Engagement and Leadership in Firearm-Related Violence Prevention: The Role of the Pediatric Hospitalist

Assessing the Effect of Electronic Medical Record Note Template on Firearm Access Screening in High-Risk Children

BACKGROUND

Children who survive a suicide attempt are at greater risk of later dying by suicide. Firearm screening and provision of lethal means restriction counseling may improve the safety of this high-risk cohort. Our objective was to determine firearm screening rates among children hospitalized after suicide attempts. We also assessed the effects of templating firearm screening questions into the psychiatric consultation note.

METHODS

This retrospective pre- and postintervention study identified children <19 years old admitted after a suicide attempt from January 1, 2016 to March 1, 2020. In mid-2017, the psychiatry consult note incorporated a previously available optional firearm screening tool as an embedded field (intervention). The intervention effect on proportion of children at high risk screened for firearm access was assessed by interrupted time series analysis.

RESULTS

Of 26 088 total admissions, 357 met inclusion criteria. The majority were teenagers (15 years old, interquartile range 14 to 16), 275 were female (77%), and 167 were White (47%). Overall, 286 (80%) of patients had firearm access screening documentation. Of the 71 (20%) without screening, 21 (30%) were discharged from the hospital; 50 (70%) were transferred to psychiatric facilities. There was no significant difference in screening rates after the intervention (Intervention shift P = .74, slope P = .85).

CONCLUSIONS

Many children were not screened for firearm access after a suicide attempt requiring hospitalization despite the screening tool integration. Multidisciplinary quality improvement efforts are needed to ensure that this critical risk reduction intervention is implemented for all patients after a suicide attempt.

A Parent Survey Assessing Association of Exposure to Gun Violence, Beliefs, and Physician Counseling

OBJECTIVES

The study objectives are to assess associations between hospitalized children's parental exposure to gun violence (GV) and parental beliefs about guns and gun safety; secondarily, the authors aim to describe parental views on the pediatrician's role in firearm injury prevention (FIP) counseling.

METHODS

Parents residing with children <20 years old hospitalized at a quaternary care hospital in a large city were eligible. Researchers administered verbal surveys between March 2017 and July 2019. We analyzed data (Wilcoxon rank-sum, χ2, or Fisher's exact tests, as appropriate) to compare the characteristics of those with exposure to GV and those without, and to assess associations of those with and without GV exposure with various beliefs.

RESULTS

Enrollment included 225 parents or guardians. Although 75.5% agreed pediatricians should talk to parents about safe gun storage, 8.9% reported FIP counseling by their child's doctor. There were no substantial differences in characteristics between those with GV exposure versus those without. The study revealed that 60.0% of participants reported hearing gunshots, and 41.8% had a friend/relative who had been shot; only 29.8% reported neither. There were no differences between groups in gun-related beliefs regardless of exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population, there was no association between exposure to GV and gun-related beliefs. Most parents are receptive to FIP counseling, yet few have discussed FIP with their pediatrician despite high exposure to GV in this community. Nearly all parents agreed with the use of gunlocks and stricter laws for background checks. Regardless of exposure to GV, parents agreed with safe gun storage and support strengthening gun safety laws.

Firearm ownership and access to healthcare in the U.S.: A cross-sectional analysis of six states

Provider-led firearm storage counseling is a form of firearm suicide prevention intervention. Little research examines whether barriers to healthcare access for at-risk individuals limit this intervention's impact. This study explores the relationship between household firearm presence/storage practices and healthcare access/utilization using a cross-sectional analysis of the 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), which included state-representative data from six states that completed the Firearm Safety and Healthcare Access Modules: California, Idaho, Kansas, Oregon, Texas, and Utah. Exposures were household firearm presence and firearm storage practices. Outcomes were lacking health insurance, not having a healthcare provider, inability to afford care, and no recent routine checkup. Logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, education, employment, children in the household, and state of residency. Our analysis included 31,888 individuals; 31.1% reported a household firearm. Compared to those in firearm-owning households, those in non-firearm-owning households had higher odds of being uninsured (aOR 1.99, 95%CI 1.60-2.48), not having a provider (aOR 1.40, 95%CI 1.18-1.67), and reporting cost as a barrier to care (aOR 1.37, 95%CI 1.13-1.67). Among firearm-owning households, those with firearms stored loaded and unlocked had higher odds of lacking a personal healthcare provider (aOR 1.52, 95%CI 1.07-2.15) compared to individuals in homes where firearms were stored unloaded. Results indicate that while individuals in firearm-owning households are more likely than non-firearm owning households to have healthcare access, those in homes with the riskiest firearm storage practices had less access. Provider-led counseling may have limited reach for individuals in homes with risky firearm storage practices.

