Pediatric tracheostomy speaking valves: A multidisciplinary protocol leads to earlier initial trials.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 NURSING Journal of Child Health Care Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1177/13674935211070416
Karen Kam, Rebecca Patzelt, Renee Soenen
{"title":"Pediatric tracheostomy speaking valves: A multidisciplinary protocol leads to earlier initial trials.","authors":"Karen Kam,&nbsp;Rebecca Patzelt,&nbsp;Renee Soenen","doi":"10.1177/13674935211070416","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Early speaking valve application in children with tracheostomies is encouraged for language development. Whether an institutional multidisciplinary protocol impacts the patient population and timelines for which a speaking valve is trialed has not been studied. This retrospective study compared speaking valve trials performed at a pediatric quaternary hospital over a 12-year period. Timelines (time between tracheostomy insertion, speech-language pathologist (SLP) consultation, speaking valve order, and trial) and patient characteristics (demographics, tracheostomy classification, and feeding status) were collected. Medians (IQRs) compared timelines before and after a protocol was instituted and compared the timelines between tracheostomy classifications. Median time between tracheostomy insertion and SLP consultation did not change: before protocol-1.8 (7.7) months and after protocol-1.8 (2.4) months. Time between tracheostomy insertion and speaking valve trial decreased: before protocol-34.1 (40.5) months and after protocol-12.9 (8.4) months. Time between tracheostomy insertion and trial was not different between tracheostomy classifications: upper airway obstruction-16.0 (27.1) months, complex medical condition-36.3 (45.8) months, and invasive ventilation-17.5 (22.3) months. An institutional multidisciplinary protocol decreases the time between tracheostomy insertion and speaking valve trial, regardless of the reason the tracheostomy is needed in the pediatric population.</p>","PeriodicalId":54388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Health Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Child Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13674935211070416","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Early speaking valve application in children with tracheostomies is encouraged for language development. Whether an institutional multidisciplinary protocol impacts the patient population and timelines for which a speaking valve is trialed has not been studied. This retrospective study compared speaking valve trials performed at a pediatric quaternary hospital over a 12-year period. Timelines (time between tracheostomy insertion, speech-language pathologist (SLP) consultation, speaking valve order, and trial) and patient characteristics (demographics, tracheostomy classification, and feeding status) were collected. Medians (IQRs) compared timelines before and after a protocol was instituted and compared the timelines between tracheostomy classifications. Median time between tracheostomy insertion and SLP consultation did not change: before protocol-1.8 (7.7) months and after protocol-1.8 (2.4) months. Time between tracheostomy insertion and speaking valve trial decreased: before protocol-34.1 (40.5) months and after protocol-12.9 (8.4) months. Time between tracheostomy insertion and trial was not different between tracheostomy classifications: upper airway obstruction-16.0 (27.1) months, complex medical condition-36.3 (45.8) months, and invasive ventilation-17.5 (22.3) months. An institutional multidisciplinary protocol decreases the time between tracheostomy insertion and speaking valve trial, regardless of the reason the tracheostomy is needed in the pediatric population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
儿童气管切开术说话阀:多学科协议导致早期初步试验。
鼓励气管切开术患儿早期应用言语瓣膜,以促进语言发育。机构多学科方案是否会影响说话瓣膜试验的患者群体和时间,目前尚未研究。本回顾性研究比较了一家儿科第四医院在12年期间进行的说话瓣膜试验。收集时间线(气管造口术插入、语言病理学家(SLP)咨询、说话阀顺序和试验之间的时间)和患者特征(人口统计学、气管造口术分类和进食状况)。中位数(IQRs)比较了制定方案前后的时间线,并比较了气管切开术分类之间的时间线。气管造口术置入和SLP会诊之间的中位时间没有改变:方案前1.8(7.7)个月,方案后1.8(2.4)个月。气管造口术置入与说话阀试验之间的时间缩短:方案前缩短34.1(40.5)个月,方案后缩短12.9(8.4)个月。不同气管造口术分类:上气道阻塞-16.0(27.1)个月,复杂医疗状况-36.3(45.8)个月,有创通气-17.5(22.3)个月。一个制度性的多学科方案减少了气管切开术插入和说话瓣膜试验之间的时间,无论在儿科人群中气管切开术的原因是什么。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Child Health Care
Journal of Child Health Care NURSING-PEDIATRICS
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
15.80%
发文量
60
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Child Health Care is a broad ranging, international, professionally-oriented, interdisciplinary and peer reviewed journal. It focuses on issues related to the health and health care of neonates, children, young people and their families, including areas such as illness, disability, complex needs, well-being, quality of life and mental health care in a diverse range of settings. The Journal of Child Health Care publishes original theoretical, empirical and review papers which have application to a wide variety of disciplines.
期刊最新文献
Why are we still doing sucrose trials for newborns? Experiences of siblings and parents of children with congenital heart disease and exploration of siblings' support needs. Mothers' experience seeking healthcare advice for their unsettled infants in Victoria, Australia. Factors that support children and young people to express their views and to have them heard in healthcare: An inductive qualitative content analysis. Goals of Morbidity and Mortality meetings in paediatric acute care. A qualitative case study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1