Setting up a Paediatric Rapid Access Outpatient Unit: Views of general practice teams

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Rapid Access Outpatient Units (RAOUs) have been suggested as an alternative to hospital inpatient units for the management of some acutely unwell children. These units can provide ambulatory care, delivered close to home, and may prevent unnecessary hospital admission. There are no qualitative data on the views of primary care practitioners regarding these types of facilities. The aim of the study was to explore the opinions of primary care practitioners regarding a newly established RAOU.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The RAOU was established locally at a district general hospital when inpatient beds were closed and moved to an inpatient centre, based six miles away at the tertiary teaching hospital.</p> <p>Qualitative, practice based group interviews with primary care practitioners (general practitioners (GPs), nurse practitioners and practice nurses) on their experiences of the RAOU. The data collection consisted of three practice based interviews with 14 participants. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic content analysis was used to evaluate the data.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There was positive feedback regarding ease of telephone access for referral, location, and the value of a service staffed by senior doctors where children could be observed, investigated and discharged quickly. There was confusion regarding the referral criteria for the assessment unit and where to send certain children. A majority of the practitioners felt the utility of the RAOU was restricted by its opening hours. Most participants felt they lacked sufficient information regarding the remit and facilities of the unit and this led to some uneasiness regarding safety and long term sustainability.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Practitioners considered that the RAOU offered a rapid senior opinion, flexible short term observation, quick access to investigations and was more convenient for patients. There were concerns regarding opening hours, safety of patients and lack of information about the unit's facilities. There was confusion about which children should be sent to the unit. This study raises questions regarding policy in regard to the organisation of paediatric services. It highlights that when establishing alternative services to local inpatient units, continual communication and engagement of primary care is essential if the units are to function effectively.</p

Protecting children in research: Safer ways to research with children who may be experiencing violence or abuse

Children participating in research, like other children, may be being maltreated. There is also potential for exposure to abuse during research. Research training, practices and protocols to respond to disclosure and discovery of abuse to protect both researchers and children may not be sufficiently robust. Our aim was to compare and contrast research practices reported in the literature related to protecting children and to recommend safer ways to conduct research. The simultaneous increase in research with children, along with an increased willingness to listen to child victims of abuse, means that researchers must consider the protection of children in the research setting. Twenty-three papers were identified in a literature review. These studies reported a wide variation of ethical considerations, methods, methodology and came from different disciplines. From the 23 papers, two overarching themes were identified: social justice and research and safer research. To make research safer teams should consider training, safety protocols and support for child protection, which includes support to report safeguarding concerns to social care. Further work is required to ensure that training, protocols and support are effective in facilitating researchers to identify and make appropriate child abuse referrals. Ethics practices in abuse research need further debat

Research Priorities for Children's Nursing in Ireland: A Delphi Study

This paper is a report of a study which identified research priorities for children's nursing in an acute care setting in Ireland. A limited number of studies have examined research priorities for children's nursing. This study was undertaken against the backdrop of significant proposed changes to the delivery of of children's healthcare. A three round Delphi survey design was used to identify and rate the importance of research priorities for children's nursing. In round 1 participants were asked to identify five of the most important research priorities for children's nursing. Participants in round 2 were asked to rate the importance of each of each research priority on a seven point Likert scale. In round 3 participants were presented with the mean scoreof each research priority from the second questionaire, and again asked to consider the importance of each topic on a 7 point Likert scale. The aim was to reach a consensus on the priorities. The top three priorities identified were recognition and care of the deteriorating child, safe transfer of the critically ill child between acute health care facilities, and the child and families perceptions of care at end-of life. The wide variation of priorities reflects the scope of care delivery of children's nurses and mirrors many global care concerns in caring for children

Self-care support for children and adolescents with long-term conditions : the REfOCUS evidence synthesis

Background: Self-care support (e.g. education, training, peer/professional support) is intended to enhance the self-care capacities of children and young people, while simultaneously reducing the financial burden facing health-care systems. Objectives: To determine which models of self-care support for long-term conditions (LTCs) are associated with significant reductions in health utilisation and costs without compromising outcomes for children and young people. Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Population: Children and young people aged 0–18 years with a long-term physical or mental health condition (e.g. asthma, depression). Intervention: Self-care support in health, social care, educational or community settings. Comparator: Usual care. Outcomes: Generic/health-related quality of life (QoL)/subjective health symptoms and health service utilisation/costs. Design: Randomised/non-randomised trials, controlled before-and-after studies, and interrupted time series designs. Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ISI Web of Science, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, The Cochrane Library, Health Technology Assessment database, Paediatric Economic Database Evaluation, IDEAS, reference scanning, targeted author searches and forward citation searching. All databases were searched from inception to March 2015. Methods: We conducted meta-analyses, simultaneously plotting QoL and health utilisation effects. We conducted subgroup analyses for evidence quality, age, LTC and intervention (setting, target, delivery format, intensity). Results: Ninety-seven studies reporting 114 interventions were included. Thirty-seven studies reported adequate allocation concealment. Fourteen were UK studies. The vast majority of included studies recruited children and young people with asthma (n = 66, 68%). Four per cent of studies evaluated ‘pure’ self-care support (delivered through health technology without additional contact), 23% evaluated facilitated self-care support (≤ 2 hours’/four sessions’ contact), 65% were intensively facilitated (≥ 2 hours’/four sessions’ contact) and 8% were case management (≥ 2 hours’ support with multidisciplinary input). Self-care support was associated with statistically significant, minimal benefits for QoL [effect size (ES) –0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) –0.23 to –0.11], but lacked clear benefit for hospital admissions (ES –0.05, 95% CI –0.12 to 0.03). This finding endured across intervention intensities and LTCs. Statistically significant, minimal reductions in emergency use were observed (ES –0.11, 95% CI –0.17 to –0.04). The total cost analysis was limited by the small number of data. Subgroup analyses revealed statistically significant, minimal reductions in emergency use for children aged ≤ 13 years (ES –0.10, 95% CI –0.17 to –0.04), children and young people with asthma (ES –0.12, 95% CI –0.18 to –0.06) and children and young people receiving ≥ 2 hours per four sessions of support (ES –0.10, 95% CI –0.17 to –0.03). Preliminary evidence suggested that interventions that include the child or young person, and deliver some content individually, may optimise QoL effects. Face-to-face delivery may help to maximise emergency department effects. Caution is required in interpreting these findings. Limitations: Identification of optimal models of self-care support is challenged by the size and nature of evidence available. The emphasis on meta-analysis meant that a minority of studies with incomplete but potentially relevant data were excluded. Conclusions: Self-care support is associated with positive but minimal effects on children and young people’s QoL, and minimal, but potentially important, reductions in emergency use. On current evidence, we cannot reliably conclude that self-care support significantly reduces health-care costs. Future work: Research is needed to explore the short- and longer-term effects of self-care support across a wider range of LTCs. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014015452. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme