family practice offices but required EMS activation and cardiac and/or respiratory support were identified from a previous prospective study of airway management in children. Two to 4 years after the emergency requiring EMS activation, the offices were contacted to complete a written survey about office preparedness for pediatric emergencies.

RESULTS

Eight of 15 offices (53%) returned a survey. Pediatricians staffed all responding offices, and all offices were within 5 miles of an emergency department. Airway emergencies were the most common emergencies seen in the offices. Availability of emergency equipment and medications varied. All offices stocked albuterol, and most (7/8) had an oxygen source with a flowmeter. However, only half of the offices had a fast-acting anticonvulsant, and a quarter had no anticonvulsant. Three offices lacked bag-mask (manual) resuscitators with all appropriate sized masks, and 3 offices lacked suction. The most common reasons cited for not stocking all emergency equipment and drugs were quick response time of EMS and proximity to an emergency department.

CONCLUSIONS

Even after treating a critically ill child who required advanced cardiac and/or pulmonary support, offices were ill prepared to handle another serious pediatric illness or injury.

Impact of a pediatric primary care office-based mock code program on physician and staff confidence to perform life-saving skills

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have described that pediatric offices are ill-prepared for medical emergencies. Pediatric "mock codes" have been utilized to increase the emergency preparedness of inpatient medical units for several decades. These practice drills have been shown to both increase practitioners' confidence and decrease anxiety during actual resuscitations. Although the use of mock codes is recommended in the outpatient setting, these benefits have yet to be demonstrated for office-based practitioners.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted this study to determine whether mock codes performed in pediatric primary care offices increase practitioner confidence to perform life-saving skills.

METHODS

Pediatric group practices participated in a clinical trial of an office-based, 2-step, emergency preparedness training. First, physicians and staffs attended a 1-hour didactic program which included staff education, office emergency protocols, emergency equipment and medications, and guidelines on instituting a mock code program. Second, each practice participated in a 10-15-minute mock code exercise. The drill was conducted by pediatric advanced life support instructors. After the code, a 30-minute feedback session was conducted which reviewed office coordination, individual skill performance, and approach to resuscitation. Each participating practice also received an infant manikin and a text complete with several mock codes scenarios written specifically for the pediatric primary care office. Evaluation of the intervention consisted of 2 components. (1) Pre- and postintervention completion of a self-administered survey assessed participants' comfort in emergency situations and confidence to perform specific life-saving skills, using an ordinal scale: 1 = "strongly agree" to 5 = "strongly disagree". (2) Practices were contacted by telephone 12 months after the training to determine whether they had implemented improvements in emergency preparedness, including instituting mock codes, preparing a written emergency protocol and purchasing new emergency equipment and medications.

RESULTS

Eleven group pediatric practices participated, which were representative of urban, suburban, and rural offices in southwestern Pennsylvania. Ninety-seven of a total 164 (59%) physicians and staff members completed both pre- and postintervention surveys. Practitioner participants were analyzed in 2 groups. Group 1 consisted of physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants; group 2 consisted of registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, and medical assistants. Comparison of pre- versus postintervention surveys in both of these groups revealed significant improvement in reported confidence to perform resuscitation skills that were included in the mock code after the training: airway positioning (group 1, 67% vs. 94%, P < 0.001; group 2, 55% vs. 75%, P = 0.003), airway suctioning, (group 1, 64% vs. 88%, P = 0.005; group 2, 27% vs. 51%, P < 0.001), and bag-mask assisted ventilation (group 1, 82% vs. 91%, P = 0.003; group 2, 39% vs. 71%, P < 0.001). In addition, group 1 reported more confidence in their ability to place an intraossesous line (24% vs. 39%, P = 0.003) and group 2 showed a significant increase in their confidence to administer oxygen (65% vs. 84%, P < 0.001). As a result of the mock code, 83% of all participants, both medical and nonmedical staffs, and 96% of physicians felt less anxious about medical emergencies in the office. Twelve months after the conclusion of the program, 18% of offices had conducted 1 or more mock codes, 64% of offices had written an emergency protocol, and 27% of offices had acquired essential resuscitation medications or equipment.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study support the recommendation that mock codes should be performed in the pediatric primary care setting to improve practitioner confidence and decrease practitioner anxiety.

