6 research outputs found

    A Multicenter Evaluation of Pediatric Emergency Department Injury Visits during the COVID-19 Pandemic

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Injuries, the leading cause of death in children 1-17 years old, are often preventable. Injury patterns are impacted by changes in the child\u27s environment, shifts in supervision, and caregiver stressors. The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence and proportion of injuries, mechanisms, and severity seen in Pediatric Emergency Departments (PEDs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This multicenter, cross-sectional study from January 2019 through December 2020 examined visits to 40 PEDs for children \u3c 18 years old. Injury was defined by at least one International Classification of Disease-10th revision (ICD-10) code for bodily injury (S00-T78). The main study outcomes were total and proportion of PED injury-related visits compared to all visits in March through December 2020 and to the same months in 2019. Weekly injury visits as a percentage of total PED visits were calculated for all weeks between January 2019 and December 2020. RESULTS: The study included 741,418 PED visits for injuries pre-COVID-19 pandemic (2019) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020). Overall PED visits from all causes decreased 27.4% in March to December 2020 compared to the same time frame in 2019; however, the proportion of injury-related PED visits in 2020 increased by 37.7%. In 2020, injured children were younger (median age 6.31 years vs 7.31 in 2019), more commonly White (54% vs 50%, p \u3c 0.001), non-Hispanic (72% vs 69%, p \u3c 0.001) and had private insurance (35% vs 32%, p \u3c 0.001). Injury hospitalizations increased 2.2% (p \u3c 0.001) and deaths increased 0.03% (p \u3c 0.001) in 2020 compared to 2019. Mean injury severity score increased (2.2 to 2.4, p \u3c 0.001) between 2019 and 2020. Injuries declined for struck by/against (- 4.9%) and overexertion (- 1.2%) mechanisms. Injuries proportionally increased for pedal cycles (2.8%), cut/pierce (1.5%), motor vehicle occupant (0.9%), other transportation (0.6%), fire/burn (0.5%) and firearms (0.3%) compared to all injuries in 2020 versus 2019. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of PED injury-related visits in March through December 2020 increased compared to the same months in 2019. Racial and payor differences were noted. Mechanisms of injury seen in the PED during 2020 changed compared to 2019, and this can inform injury prevention initiatives

    Implementation of an emerging hospital-based violence intervention program: a multimethod study

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Individuals who experience assaultive firearm injury are at elevated risk for violent reinjury and multiple negative physical and psychological health outcomes. Hospital-based violence intervention programs (HVIPs) may improve patient outcomes through intensive, community-based case management. METHODS: We conducted a multimethod evaluation of an emerging HVIP at a large trauma center using the framework. We assessed recruitment, violent reinjury outcomes, and service provision from 2020 to 2022. Semistructured, qualitative interviews were performed with HVIP participants and program administrators to elicit experiences with HVIP services. Directed content analysis was used to generate and organize codes from the data. We also conducted clinician surveys to assess awareness and referral patterns. RESULTS: Of the 319 HVIP-eligible individuals who presented with non-fatal assaultive firearm injury, 39 individuals (12%) were enrolled in the HVIP. Inpatient admission was independently associated with HVIP enrollment (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.3 to 5.2; p=0.01). Facilitators of included engaging with credible messengers, personal relationships with HVIP program administrators, and encouragement from family to enroll. Fear of disclosure to police was cited as a key barrier to enrollment. For the domain, enrollment was not associated with reinjury (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.16 to 3.1). Participants identified key areas of focus where needs were not met including housing and mental health. Limited awareness of HVIP services was a barrier to . Participants described strengths of , highlighting the deep relationships built between clients and administrators. For the long-term of the program, both clinicians and HVIP clients reported that there is a need for HVIP services for individuals who experience violent injury. CONCLUSIONS: Credible messengers facilitate engagement with potential participants, whereas concerns around police involvement is an important barrier. Inpatient admission provides an opportunity to engage patients and may facilitate recruitment. HVIPs may benefit from increased program intensity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV
    corecore