对危重儿童进行重症监护的时效性和模式的评估:描述混合方法研究

P. Ramnarayan, S. Seaton, R. Evans, V. Barber, E. Hudson, Enoch Kung, M. Entwistle, A. Pearce, P. Davies, Will Marriage, P. Mouncey, Eithne Polke, F. Rajah, Nicholas Hudson, Robert Darnell, E. Draper, J. Wray, Stephen Morris, C. Pagel
{"title":"对危重儿童进行重症监护的时效性和模式的评估:描述混合方法研究","authors":"P. Ramnarayan, S. Seaton, R. Evans, V. Barber, E. Hudson, Enoch Kung, M. Entwistle, A. Pearce, P. Davies, Will Marriage, P. Mouncey, Eithne Polke, F. Rajah, Nicholas Hudson, Robert Darnell, E. Draper, J. Wray, Stephen Morris, C. Pagel","doi":"10.3310/afwj6179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Centralisation of paediatric intensive care has increased the need for specialist critical care transport teams to transfer sick children from general hospitals to tertiary centres. National audit data show variation in how quickly transport teams reach the patient’s bedside and in the models of care provided during transport; however, the impact of this variation on clinical outcomes and the experience of patients, families and clinicians is unknown.\n \n \n \n We aimed to understand if and how clinical outcomes and experience of children transported for intensive care are affected by timeliness of access to a transport team and different models of transport care.\n \n \n \n We used a mixed-methods approach with a convergent triangulation study design. There were four study workstreams: a retrospective analysis of linked national clinical audit data (2014–16) (workstream A), a prospective questionnaire study to collect experience data from parents of transported children and qualitative analysis of interviews with patients, families and clinicians (workstream B), health economic evaluation of paediatric transport services (workstream C) and mathematical modelling evaluating the potential impact of alternative service configurations (workstream D).\n \n \n \n Transport data from over 9000 children were analysed in workstream A. Transport teams reached the patient bedside within 3 hours of accepting the referral in > 85% of transports, and there was no apparent association between time to bedside and 30-day mortality. Similarly, the grade of the transport team leader or stabilisation approach did not appear to affect mortality. Patient-related critical incidents were associated with higher mortality (adjusted odds ratio 3.07, 95% confidence interval 1.48 to 6.35). In workstream B, 2133 parents completed experience questionnaires pertaining to 2084 unique transports of 1998 children. Interviews were conducted with 30 parents and 48 staff. Regardless of the actual time to bedside, parent satisfaction was higher when parents were kept informed about the team’s arrival time and when their expectation matched the actual arrival time. Satisfaction was lower when parents were unsure who the team leader was or when they were not told who the team leader was. Staff confidence, rather than seniority, and the choice for parents to travel with their child in the ambulance were identified as key factors associated with a positive experience. The health economic evaluation found that team composition was variable between transport teams, but not significantly associated with cost and outcome measures. Modelling showed marginal benefit in changing current transport team locations, some benefit in reallocating existing teams and suggested where additional transport teams could be allocated in winter to cope with the expected surge in demand.\n \n \n \n Our analysis plans were limited by the impact of the pandemic. Unmeasured confounding may have affected workstream A findings.\n \n \n \n There is no evidence that reducing the current 3-hour time-to-bedside target for transport teams will improve patient outcomes, although timeliness is an important consideration for parents and staff. Improving communication during transport and providing parents the choice to travel in the ambulance with their child are two key service changes to enhance patient/family experience.\n \n \n \n More research is needed to develop suitable risk-adjustment tools for paediatric transport and to validate the short patient-related experience measure developed in this study.\n \n \n \n This trial is registered as ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03520192.\n \n \n \n This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 10, No. 34. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.\n","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of timeliness and models of transporting critically ill children for intensive care: the DEPICT mixed-methods study\",\"authors\":\"P. Ramnarayan, S. Seaton, R. Evans, V. Barber, E. Hudson, Enoch Kung, M. Entwistle, A. Pearce, P. Davies, Will Marriage, P. Mouncey, Eithne Polke, F. Rajah, Nicholas Hudson, Robert Darnell, E. Draper, J. Wray, Stephen Morris, C. Pagel\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/afwj6179\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n Centralisation of paediatric intensive care has increased the need for specialist critical care transport teams to transfer sick children from general hospitals to tertiary centres. National audit data show variation in how quickly transport teams reach the patient’s bedside and in the models of care provided during transport; however, the impact of this variation on clinical outcomes and the experience of patients, families and clinicians is unknown.