Office preparedness for pediatric emergencies: a randomized, controlled trial of an office-based training program

OBJECTIVE

Many children enter the emergency medical system through primary care offices, yet these offices may not be adequately prepared to stabilize severely ill children. We conducted this study to evaluate the effectiveness of an office-based educational program designed to improve the preparation of primary care practices for pediatric emergencies.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized, controlled trial was conducted of primary care practices (pediatric, family practice, and health departments) that were recruited from an existing database of North Carolina practices. Practices that agreed to participate were randomly assigned to either the intervention or the control group. Unannounced mock codes were conducted in the intervention practices by 2 emergency medicine clinicians (medical doctor and/or registered nurse). Practices were expected to respond to the mock code using their own staff, equipment, and local emergency medical system. After the exercise, the emergency medicine clinicians and the local emergency medical system team led a structured debriefing session providing constructive feedback to the staff on their performance, a review of the office's equipment, and a resource manual designed for the project. The primary outcome measures were obtained by survey 3 to 6 months postintervention and included 1) purchase of new pediatric emergency equipment and medications, 2) receipt or updating of basic life support/pediatric advanced life support/advanced life support training by staff members, and 3) development of written emergency pediatric protocols. The control practices received no interventions during the trial and completed a similar outcome survey.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine practices (20 intervention, 19 control) completed the trial. There were no significant differences in practice characteristics between the 2 groups. Intervention practices were more likely to develop written office protocols (60% vs 21%); more staff in the intervention practices received additional basic life support/pediatric advanced life support/advanced life support training 3 to 6 months after the intervention (118 vs 54). There were no significant differences in the purchase of new equipment or medications. Ninety percent of the intervention practices rated the intervention as useful for their practice, and 95% believed that the program should be continued.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that the intervention was well received and motivated practices to take concrete actions to prepare for pediatric emergencies.

Pediatricians' evaluations of their residency curriculum in emergency medicine

OBJECTIVE

To describe residency graduates' perceptions of their preparation for providing pediatric emergency medical care.

METHODS

The design was a cross-sectional survey set in a university-affiliated pediatric residency program. Twenty residency graduates from 1994 and 1995 who did not have an emergency department (ED) rotation (pre-ED group) and 24 graduates from 1998 and 1999 who had an ED rotation (post-ED group) participated in the study. The main outcome measures were residency graduates' responses regarding their preparation for various types of emergency situations and ratings of various residency curriculum components for usefulness in pediatric emergency medicine education.

RESULTS

Nearly all residency graduates (98%) believed that they were well prepared to manage pediatric emergencies, and this did not differ between the pre- and post-ED groups (P = 1.0). For both groups, urgent care and critical care rotations were generally the highest ranked residency curriculum components for learning about four specific areas of pediatric emergency medicine (minor trauma, toxic ingestions, and medical and surgical emergencies). For the post-ED group, the ED rotation was also rated highly for each of these areas, but it was not the highest ranked for any of the four curriculum components.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite limited access to rotations in a pediatric ED, our graduates were confident in their ability to manage pediatric emergencies. A pediatric emergency medicine curriculum composed of didactic teaching and clinical rotations in a pediatric intensive care unit and urgent care served as an effective way to supplement limited ED experience.

Training in pediatric critical care medicine: A survey of pediatric residency training programs

BACKGROUND

After completing their critical care rotations, pediatric residents are expected to have acquired skills in the resuscitation of critically ill newborns and children. Recent Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) guidelines have limited the time devoted to critical care training during pediatric residency. We sought to determine how individual programs have structured their critical care training experience in light of these changes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A questionnaire was mailed to each pediatric residency program listed in the 1996-1997 Graduate Medical Education Directory. Information was obtained regarding the structure of critical care training. Data were analyzed using descriptive techniques, one-way analysis of variance with Scheffé post hoc test, and Fisher exact test as appropriate.

