Hospital pediatrics · 2021
Pediatrician Perspectives on Brief Resolved Unexplained Events.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Maksimowski Karolina, Haddad Rita, DeLaroche Amy M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The objective with this study was to describe pediatric emergency department (ED) physicians' perspective on the evaluation and management of brief resolved unexplained events (BRUEs) to help support the development of quality improvement interventions for this population.
METHODS: We conducted qualitative semistructured interviews with pediatric ED providers who practice in a single state. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed and demographic information was also obtained. The 6-phase approach to reflexive thematic analysis was used to conduct the qualitative analysis.
RESULTS: Nineteen pediatric ED physicians practicing in 4 institutions across our state participated in the study. The majority of participants (95%) practice in a university-affiliated setting. The primary themes related to providing care for patients with a BRUE identified in our analysis were (1) reassurance, (2) caregiver or provider concern, and (3) clinical practice guideline availability and interpretation. Closely intertwined underlying topics informing BRUE patient management were also noted: (1) ambiguity in the BRUE diagnosis and its management; (2) a need for shared decision-making between the caregiver and the provider; and (3) concern over the increased time spent with caregivers during an ED visit for a diagnosis of BRUE. These complex relationships were found to influence patient evaluation and disposition.
CONCLUSION: Multifaceted quality improvement interventions should address caregiver and provider concerns regarding the diagnosis of BRUE while providing decision aids to support shared decision-making with caregivers.
METHODS: We conducted qualitative semistructured interviews with pediatric ED providers who practice in a single state. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed and demographic information was also obtained. The 6-phase approach to reflexive thematic analysis was used to conduct the qualitative analysis.
RESULTS: Nineteen pediatric ED physicians practicing in 4 institutions across our state participated in the study. The majority of participants (95%) practice in a university-affiliated setting. The primary themes related to providing care for patients with a BRUE identified in our analysis were (1) reassurance, (2) caregiver or provider concern, and (3) clinical practice guideline availability and interpretation. Closely intertwined underlying topics informing BRUE patient management were also noted: (1) ambiguity in the BRUE diagnosis and its management; (2) a need for shared decision-making between the caregiver and the provider; and (3) concern over the increased time spent with caregivers during an ED visit for a diagnosis of BRUE. These complex relationships were found to influence patient evaluation and disposition.
CONCLUSION: Multifaceted quality improvement interventions should address caregiver and provider concerns regarding the diagnosis of BRUE while providing decision aids to support shared decision-making with caregivers.