\\n \\n \\n \\n We aimed to understand if and how clinical outcomes and experience of children transported for intensive care are affected by timeliness of access to a transport team and different models of transport care.\\n \\n \\n \\n We used a mixed-methods approach with a convergent triangulation study design. There were four study workstreams: a retrospective analysis of linked national clinical audit data (2014–16) (workstream A), a prospective questionnaire study to collect experience data from parents of transported children and qualitative analysis of interviews with patients, families and clinicians (workstream B), health economic evaluation of paediatric transport services (workstream C) and mathematical modelling evaluating the potential impact of alternative service configurations (workstream D).\\n \\n \\n \\n Transport data from over 9000 children were analysed in workstream A. Transport teams reached the patient bedside within 3 hours of accepting the referral in > 85% of transports, and there was no apparent association between time to bedside and 30-day mortality. Similarly, the grade of the transport team leader or stabilisation approach did not appear to affect mortality. Patient-related critical incidents were associated with higher mortality (adjusted odds ratio 3.07, 95% confidence interval 1.48 to 6.35). In workstream B, 2133 parents completed experience questionnaires pertaining to 2084 unique transports of 1998 children. Interviews were conducted with 30 parents and 48 staff. Regardless of the actual time to bedside, parent satisfaction was higher when parents were kept informed about the team’s arrival time and when their expectation matched the actual arrival time. Satisfaction was lower when parents were unsure who the team leader was or when they were not told who the team leader was. Staff confidence, rather than seniority, and the choice for parents to travel with their child in the ambulance were identified as key factors associated with a positive experience. The health economic evaluation found that team composition was variable between transport teams, but not significantly associated with cost and outcome measures. Modelling showed marginal benefit in changing current transport team locations, some benefit in reallocating existing teams and suggested where additional transport teams could be allocated in winter to cope with the expected surge in demand.\\n \\n \\n \\n Our analysis plans were limited by the impact of the pandemic. Unmeasured confounding may have affected workstream A findings.\\n \\n \\n \\n There is no evidence that reducing the current 3-hour time-to-bedside target for transport teams will improve patient outcomes, although timeliness is an important consideration for parents and staff. Improving communication during transport and providing parents the choice to travel in the ambulance with their child are two key service changes to enhance patient/family experience.\\n \\n \\n \\n More research is needed to develop suitable risk-adjustment tools for paediatric transport and to validate the short patient-related experience measure developed in this study.\\n \\n \\n \\n This trial is registered as ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03520192.\\n \\n \\n \\n This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 10, No. 34. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":73204,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health and social care delivery research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health and social care delivery research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/afwj6179\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and social care delivery research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/afwj6179","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

儿科重症监护的集中化增加了专业重症监护运输团队将患病儿童从综合医院转移到三级中心的需求。国家审计数据显示,运输团队到达患者床边的速度以及运输过程中提供的护理模式各不相同;然而,这种变异对临床结果以及患者、家属和临床医生的经验的影响尚不清楚。我们旨在了解被送往重症监护室的儿童的临床结果和体验是否以及如何受到交通团队和不同交通护理模式的及时性的影响。我们使用了一种混合方法和收敛三角测量研究设计。共有四个研究工作流程:对相关的国家临床审计数据(2014-2016)的回顾性分析(工作流程a),收集运输儿童父母经验数据的前瞻性问卷研究,以及对患者、家庭和临床医生访谈的定性分析(工作流B),儿科运输服务的健康经济评估(工作流C)和评估替代服务配置的潜在影响的数学模型(工作流D)。在工作流A中分析了9000多名儿童的交通数据。交通团队在接受转诊后3小时内到达患者床边 85%的运输,并且到床边的时间与30天死亡率之间没有明显的相关性。同样,运输队队长的级别或稳定方法似乎不会影响死亡率。与患者相关的危重事件与较高的死亡率相关(调整后的比值比3.07,95%置信区间1.48至6.35)。在工作流程B中,2133名父母完成了与2084名1998年儿童独特运输有关的经验问卷。对30名家长和48名工作人员进行了访谈。无论实际到达床边的时间如何,当父母不断被告知团队的到达时间以及他们的期望与实际到达时间相匹配时,父母的满意度更高。当父母不确定谁是队长,或者没有被告知谁是队长时,满意度会降低。员工的信心,而不是资历,以及父母带孩子乘坐救护车的选择,被认为是与积极体验相关的关键因素。健康经济评估发现,运输团队之间的团队组成是可变的,但与成本和结果指标没有显著关联。建模显示,改变当前运输团队的位置会带来边际效益,重新分配现有团队会带来一些效益,并建议在冬季分配额外的运输团队,以应对预期的需求激增。我们的分析计划受到疫情影响的限制。未测量的混淆可能影响了工作流A的发现。尽管及时性是家长和工作人员的一个重要考虑因素,但没有证据表明减少运输团队目前3小时的床边目标时间会改善患者的预后。改善运输过程中的沟通,并为父母提供带孩子乘坐救护车的选择,这是提高患者/家庭体验的两个关键服务变化。需要更多的研究来开发适合儿科运输的风险调整工具,并验证本研究中开发的短期患者相关经验测量。该试验注册为ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03520192。该项目由国家卫生与护理研究所(NIHR)卫生与社会护理提供研究计划资助,并将在《卫生与社会保健提供研究》上全文发表;第10卷,第34期。有关更多项目信息,请访问NIHR期刊图书馆网站。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Evaluation of timeliness and models of transporting critically ill children for intensive care: the DEPICT mixed-methods study
