Parent and Clinician Communication During Paediatric Burn Wound Care: A Qualitative Study

Acceptability and Usability of Smileyscope Virtual Reality for Paediatric Pain Management During Burn Procedures: Perspectives of Patients, Carers and Clinicians

AIM

To explore clinician, child and parent acceptability and usability of the Smileyscope VR device in the context of addressing the unique pain and distress needs of young burn patients.

DESIGN

A survey comprising closed and open-ended questions.

METHOD

Descriptive statistics analysed participant characteristics, pain and analgesia. Qualitative content was collected from April 2022-August 2022 and analysed to identify barriers and enablers. Categories were then mapped onto the Capabilities, Opportunities and Motivation-Behaviour Wheel (COM-B) framework.

RESULTS

Smileyscope was found to be effective for reducing pain and anxiety during dressing changes by both patients (n = 39) and parents (n = 37). Clinicians (n = 35) reported high self-efficacy and willingness to reuse the device. However, concerns arose regarding the device's fit and the need for age-appropriate programmes.

CONCLUSION

Smileyscope demonstrated promise in reducing procedural pain and distress. The device is well accepted by all participants implying ease of implementation. Feedback suggests further program development and fitting optimisation is required.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

Improved procedural pain has proven to decrease wound healing times, decreasing possible need for further scar management and long-term consequences after sustaining a burn injury. Smileyscope use in rural hospitals presents valuable opportunities for optimising early paediatric burn pain.

IMPACT

Increased burn pain can delay wound healing and have long term physical and psychological impact on patients. Smileyscope was well received within this cohort; however, improvements in device design and programmes were suggested. This study shows the potential for use of Smileyscope as a non-pharmacological approach to improving paediatric burn pain and distress.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

While our study included patients, parents and clinicians as research participants, there was no patient or public contribution in the design or conduct of the study, analysis or interpretation of the data.

Family engagement in paediatric acute care settings: A realist review

AIM

To create a programme theory of family engagement in paediatric acute care to explicate the relationships between contexts and mechanisms of family engagement that align with family, direct care providers and healthcare organization outcomes.

DESIGN

Realist review and synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science searches for the 2.5-year period (July 2019-December 2021) following our 2021 scoping review.

REVIEW METHODS

Following methods described by Pawson and Rycroft-Malone, we defined the scope of the review, searched for and appraised the evidence, extracted and synthesized study findings and developed a supporting narrative of our results.

RESULTS

Of 316 initial citations, 101 were included in our synthesis of the final programme theory. Contexts included family and direct care provider individualism, and the organizational care philosophy and environment. Mechanisms were family presence, family enactment of a role in the child's care, direct care providers facilitating a family role in the child's care, unit/organizational promotion of a family role, relationship building and mutually beneficial partnerships. Outcomes were largely family-focussed, with a paucity of organizational outcomes studied. We identified four context-mechanism-outcome configurations.

CONCLUSION

This realist review uncovered underlying contexts and mechanisms between patients, direct care providers and organizations in the family engagement process and key components of a mutually beneficial partnership. Given that successful family engagement requires direct care provider and organizational support, future research should expand beyond family outcomes to include direct care providers, particularly nurses and healthcare organization outcomes.

IMPACT

The final programme theory of family engagement in paediatric acute care provides a roadmap for clinicians to develop complex interventions to engage families and evaluate their impact. The components of our final programme theory reflect family engagement concepts that have been evolving for decades.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The team conducting this review included members from the practice setting (JT & KG). In the future, as we and others use this model in practice, we will seek input for refinement from clinicians, patients and caregivers.

Exploring Limited English Proficiency in the Clinical Outcomes of Pediatric Burn Patients

INTRODUCTION

Limited English proficiency (LEP) is linked to lower health care access and worse clinical outcomes. This study aims to explore the potential role of LEP on clinical outcomes of pediatric burn patients.

