Factors Influencing Clinicians', Health Visitors' and Social Workers' Professional Judgements, Decision-Making and Multidisciplinary Collaboration When Safeguarding Children with Burn Injuries: A Qualitative Study

IF 0.9 4区 社会学 Q3 FAMILY STUDIES Child Abuse Review Pub Date : 2024-02-05 DOI:10.1002/car.2862
Laura E. Cowley, C. Verity Bennett, Harriet D. Quinn-Scoggins, Diane Nuttall, David Wilkins, Alison M. Kemp
{"title":"Factors Influencing Clinicians', Health Visitors' and Social Workers' Professional Judgements, Decision-Making and Multidisciplinary Collaboration When Safeguarding Children with Burn Injuries: A Qualitative Study","authors":"Laura E. Cowley,&nbsp;C. Verity Bennett,&nbsp;Harriet D. Quinn-Scoggins,&nbsp;Diane Nuttall,&nbsp;David Wilkins,&nbsp;Alison M. Kemp","doi":"10.1002/car.2862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Burns are a common injury to young children, sometimes related to neglect or physical abuse. Emergency department (ED) clinicians, health visitors and social workers must work collaboratively when safeguarding children with burns; however, little is known about the factors influencing their professional judgements, decision-making and multidisciplinary collaboration. Objective was to explore factors affecting ED clinicians', health visitors' and social workers' professional judgements and decision-making when children present to the ED with burns, and experiences of multidisciplinary collaboration, to identify areas for improvement. This was a qualitative semi-structured interview study using purposive and snowball sampling to recruit participants. Data were analysed using ‘codebook’ thematic analysis. Four themes were identified: ‘perceived roles and responsibilities when safeguarding children with burn injuries’, ‘factors influencing judgment of risk and decision-making’, ‘information sharing’ and ‘barriers and facilitators to successful multidisciplinary collaboration’. There is limited understanding between the groups about each other's roles. Each agency is dependent on one another to understand the full picture; however, information sharing is lacking in detail and context and hindered by organisational and resource constraints. Formal opportunities for multiagency team working such as strategy meetings can be facilitators of more successful collaborations. Professionals may benefit from multiagency training to improve understanding of one another's roles. Greater detail and context are needed when notifying health visitors of burn injuries in children or making a referral to children's services.</p>","PeriodicalId":47371,"journal":{"name":"Child Abuse Review","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/car.2862","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Child Abuse Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/car.2862","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Burns are a common injury to young children, sometimes related to neglect or physical abuse. Emergency department (ED) clinicians, health visitors and social workers must work collaboratively when safeguarding children with burns; however, little is known about the factors influencing their professional judgements, decision-making and multidisciplinary collaboration. Objective was to explore factors affecting ED clinicians', health visitors' and social workers' professional judgements and decision-making when children present to the ED with burns, and experiences of multidisciplinary collaboration, to identify areas for improvement. This was a qualitative semi-structured interview study using purposive and snowball sampling to recruit participants. Data were analysed using ‘codebook’ thematic analysis. Four themes were identified: ‘perceived roles and responsibilities when safeguarding children with burn injuries’, ‘factors influencing judgment of risk and decision-making’, ‘information sharing’ and ‘barriers and facilitators to successful multidisciplinary collaboration’. There is limited understanding between the groups about each other's roles. Each agency is dependent on one another to understand the full picture; however, information sharing is lacking in detail and context and hindered by organisational and resource constraints. Formal opportunities for multiagency team working such as strategy meetings can be facilitators of more successful collaborations. Professionals may benefit from multiagency training to improve understanding of one another's roles. Greater detail and context are needed when notifying health visitors of burn injuries in children or making a referral to children's services.

Abstract Image

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
影响临床医生、健康访视员和社会工作者在保护烧伤儿童时的专业判断、决策和多学科合作的因素:定性研究
烧伤是幼儿常见的损伤,有时与忽视或身体虐待有关。急诊科(ED)临床医生、健康访视员和社工在保护烧伤儿童时必须通力合作;然而,人们对影响他们的专业判断、决策和多学科合作的因素知之甚少。本研究旨在探讨影响急诊科临床医生、健康访视员和社工对烧伤儿童就诊时的专业判断和决策的因素,以及多学科合作的经验,从而找出需要改进的地方。这是一项半结构式定性访谈研究,采用目的性抽样和滚雪球抽样的方法招募参与者。采用 "编码本 "主题分析法对数据进行分析。确定了四个主题:保护烧伤儿童时的角色和责任"、"影响风险判断和决策的因素"、"信息共享 "和 "多学科合作成功的障碍和促进因素"。各小组之间对彼此角色的理解有限。每个机构都依赖彼此来了解全局;然而,信息共享缺乏细节和背景,并受到组织和资源限制的阻碍。多机构团队工作的正式机会,如战略会议,可以促进更成功的合作。专业人员可从多机构培训中获益,以增进对彼此角色的了解。在向健康访视者通报儿童烧伤情况或向儿童服务机构进行转介时,需要提供更多细节和背景信息。
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
Child Abuse Review
Child Abuse Review Multiple-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: Child Abuse Review provides a forum for all professionals working in the field of child protection, giving them access to the latest research findings, practice developments, training initiatives and policy issues. The Journal"s remit includes all forms of maltreatment, whether they occur inside or outside the family environment. Papers are written in a style appropriate for a multidisciplinary audience and those from outside Britain are welcomed. The Journal maintains a practice orientated focus and authors of research papers are encouraged to examine and discuss implications for practitioners.
期刊最新文献
An analysis of child safeguarding cases managed by National Governing Bodies of sport across England and Wales The intersection of child protection and healthcare: Paediatric social admissions Proactive and reactive sibling aggression and their mediating effects on the relationship between exposure to parental violence and adulthood intimate partner violence perpetration Does money motivate prospective foster parents? Are responses from high vs. low-income towns different? Evidence from Google advertising A thematic analysis of the involvement of children and families in Child Safeguarding Practice Reviews in England
×
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