RESULTS

Data were received from 149 programs (71% response rate). Most programs were in compliance with ACGME standards regarding the number of months devoted to neonatal intensive care, pediatric intensive care, and emergency medicine. There were no significant differences in the total number of rotations in either the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) or the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) when the programs were stratified by size. There were no significant differences in the percentage of programs requiring night call in either the NICU or the PICU during off-service months. However, small programs (< 25 residents) required significantly fewer rotations in emergency medicine (P < 0.001). Most programs complemented the critical care experience by offering additional rotations and advanced life support training.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric residency programs have structured their critical care rotations in a similar fashion in accordance with ACGME guidelines. The success in meeting the stated objectives, as measured by the ability of graduating residents to stabilize critically ill children, is not known and will require further study.

Pediatric office emergencies and emergency preparedness in a small rural state

OBJECTIVE

Although the frequency of pediatric office medical emergencies has been investigated in a retrospective manner, there have been no prospective studies. We examined how often pediatricians in a small rural state encountered medical emergencies in the office setting. This study included an in-office educational program and the donation of resuscitation equipment to study participants.

DESIGN AND INTERVENTION

Thirty-eight of the 40 active primary care pediatric practices in the state of Vermont participated in this study. Thirty-seven sites were surveyed retrospectively regarding office preparedness for emergencies and frequency of office emergencies. At each practice site, an educational session was provided and an office resuscitation kit was donated. Thirty-seven sites were followed prospectively for a 12-month period evaluating the incidence of office medical emergencies and the adequacy of the donated resuscitation kit.

RESULTS

Three hundred twenty-seven individuals from 38 Vermont pediatric practice sites participated. Forty-nine percent had basic life support training and 26% had pediatric advanced life support training. Sixty-seven percent of practices had a plan for office medical emergencies. Forty-six percent of practices had called local emergency medical services providers to their offices in the past year. Emergency preparedness ranged from a high of 95% of sites with oxygen to a low of 27% of sites with intraosseous needles. The estimate of the frequency of medical emergencies was.9 (standard deviation =.8) per office in the previous 12 months. In the 12-month study, there were 28 medical emergencies reported, averaging.8 (standard deviation = 1.5) emergencies per office per year. Sixty-five percent of participating sites had no emergencies in the study. Of the emergencies reported, 75% were respiratory in origin. The donated resuscitation kits proved sufficient for all of the emergencies reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Serious medical emergencies are rare events in the primary care pediatric office, occurring less than once per office per year. The most common emergency situations encountered are respiratory. All of the emergencies in this study were managed effectively using a simple and relatively inexpensive resuscitation kit. We provided an emergency preparedness program for pediatric practices in a small rural state.

Assessing pediatric senior residents' training in resuscitation: fund of knowledge, technical skills, and perception of confidence

OBJECTIVE

To describe pediatric housestaff knowledge, experience, confidence in pediatric resuscitations and their ability to perform important resuscitation procedures during the usual training experience.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

Cohort study of PGY-3 level residents in a ACGME accredited pediatric residency training program at a large, tertiary care children's hospital.

METHODS

Fund of knowledge was assessed by administering the standardized test from the Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) Course in addition to a supplemental short answer test requiring clinical problem-solving skills. Procedural skills were evaluated through observation of the resident performing four procedures during a skills workshop using a weighted step-wise grading sheet. Resident experience and confidence was quantified using an anonymous survey.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven percent of residents participated. Residents achieved high scores on the standardized PALS test (93.2%+/-5.5), but performed less well when answering more complicated questions (60.0%+/-9.9) on the short answer test. No resident was able to successfully perform both basic and advanced airway skills, and only 11% successfully completed both vascular skills. Although residents were overall confident in their resuscitation skills, performance in the skill workshop revealed significant deficits. For example, only 18% performed ancillary airway maneuvers properly. None of the residents performed all four skills correctly. Experience in both real and mock resuscitations was infrequent. Residents reported receiving feedback on their performance less than half of the time. Over 89% of them felt that resuscitation knowledge and skill were important for their future chosen career.

