The economic burden experienced by carers of children who had a critical deterioration at a tertiary children’s hospital in the United Kingdom (the DETECT study): an online survey

BackgroundUnplanned critical care admissions following in-hospital deterioration in children are expected to impose a significant burden for carers across a number of dimensions. One dimension relates to the financial and economic impact associated with the admission, from both direct out-of-pocket expenditures, as well as indirect costs, reflecting productivity losses. A robust assessment of these costs is key to understand the wider impact of interventions aiming to reduce in-patient deterioration. This work aims to determine the economic burden imposed on carers caring for hospitalised children that experience critical deterioration events.MethodsDescriptive study with quantitative approach. Carers responded to an online survey between July 2020 and April 2021. The survey was developed by the research team and piloted before use. The sample comprised 71 carers of children admitted to a critical care unit following in-patient deterioration, at a tertiary children's hospital in the UK. The survey provides a characterisation of the carer's household and estimates of direct non-medical costs grouped in five different expenditure categories. Productivity losses can also be estimated based on the reported information.ResultsMost carers reported expenditures associated to the child's admission in the week preceding the survey completion. Two-thirds of working carers had missed at least one workday in the week prior to the survey completion. Moreover, eight in ten carers reported having had to travel from home to the hospital at least once a week. These expenditures, on average, amount to £164 per week, grouped in five categories (38% each to travelling costs and to food and drink costs, with accommodation, childcare, and parking representing 12%, 7% and 5%, respectively). Additionally, weekly productivity losses for working carers are estimated at £195.ConclusionUnplanned critical care admissions for children impose a substantial financial burden for carers. Moreover, productivity losses imply a subsequent cost to society. Even though subsidised hospital parking and on-site accommodation at the hospital contribute to minimising such expenditure, the overall impact for carers remains high. Interventions aiming at reducing emergency critical care admissions, or their length, can be crucial to further contribute to the reduction of this burden.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN61279068, date of registration 07/06/2019, retrospectively registered

Parents’ experiences and perceptions of the acceptability of a whole-hospital, pro-active electronic pediatric early warning system (the DETECT study): A qualitative interview study

BackgroundFailure to recognize and respond to clinical deterioration in a timely and effective manner is an urgent safety concern, driving the need for early identification systems to be embedded in the care of children in hospital. Pediatric early warning systems (PEWS) or PEW scores alert health professionals (HPs) to signs of deterioration, trigger a review and escalate care as needed. PEW scoring allows HPs to record a child's vital signs and other key data including parent concern.AimThis study aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of parents about the acceptability of a newly implemented electronic surveillance system (the DETECT surveillance system), and factors that influenced acceptability and their awareness around signs of clinical deterioration and raising concern.MethodsDescriptive, qualitative semi-structured telephone interviews were undertaken with parents of children who had experienced a critical deterioration event (CDE) (n = 19) and parents of those who had not experienced a CDE (non-CDE parents) (n = 17). Data were collected between February 2020 and February 2021.ResultsQualitative data were analyzed using generic thematic analysis. Analysis revealed an overarching theme of trust as a key factor that underpinned all aspects of children's vital signs being recorded and monitored. The main themes reflect three domains of parents' trust: trust in themselves, trust in the HPs, and trust in the technology.ConclusionParents' experiences and perceptions of the acceptability of a whole-hospital, pro-active electronic pediatric early warning system (The DETECT system) were positive; they found it acceptable and welcomed the use of new technology to support the care of their child

Accuracy and Efficiency of Recording Pediatric Early Warning Scores Using an Electronic Physiological Surveillance System Compared With Traditional Paper-Based Documentation

Pediatric Early Warning Scores are advocated to assist health professionals to identify early signs of serious illness or deterioration in hospitalized children. Scores are derived from the weighting applied to recorded vital signs and clinical observations reflecting deviation from a predetermined "norm." Higher aggregate scores trigger an escalation in care aimed at preventing critical deterioration. Process errors made while recording these data, including plotting or calculation errors, have the potential to impede the reliability of the score. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a controlled study of documentation using five clinical vignettes. We measured the accuracy of vital sign recording, score calculation, and time taken to complete documentation using a handheld electronic physiological surveillance system, VitalPAC Pediatric, compared with traditional paper-based charts. We explored the user acceptability of both methods using a Web-based survey. Twenty-three staff participated in the controlled study. The electronic physiological surveillance system improved the accuracy of vital sign recording, 98.5% versus 85.6%, P < .02, Pediatric Early Warning Score calculation, 94.6% versus 55.7%, P < .02, and saved time, 68 versus 98 seconds, compared with paper-based documentation, P < .002. Twenty-nine staff completed the Web-based survey. They perceived that the electronic physiological surveillance system offered safety benefits by reducing human error while providing instant visibility of recorded data to the entire clinical team

Assessing acutely ill children in general practice using the National PEWS and LqSOFA clinical scores: a retrospective cohort study