METHODS

We conducted a single-institution retrospective study of burn patients presenting at a tertiary pediatric burn referral program between January 2016 and December 2020. Patient demographics, burn mechanism, severity, interventions, and primary patient language were abstracted from the electronic health record. Clinical outcomes (length of stay [LOS], clinic follow-up, and 30-day readmission) of patients with LEP were compared to patients with English as primary language (EPL).

RESULTS

Thirty-five (4.2%) patients with LEP were identified of 840 total patients. On univariate analysis, there was no difference in mean total body surface area (6.5% versus 6.1%), report of physical abuse (2.9% versus 8.9%), or need for grafting (14.3% versus 15.0%) comparing patients with LEP to those with EPL. Patients with LEP were more likely to have a scald burn (68.6% versus 48.9%, P = 0.025) and less likely to have a flame/fire burn (20.0% versus 37.6%, P = 0.047). On multivariate analysis, there was no difference between patients with LEP compared to patients with EPL for LOS (2.9 versus 3.5 d), 30-day readmissions (5.6% versus 5.7%), or clinic follow-up (80.6% versus 75.0%). In patients with >10% total body surface area, patients with LEP had a longer emergency department LOS (277 min versus 145 min, P = 0.06) but no difference in outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric patients with LEP were not found to have worse burn outcomes compared to EPL patients in our patient sample. However, a true association is difficult to determine given the small sample size of LEP patients and the potential underestimation of language discordancy as recorded in the electronic medical record. Further research is needed to better explore the role of primary language and health communication as a social determinant of health in pediatric burn patients.

Management of non-severe burn wounds in children and adolescents: optimising outcomes through all stages of the patient journey

Paediatric burn injuries are common, especially in children younger than 5 years, and can lead to poor physical and psychosocial outcomes in the long term. In this Review, we aim to summarise the key factors and interventions before hospital admission and following discharge that can improve the long-term outcomes of paediatric burns. Care can be optimised through first aid treatment, correct initial assessment of burn severity, and appropriate patient referral to a burns centre. Scar prevention or treatment and patient follow-up after discharge are also essential. As most burn injuries in children are comparatively small and readily survivable, this Review does not cover the perioperative management associated with severe burns that require fluid resuscitation, or inhalational injury. Burns disproportionately affect children from low socioeconomic backgrounds and those living in low-income and middle-income countries, with ample evidence to suggest that there remains scope for low-cost interventions to improve care for those patients with the greatest burden of burn injury. Current knowledge gaps and future research directions are discussed.

Early non-excisional debridement of paediatric burns under general anaesthesia reduces time to re-epithelialisation and risk of skin graft

Reported advantages of early excision for larger burn injuries include reduced morbidity, mortality, and hospital length of stay for adult burn patients. However, a paucity of evidence supports the best option for paediatric burns and the advantages of non-excisional (mechanical) debridement. Procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department is a popular alternative to debridement in operating theatres under general anaesthesia. This study aims to evaluate the association between early (< 24 h post-injury) non-excisional debridement under general anaesthesia with burn wound re-epithelialisation time and skin graft requirements. Cohort study of children younger than 17 years who presented with burns of five percent total body surface area or greater. Data from January 2013 to December 2019 were extracted from a prospectively collected state-wide paediatric burns' registry. Time to re-epithelialisation was tested using survival analysis, and binary logistic regression for odds of skin graft requirementto analyse effects of early non-excisional debridement in the operating theatre. Overall, 292 children met eligibility (males 55.5%). Early non-excisional debridement under general anaesthesia in the operating theatre, significantly reduced the time to re-epithelialisation (14 days versus 21 days, p = 0.029)) and the odds of requiring a skin graft in comparison to paediatric patients debrided in the emergency department under Ketamine sedation (OR: 6.97 (2.14-22.67), p < 0.001. This study is the first to demonstrate that early non-excisional debridement under general anaesthesia in the operating theatre significantly reduces wound re-epithelialisation time and subsequent need for a skin graft in paediatric burn patients. Analysis suggests that ketamine procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department used for burn wound debridement is not an effective substitute for debridement in the operating theatre.