CONCLUSION

Pediatric residents infrequently lead or participate in real or mock resuscitations. Although confident in performing many of the necessary resuscitation skills, few residents performed critical components of these skills correctly. Current pediatric residency training may not provide sufficient experience to develop adequate skills, fund of knowledge, or confidence needed for resuscitation.

Pediatric advanced life support training of pediatricians in New Jersey: cause for concern?

OBJECTIVE

The Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) course teaches the fundamental basics for pediatric emergency care, and it is recommended that all physicians, nurses, and paramedics who care for children complete training and refresher courses on a regular basis. The purpose of this study was to determine how many pediatricians in general practice participated in PALS courses in the first 3 years since its introduction in New Jersey.

METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to all PALS training centers in New Jersey that administered the course from 1990 through 1993. The questionnaire was designed to determine the number of physicians trained; their specialty, and their practice setting. The questionnaire and follow-up telephone interviews focused on the perceptions of course coordinators as to why primary care pediatricians did or did not take PALS courses, and their recommendations for improving pediatrician participation.

RESULTS

Two PALS training centers provided courses for only 1 year and did not maintain records of their students. A total of 3652 individuals completed training in the remaining 11 centers. Only 649 of these students were physicians. The largest groups of physicians who completed training were Emergency Medicine physicians (248) and Pediatric residents (175). Forty-two students were pediatricians in general office-based practice, which represents a crude rate of only 0.81% of New Jersey American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) members. Training center coordinators offered several opinions for these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of those students who participated in PALS training were not physicians. Pediatricians in general office practice accounted for a small percentage of those who could have participated. Further research should be conducted to determine attitudes toward PALS training and the barriers that exist to the office-based pediatrician participating in PALS training.

Emergency medical services for children: a general pediatrician's perspective

The EMSC movement is still in its infancy, and there is much that remains to be done. The primary care pediatrician plays a major role in the EMSC system and should continue to advocate for efficient, high-quality pediatric emergency care. In summary, there are several ways that the office-based pediatrician can and should become involved with EMSC: 1. Pediatricians should emphasize safe and injury prevention at each health maintenance visit throughout a child's life. 2. Pediatricians should encourage all parents to become certified in BLS/CPR. Ideally, training in CPR should be provided during prenatal and childbirth classes. 3. Pediatricians should advocate for injury prevention and safety campaigns in their communities. They can also become involved with efforts to develop legislation dealing with issues in injury prevention and safety. 4. Pediatricians should ensure that all children receive the appropriate immunizations. 5. Pediatricians need to maintain office emergency preparedness. All office personnel should maintain certification in BLS as a minimum and ideally, PALS. Equipment used for pediatric resuscitation should be available and functional. Monthly mock codes should be scheduled to ensure that all personnel clearly know their roles and responsibilities in the event of an emergency. 6. Pediatricians should maintain their skills in emergency pediatrics. In addition, they should maintain certification in PALS. Continuing medical education (CME) workshops and conferences in emergency pediatrics are available throughout the year. Also, pediatricians can maintain their airway management skills by practicing endotracheal intubation in the operating room setting. 7. Pediatricians must become familiar with the prehospital care providers, EDs, and transport services in their communities. Association with a pediatric intensive care unit at a tertiary care center would also be beneficial. 8. Pediatricians must be available for consultation to local EDs. They must realize that, in many instances, they may represent the physician who is most experienced with caring for the critically ill or injured child. 9. Pediatricians can serve as medical advisors to the EMS systems in their communities. 10. Pediatricians should stay well informed on issues pertaining to EMSC.

911 in your office: preparations to keep emergencies from becoming catastrophes

Emergencies are more common in the day-to-day pediatric practice than generally appreciated. Knowledge of the types of emergencies that may be encountered, obtaining and organizing the necessary equipment and medications, training staff, and developing a plan for disposition of the patients are all required to effectively manage these situations. A well thought-out plan is not prohibitively expensive, but is necessary to ensure proper patient care.