Background: Clinical tools are needed in general practice to help identify seriously ill children. The Liverpool quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (LqSOFA) was validated in an Emergency Department and performed well. The National Paediatric Early Warning score (PEWS) has been introduced in hospitals throughout England with hopes for implementation in general practice. Aim: To validate the LqSOFA and National PEWS in general practice. Design/Setting: Secondary analysis of 6,703 children <5 years presenting to 225 general practices in England and Wales with acute illnesses, linked to hospital data. Method: Variables from the LqSOFA and National PEWS were mapped onto study data to calculate score totals. A primary outcome of admission within two days of GP consultation was used to calculate sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive values (NPV), positive predictive values (PPV) and area-under-the-curve (AUC). Results: 104/6,703 children were hospitalised within two days (pre-test probability 1.6%). The sensitivity of the LqSOFA was 30.6% (95% confidence interval 21.8% - 41.0%), with a specificity of 84.7% (83.7% - 85.6%), PPV of 3.0% (2.1% – 4.4%), NPV of 98.7% (98.4% - 99.0%), and AUC of 0.58 (0.53 - 0.63). The sensitivity of the National PEWS was 81.0% (71.0% - 88.1%), with a specificity of 32.5% (31.2% - 33.8%); PPV of 1.9% (1.5% - 2.5%); NPV of 99.1% (98.4% - 99.4%) and AUC of 0.66 (0.59 - 0.72). Conclusion: Although the NPVs appear useful, due to low pre-test probabilities rather than discriminative ability, neither tool accurately identified hospitalisations. Unconsidered use by GPs could result in unsustainable referrals

Clinical utility and acceptability of a whole-hospital, pro-active electronic paediatric early warning system (the DETECT study): a prospective e-survey of parents and health professionals.

BackgroundPaediatric early warning systems (PEWS) are a means of tracking physiological state and alerting healthcare professionals about signs of deterioration, triggering a clinical review and/or escalation of care of children. A proactive end-to-end deterioration solution (the DETECT surveillance system) with an embedded e-PEWS that included sepsis screening was introduced across a tertiary children's hospital. One component of the implementation programme was a sub-study to determine an understanding of the DETECT e-PEWS in terms of its clinical utility and its acceptability.AimThis study aimed to examine how parents and health professionals view and engage with the DETECT e-PEWS apps, with a particular focus on its clinical utility and its acceptability.MethodA prospective, closed (tick box or sliding scale) and open (text based) question, e-survey of parents (n = 137) and health professionals (n = 151) with experience of DETECT e-PEWS. Data were collected between February 2020 and February 2021.ResultsQuantitative data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics and qualitative data with generic thematic analysis. Overall, both clinical utility and acceptability (across seven constructs) were high across both stakeholder groups although some challenges to utility (e.g., sensitivity of triggers within specific patient populations) and acceptability (e.g., burden related to having to carry extra technology) were identified.ConclusionDespite the multifaceted nature of the intervention and the complexity of implementation across a hospital, the system demonstrated clinical utility and acceptability across two key groups of stakeholders: parents and health professionals

Validity and effectiveness of paediatric early warning systems and track and trigger tools for identifying and reducing clinical deterioration in hospitalised children: A systematic review

Objective: To assess (1) how well validated existing paediatric track and trigger tools (PTTT) are for predicting adverse outcomes in hospitalised children, and (2) how effective broader paediatric early warning systems are at reducing adverse outcomes in hospitalised children.Design: Systematic review.Data sources: British Nursing Index, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, EMBASE, Health Management Information Centre, Medline, Medline in Process, Scopus and Web of Knowledge searched through May 2018. Eligibility criteria: We included (1) papers reporting on the development or validation of a PTTT or (2) the implementation of a broader early warning system in paediatric units (age 0–18 years), where adverse outcome metrics were reported. Several study designs were considered.Data extraction and synthesis: Data extraction was conducted by two independent reviewers using template forms. Studies were quality assessed using a modified Downs and Black rating scale. Results: 36 validation studies and 30 effectiveness studies were included, with 27 unique PTTT identified. Validation studies were largely retrospective case-control studies or chart reviews, while effectiveness studies were predominantly uncontrolled before-after studies. Metrics of adverse outcomes varied considerably. Some PTTT demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy in retrospective case-control studies (primarily for predicting paediatric intensive care unit transfers), but positive predictive value was consistently low, suggesting potential for alarm fatigue. A small number of effectiveness studies reported significant decreases in mortality, arrests or code calls, but were limited by methodological concerns. Overall, there was limited evidence of paediatric early warning system interventions leading to reductions in deterioration. Conclusion: There are several fundamental methodological limitations in the PTTT literature, and the predominance of single-site studies carried out in specialist centres greatly limits generalisability. With limited evidence of effectiveness, calls to make PTTT mandatory across all paediatric units are not supported by the evidence base

Accuracy of a Modified qSOFA Score for Predicting Critical Care Admission in Febrile Children

