How safe are our paediatric emergency departments? Protocol for a national prospective cohort study

How safe are paediatric emergency departments? A national prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Despite the high number of children treated in emergency departments, patient safety risks in this setting are not well quantified. Our objective was to estimate the risk and type of adverse events, as well as their preventability and severity, for children treated in a paediatric emergency department.

METHODS

Our prospective, multicentre cohort study enrolled children presenting for care during one of 168 8-hour study shifts across nine paediatric emergency departments. Our primary outcome was an adverse event within 21 days of enrolment which was related to care provided at the enrolment visit. We identified 'flagged outcomes' (such as hospital visits, worsening symptoms) through structured telephone interviews with patients and families over the 21 days following enrolment. We screened admitted patients' health records with a validated trigger tool. For patients with flags or triggers, three reviewers independently determined whether an adverse event occurred.

RESULTS

We enrolled 6376 children; 6015 (94%) had follow-up data. Enrolled children had a median age of 4.3 years (IQR 1.6-9.8 years). One hundred and seventy-nine children (3.0%, 95% CI 2.6% to 3.5%) had at least one adverse event. There were 187 adverse events in total; 143 (76.5%, 95% CI 68.9% to 82.7%) were deemed preventable. Management (n=98, 52.4%) and diagnostic issues (n=36, 19.3%) were the most common types of adverse events. Seventy-nine (42.2%) events resulted in a return emergency department visit; 24 (12.8%) resulted in hospital admission; and 3 (1.6%) resulted in transfer to a critical care unit.

CONCLUSION

In this large-scale study, 1 in 33 children treated in a paediatric emergency department experienced an adverse event related to the care they received there. The majority of events were preventable; most were related to management and diagnostic issues. Specific patient populations were at higher risk of adverse events. We identify opportunities for improvement in care.

Adverse Events from Emergency Physician Pediatric Extremity Radiograph Interpretations: A Prospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

We determined how often emergency physician pediatric musculoskeletal (MSK) radiograph interpretations were discordant to that of a radiologist and led to an adverse event (AE). We also established the variables independently associated with this outcome.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study was conducted in an urban, tertiary care children's emergency department (ED). We enrolled children who presented to an ED with an extremity injury and received radiographs. ED physicians documented their radiograph interpretation, which was compared to a radiology reference standard. Patients received telephone follow-up and had institutional medical records reviewed in 3 weeks. An AE occurred if there were clinical sequelae and/or repeat health care visits due to a delay in correct radiograph interpretation.

RESULTS

We enrolled 2,302 children (mean [±SD] age = 9.0 [4.4] years; 1,288 (56.0%) male]. Of these, 180 (7.8%; 95% confidence interval = 6.8 to 9.0) ED physician discordant interpretations resulted in an AE. Specifically, there were no negative clinical outcomes; however, relative to cases diagnosed correctly at the index ED, patients whose fracture was not initially identified encountered 77.2% more subsequent ED visits, while those falsely diagnosed with a fracture experienced 41.5% additional orthopedic clinic visits. Odds of an ED discrepant interpretation was significantly higher if a physician's pretest probability of a fracture was ≤ 20% versus> 20% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.6), patient's pain score was ≤ 2 versus> 2 (aOR = 1.6), and injury was located in a joint versus other location (aOR = 1.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency physician discordant pediatric MSK radiograph interpretations that resulted in an AE occurred with regular frequency in a pediatric ED setting. AEs were primarily an increase in subsequent health care visits. Importantly, a low clinical suspicion for a fracture or injury located in the joint were risk factors for ED physician discordant interpretations.

Pediatric Emergency Research Canada: Origins and Evolution

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to describe the origins, growth, and progress of a national research network in pediatric emergency medicine.

METHODS

The success of Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC) is described in terms of advancing the pediatric emergency medicine agenda, grant funding, peer-reviewed publications, mentoring new investigators, and global collaborations.

RESULTS

Since 1995, clinicians and investigators within PERC have grown the network to 15 active tertiary pediatric emergency medicine sites across Canada. Investigators have advanced the research agenda in numerous areas, including gastroenteritis, bronchiolitis, croup, head injury, asthma, and injury management. Since the first PERC Annual Scientific meeting in 2004, the attendance has increased by approximately 400% to 152 attendees, 65 presentations, and 13 project/investigator meetings. More than $33 million in grant funding has been awarded to the network, and has published 76 peer-reviewed articles. In 2011, PERC's success was recognized with a Top Achievement Award in Health Research from Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Canadian Medical Association Journal.

CONCLUSIONS

Moving forward, PERC will continue to focus on the creation of new knowledge, the mentorship of new investigators and fellows in developing research projects, and promoting a pediatric emergency medicine-focused research agenda guided by the pooling of expertise from individuals across the nation. Through collaborations with networks across the globe, PERC will continue to strive for the conduct of high-quality, impactful research that improves outcomes in children with acute illness and injury.

Knowledge translation studies in paediatric emergency medicine: A systematic review of the literature

AIM

Systematic review of knowledge translation studies focused on paediatric emergency care to describe and assess the interventions used in emergency department settings.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for knowledge translation studies conducted in the emergency department that included the care of children. Two researchers independently reviewed the studies.

RESULTS

From 1305 publications identified, 15 studies of varied design were included. Four were cluster-controlled trials, two patient-level randomised controlled trials, two interrupted time series, one descriptive study and six before and after intervention studies. Knowledge translation interventions were predominantly aimed at the treating clinician, with some targeting the organisation. Studies assessed effectiveness of interventions over 6-12 months in before and after studies, and 3-28 months in cluster or patient level controlled trials. Changes in clinical practice were variable, with studies on single disease and single treatments in a single site showing greater improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence for effective methods to translate knowledge into practice in paediatric emergency medicine is fairly limited. More optimal study designs with more explicit descriptions of interventions are needed to facilitate other groups to effectively apply these procedures in their own setting.