Centralisation of paediatric intensive care has increased the need for specialist critical care transport teams to transfer sick children from general hospitals to tertiary centres. National audit data show variation in how quickly transport teams reach the patient’s bedside and in the models of care provided during transport; however, the impact of this variation on clinical outcomes and the experience of patients, families and clinicians is unknown. We aimed to understand if and how clinical outcomes and experience of children transported for intensive care are affected by timeliness of access to a transport team and different models of transport care. We used a mixed-methods approach with a convergent triangulation study design. There were four study workstreams: a retrospective analysis of linked national clinical audit data (2014–16) (workstream A), a prospective questionnaire study to collect experience data from parents of transported children and qualitative analysis of interviews with patients, families and clinicians (workstream B), health economic evaluation of paediatric transport services (workstream C) and mathematical modelling evaluating the potential impact of alternative service configurations (workstream D). Transport data from over 9000 children were analysed in workstream A. Transport teams reached the patient bedside within 3 hours of accepting the referral in > 85% of transports, and there was no apparent association between time to bedside and 30-day mortality. Similarly, the grade of the transport team leader or stabilisation approach did not appear to affect mortality. Patient-related critical incidents were associated with higher mortality (adjusted odds ratio 3.07, 95% confidence interval 1.48 to 6.35). In workstream B, 2133 parents completed experience questionnaires pertaining to 2084 unique transports of 1998 children. Interviews were conducted with 30 parents and 48 staff. Regardless of the actual time to bedside, parent satisfaction was higher when parents were kept informed about the team’s arrival time and when their expectation matched the actual arrival time. Satisfaction was lower when parents were unsure who the team leader was or when they were not told who the team leader was. Staff confidence, rather than seniority, and the choice for parents to travel with their child in the ambulance were identified as key factors associated with a positive experience. The health economic evaluation found that team composition was variable between transport teams, but not significantly associated with cost and outcome measures. Modelling showed marginal benefit in changing current transport team locations, some benefit in reallocating existing teams and suggested where additional transport teams could be allocated in winter to cope with the expected surge in demand. Our analysis plans were limited by the impact of the pandemic. Unmeasured confounding may have affected workstream A findings. There is no evidence that reducing the current 3-hour time-to-bedside target for transport teams will improve patient outcomes, although timeliness is an important consideration for parents and staff. Improving communication during transport and providing parents the choice to travel in the ambulance with their child are two key service changes to enhance patient/family experience. More research is needed to develop suitable risk-adjustment tools for paediatric transport and to validate the short patient-related experience measure developed in this study. This trial is registered as ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03520192. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 10, No. 34. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Causes and solutions to workplace psychological ill-health for nurses, midwives and paramedics: the Care Under Pressure 2 realist review. Relationship between staff and quality of care in care homes: StaRQ mixed methods study. Practices of falls risk assessment and prevention in acute hospital settings: a realist investigation. Safer and more efficient vital signs monitoring protocols to identify the deteriorating patients in the general hospital ward: an observational study. Reducing health inequalities through general practice: a realist review and action framework.
×
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