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The identification of life-threatening infection in febrile children presenting to the emergency department (ED) remains difficult. The quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) was only derived for adult populations, implying an urgent need for pediatric scores. We developed and validated a novel, adapted qSOFA score (Liverpool quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [LqSOFA]) and compared its performance with qSOFA, Pediatric Early Warning Score (PEWS), and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) high-risk criteria in predicting critical care (CC) admission in febrile children presenting to the ED. METHODS: The LqSOFA (range, 0–4) incorporates age-adjusted heart rate, respiratory rate, capillary refill, and consciousness level on the Alert, Voice, Pain, Unresponsive scale. The primary outcome was CC admission within 48 hours of ED presentation, and the secondary outcome was sepsis-related mortality. LqSOFA, qSOFA, PEWS, and NICE high-risk criteria scores were calculated, and performance characteristics, including area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, were calculated for each score. RESULTS: In the initial (n = 1121) cohort, 47 CC admissions (4.2%) occurred, and in the validation (n = 12 241) cohort, 135 CC admissions (1.1%) occurred, and there were 5 sepsis-related deaths. In the validation cohort, LqSOFA predicted CC admission with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 0.86), versus qSOFA (0.66; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.71), PEWS (0.93; 95% CI, 0.90 to 0.95), and NICE high-risk criteria (0.81; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.85). For predicting CC admission, the LqSOFA outperformed the qSOFA, with a net reclassification index of 10.4% (95% CI, 1.0% to 19.9%). CONCLUSIONS: In this large study, we demonstrate improved performance of the LqSOFA over qSOFA in identifying febrile children at risk for CC admission and sepsis-related mortality. Further validation is required in other settings

Teaching paediatric ward teams to recognise and manage the deteriorating child

Background: Issues around the deterioration of hospitalised children are known: the failure to observe and monitor patients adequately, a failure to recognise the deteriorating patient, a failure to communicative effectively within the healthcare team and a failure to respond appropriately or in a timely manner (Pearson, 2008; NPSA, 2009). In response to this, a new 1-day course called RESPOND (Recognising Signs of Paediatric hOspital iNpatients Deterioration) was developed. Objectives: To describe the development of the RESPOND course and present a preliminary evaluation of the first four courses. Methods: A written postcourse survey was completed by participants (junior doctors, medical students, nurses and health care assistants) immediately after the course and an electronic survey completed three months later in a large children's hospital in the North West of England. Data were analysed descriptively and by simple thematic analysis of free text responses. Results: Sixty-five participants undertook the RESPOND course over four separate days. Overwhelmingly participants found the course positive, with the most frequently cited benefit being improved multidisciplinary communication. Despite a poor response to the second survey, 18% (12 of 65) of respondents remained positive about the impact of the course. Conclusions and relevance to practice: This preliminary evaluation combined with a reduction in hospital cardiac arrest rates suggest that the multiprofessional RESPOND course (in conjunction with an early warning tool and response system) is successful as part of a targeted strategy to promote patient safety within a children's hospital.</p

Dynamic Electronic Tracking and Escalation to reduce Critical care Transfers (DETECT): the protocol for a stepped wedge mixed method study to explore the clinical effectiveness, clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of an electronic physiological surveillance system for use in children

BackgroundActive monitoring of hospitalised adults, using handheld electronic physiological surveillance systems, is associated with reduced in-patient mortality in the UK. Potential also exists to improve the recognition and response to deterioration in hospitalised children. However, the clinical effectiveness, the clinical utility, and the cost-effectiveness of this technology to reduce paediatric critical deterioration, have not been evaluated in an NHS environment. MethodThis is a non-randomised stepped-wedge prospective mixed methods study. Participants will be in-patients under the age of 18 years, at a tertiary children’s hospital. Day-case, neonatal surgery and Paediatric Intensive Care patients will be excluded. The intervention is the implementation of Careflow Vitals and Connect (System C) to document vital signs and sepsis screening. The underpinning age-specific Paediatric Early Warning (PEWS) risk model calculates PEWS and provides associated clinical decision support. Real-time data of deterioration risk are immediately visible to the entire clinical team to optimise situation awareness, the chronology of the escalation and response are captured with automated reporting of the organisational safety profile.Baseline data will be collected prospectively for one year preceding the intervention. Following a three month implementation period, one year of post-intervention data will be collected. The primary outcome is unplanned transfers to critical care (HDU and/or PICU). The secondary outcomes are critical deterioration events (CDE), the timeliness of critical care transfer, the critical care interventions required, critical care length of stay and outcome. The clinical effectiveness will be measured by prevalence of critical deterioration events (CDE) per 1,000 hospital admissions and per 1,000 non-ICU bed days. Observation, field notes, e-surveys and focused interviews will be used to establish the clinical utility of the technology to healthcare professionals and the acceptability to in-patient families. The cost-effectiveness will be analysed using Health Related Group costs per day for the critical care and hospital stay for up to 90 days post CDE. DiscussionIf the technology is effective at reducing CDE in hospitalised children it could be deployed widely, to reduce morbidity and mortality, and associated costs