A multidimensional quality model: an opportunity for patients, their kin, healthcare providers and professionals to coproduce health

Background: It is twenty years since the US Institute of Medicine (IOM) defined quality in healthcare, as comprising six domains: person-centredness, timeliness, efficiency, effectiveness, safety and equity. Since then, a new quality movement has emerged, with the development of numerous interventions aimed at improving quality, with a focus on accessibility, safety and effectiveness of care. Further gains in equity and timeliness have proven even more challenging. The challenge: With the emergence of "service-oriented" systems, complexity science, the challenges of climate change, the growth of social media and the internet and the new reality of COVID-19, the original domains proposed by the IOM invite reflection on their relevance and possibility for improvement. The possible solution: In this paper, we propose a revised model of quality that is built on never-ending learning and includes new domains, such as Ecology and Transparency, which reflect the changing worldview of healthcare. We also introduce the concept of person- or "kin-centred care" to emphasise the shared humanity of people involved in the interdependent work. The change of Person Centred Care to Kin Centred Care introduces a broader concept of the person and ensures that Person Centred Care is included in every domain of quality rather than as a separate domain. The concentration on the technological aspects of quality is an example of the problem in the past. This is a more expansive view of what "person-centredness" began. The delivery of health and healthcare requires people working in differing roles, with explicit attention to the lived realities of the people in the roles of professional and patient. The new model will provide a construct that may make the attainment of equity in healthcare more possible with a focus on kindness for all.

A multidimensional quality model: an opportunity for patients, their kin, healthcare providers and professionals to coproduce health

Background: It is twenty years since the US Institute of Medicine (IOM) defined quality in healthcare, as comprising six domains: person-centredness, timeliness, efficiency, effectiveness, safety and equity. Since then, a new quality movement has emerged, with the development of numerous interventions aimed at improving quality, with a focus on accessibility, safety and effectiveness of care. Further gains in equity and timeliness have proven even more challenging. The challenge: With the emergence of "service-oriented" systems, complexity science, the challenges of climate change, the growth of social media and the internet and the new reality of COVID-19, the original domains proposed by the IOM invite reflection on their relevance and possibility for improvement. The possible solution: In this paper we propose a revised model of quality that is built on never-ending learning and includes new domains, such as Ecology and Transparency, which reflect the changing worldview of healthcare. We also introduce the concept of person- or "kin-centred care" to emphasise the shared humanity of people involved in the interdependent work. This is a more expansive view of what "person-centredness" began. The delivery of health and healthcare requires people working in differing roles, with explicit attention to the lived realities of the people in the roles of professional and patient. The new model will provide a construct that may make the attainment of equity in healthcare more possible with a focus on kindness for all.

A multidimensional quality model: an opportunity for patients, their kin, healthcare providers and professionals in the new COVID-19 period

Background: It is twenty years since the Institute of Medicine (IOM) defined quality in healthcare, as comprising six domains: person-centredness, timeliness, efficiency, effectiveness, safety and equity. Since then, a new quality movement has emerged, with the development of numerous interventions aimed at improving quality, with a focus on accessibility, safety and effectiveness of care. Further gains in equity and timeliness have proven even more challenging. The challenge: With the emergence of "service-oriented" systems, complexity science, the challenges of climate change, the growth of social media and the internet and the new reality of COVID-19, the original domains proposed by the IOM invite reflection on their relevance and possibility for improvement. The possible solution: In this paper we propose a revised model of quality that is built on never-ending learning and includes new domains, such as Ecology and Transparency, which reflect the changing worldview of healthcare. We also introduce the concept of person- or "kin-centred care" to emphasise the shared humanity of people involved in the interdependent work. This is a more expansive view of what "person-centredness" began. The delivery of health and healthcare requires people working in differing roles, with explicit attention to the lived realities of the people in the roles of professional and patient. The new model will provide a construct that may make the attainment of equity in healthcare more possible with a focus on kindness for all.