Perceptions of pharmacy technician students of the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) e-module introduced as part of vaccine injection training.

Introduction: The scope of practice for pharmacy technicians is expanding to include vaccine administration in some provinces. Vaccine training courses and programs currently do not include education about mitigating immunization stress-related responses (ISRR) and improving the vaccination experience. We obtained feedback from pharmacy technician students about a new e-module that addresses this identified knowledge gap, whereby learners are educated about CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract), a vaccine delivery framework that reduces ISRR and improves the vaccination experience. Methods: Mixed-methods design including second-year pharmacy technician students who elected to take an accredited vaccine injection training program. Students were given access to the CARD e-module after completing mandatory vaccine education components. Eight students answered a quantitative survey and 4 (50%) additionally participated in a focus group. Qualitative data were analyzed deductively using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: The study was conducted between April 28 and June 12, 2022. Students reported positive attitudes about the CARD e-module across quantitative and qualitative measures. Qualitative feedback spanned 4 CFIR constructs: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting and individual characteristics. Students reported the e-module was well designed and that the content was relevant. They believed CARD facilitated provision of vaccinations using a person-centred approach that promotes vaccination. They felt that CARD could potentially add time to the vaccination appointment and that it would need to be acceptable to pharmacy leaders because of implications for training and vaccination delivery. They suggested that CARD education should be mandatory. CARD improved their confidence in delivering vaccinations, and they planned to integrate CARD into their practice. Conclusion: The CARD e-module was well received by pharmacy technician students when coupled with usual vaccine injection training.

Community pharmacists' perceptions of the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system for use during vaccinations.

Introduction: We explored Canadian community pharmacists' perceptions of the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system, a vaccine delivery framework that integrates evidence-based interventions that reduce immunization stress-related responses (ISRRs). The objective was to introduce CARD to pharmacists and obtain their feedback to guide future implementation efforts for community pharmacy-based vaccinations. Methods: Eighteen pharmacists across all provinces participated in one-on-one moderated virtual interviews. A semistructured interview guide was used to guide the discussion and included questions about experiences with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine administration and perceptions of CARD as a framework for vaccination delivery in the pharmacy. In this report, we focus on feedback about CARD. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim and deductively coded using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: The study was conducted from May 28 to August 16, 2021. Pharmacists' responses were categorized in 3 CFIR domains: intervention characteristics, inner setting and characteristics of individuals. Overall, pharmacists were receptive towards CARD and thought it filled a current gap in practice, particularly for childhood vaccinations. Pharmacists reported learning techniques to make vaccinations more comfortable for their clients. They provided feedback on how specific interventions could be adapted for their practice (e.g., dissemination of client-directed education via appointment booking portals, provision of distraction items in waiting and vaccinating spaces). Discussion: This study provided preliminary evidence that pharmacists found CARD acceptable and appropriate for community pharmacy-based vaccinations. The data collected from this study were used to inform a small-scale implementation project with CARD during COVID-19 vaccine administration in children aged 5 to 11 years.

Experiences of community pharmacists administering COVID-19 vaccinations: A qualitative study.

Background: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, community pharmacists have played an important role in the provision of patient care, including the delivery of COVID-19 vaccines. The additional workload and related demands arising from these extended services might affect worklife burnout. This qualitative study explored the experiences of Canadian community pharmacists in providing COVID-19 vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Eighteen community pharmacists across 10 provinces were asked about vaccination processes and perceptions about their role in separate, virtual semistructured interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a deductive approach using the Areas of Worklife Burnout framework, with pharmacists' self-reported descriptions of their activities summarized using the Association of Faculties of Pharmacy of Canada's (AFPC) professional competencies framework. Results: Participants identified aspects of their role that were rewarding and challenging. Some challenges included lack of control, increased workload, inadequate communication, unfair treatment and conflicting values. They described being able to meet challenges and demonstrating resiliency via adaptability, developing communities and valuing their contribution to ending the COVID-19 pandemic. Self-identified AFPC competencies contributing to their ability to manage their worklife included care-provider, professional, leader-manager, collaborator and scholar. Conclusion: Pharmacists accepted their additional responsibility of managing COVID-19 vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, they expressed some challenges with this role. To ensure sustainability of these services, prioritizing adequate resources, work processes and efficient communication with all relevant stakeholder groups, including public health, government and corporate leaders, is recommended for the future. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2023;156(Suppl):xx-xx.

Integration of CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) for COVID-19 community pharmacy vaccination in children: Effect on implementation outcomes.

Introduction: Community pharmacists report that providing vaccinations can be challenging, particularly if the vaccine recipient is a child, because of heightened levels of fear. The objective of this study was to determine acceptability and feasibility of the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system as a vaccination delivery framework for children receiving COVID-19 vaccinations in a community pharmacy setting. CARD incorporates evidence-based interventions that reduce fear and immunization stress-related responses in vaccine recipients and was demonstrated to be effective and feasible in other vaccination settings providing vaccinations to children and adults. Methods: This mixed-methods study involved 5 independent pharmacies (with 6 vaccinators) offering COVID-19 vaccinations to children between 5 and 11 years of age. Vaccinating staff and implementation leads from the pharmacy organization participated in a small-scale CARD implementation project (before-and-after design). Afterwards, they filled in quantitative surveys and provided qualitative feedback about their perceptions and experiences in focus group discussions. Qualitative data were analyzed deductively, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: The study was conducted between January 16 and March 20, 2022. Across both quantitative and qualitative measures, vaccinating staff reported positive attitudes about CARD and alignment with their professional roles. They reported that CARD reduced children's fear and improved the vaccination experiences in children and parents and for themselves. Vaccinators reported increased confidence due to CARD. They reported compatibility of CARD interventions within their practice and that it was time neutral. They maintained use of some interventions after the study. They also provided suggestions and shared concerns about fidelity and future feasibility of continuing various components of the program. Conclusion: CARD was demonstrated to be acceptable and feasible by vaccinators performing vaccinations in children in community pharmacies.

CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) for community pharmacy vaccinations in children: Effect on immunization stress-related responses and satisfaction.

Introduction: CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) is a vaccine delivery program demonstrated to reduce pain, fear and associated immunization stress-related responses (ISRR) in children undergoing vaccinations at school. This study evaluated CARD's clinical impact when integrated into community pharmacy-based pediatric vaccinations. Methods: This was a before-and-after CARD implementation study in 5 independent pharmacies offering COVID-19 vaccinations to children aged 5-11 years. No changes were made to practices in the "before" phase. CARD interventions were integrated in the "after" phase (e.g., children prepared a coping plan using a checklist, distraction toolkits were placed in waiting and vaccination spaces, vaccinations were performed with privacy, needles were obscured). Children self-reported ISRR, including fear, pain and dizziness during vaccination, and both children and parents/caregivers (herein, parents) compared the child's experience to their last needle (better, same, worse). In the "after" phase, parents and children reported how much CARD helped (not at all, a little bit, a moderate amount, a lot). Results: The study was conducted between January 16 and March 20, 2022. Altogether, 152 children participated (71 before and 81 after CARD); demographic characteristics did not differ. Children's self-reported fear was lower after CARD, when assessed continuously (2.5 vs 3.7 out of 10; p = 0.02) or dichotomously, using a cut-off of 0 vs >0 (58% vs 80%; p = 0.01). Pain was lower when assessed dichotomously (<2 vs ≥2; p = 0.03). There was no difference in dizziness. After CARD, children and parents reported more positive experiences compared to the child's last needle (p = 0.01, both analyses) and more children and parents reported that distraction and child participation in the process were helpful (p < 0.001, both analyses). Overall, 92% of children and 91% of parents said CARD helped. Conclusion: CARD reduced children's fear and improved vaccination experiences for children and parents when integrated in community pharmacy-based vaccinations.

Liver enzymes after short-term acetaminophen error in critically ill children: a cohort study.

Drug-associated harm is common but difficult to detect in the hospital setting. In critically ill children, we sought to evaluate drug-associated hepatic injury following enteral acetaminophen error, defined as acetaminophen dosing that exceeds daily maximum recommendations. This retrospective cohort study took place in two pediatric intensive care units within a pediatric hospital center. The included patients are children (< 18 years of age) admitted to the pediatric and cardiac intensive care unit between January 2008 and January 2018, and receiving enteral acetaminophen. We defined acetaminophen dosing error as exceeding daily acetaminophen dosing by > 10% the upper limit of maximum recommended dose for weight and age (> 82.5 mg/kg/day or > 4400 mg/day). We included 14,146 admissions, who received 147,485 doses of acetaminophen. Acetaminophen dosing errors occurred 1 in every 9.5 patient-days on acetaminophen. ALT and AST decreased significantly over the course of ICU admission (p < 0.0001). In patients with acetaminophen errors, ALT and AST measured in the 24 to 96 h post error were not significantly different than when measured outside this window. A sensitivity analysis using > 100 mg/kg/day as the upper daily acetaminophen error cut-off did not reveal any subsequent significant increase in ALT or ALT in the 24 to 96-h post-error window, compared to measurements taken outside the window. CONCLUSION: Although the administration of acetaminophen in critically ill children frequently exceeds the daily recommended limit and vigilance is needed, we did not find any associated increase in liver transaminases following acetaminophen errors. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Acetaminophen dosing errors are common in pediatric outpatients. • Excessive acetaminophen dosing can be associated with harm, including hepatic injury. WHAT IS NEW: • Exceeding daily acetaminophen dosing limit occurs 1 in every 9.5 patient-days in children admitted to the critical care unit. • In patients with daily dose excess of acetaminophen, we did not find a significant increase in the measured liver enzymes in the 24 to 96 h following the overdosing.

Exploring key elements of approaches that support childrens' preferences during painful and stressful medical procedures: A scoping review.

PROBLEM: Children undergoing medical procedures can experience pain and distress. While numerous interventions exist to mitigate pain and distress, the ability to individualize the intervention to suit the needs and preferences of individual children is emerging as an important aspect of providing family-centered care and shared decision making. To date, the approaches for supporting children to express their preferences have not been systematically identified and described. A scoping review was conducted to identify such approaches and to describe the elements that are included in them. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies that (a) described approaches with the aim to support children to express their coping preferences during medical procedures; (b) included the option for children to choose coping interventions; (c) included a child (1--18 years). SAMPLE: Searches were conducted in December 2019 and November 2020 in the following databases: Cinahl, Embase, PubMed and Psycinfo. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were identified that included six distinct approaches. Four important key elements were identified: 1) Aid to express preferences or choice, 2) Information Provision, 3) Assessment of feelings/emotions, 4) Feedback/Reflection and Reward. CONCLUSIONS: Identified approaches incorporate components of shared decision-making to support children in expressing their preferences during medical procedures and treatments. IMPLICATIONS: Children undergoing medical procedures can be supported in expressing their coping needs and preferences by using components of shared decision-making.

Effectiveness of parental education about pain in the neonatal period on knowledge, attitudes, and practices: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Despite the availability of effective, safe, and feasible pain management strategies, infant pain remains undertreated. Parents can play a key role in advocating for or delivering pain management strategies if they are educated. To date, a quantitative synthesis of the effectiveness of parental education about pain management in the neonatal period has not been performed. Objective: To systematically review the effectiveness of parental education during the neonatal period on pain management in infancy. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized trials (NRTs) that evaluated parental education with respect to pain management during the neonatal period in any setting from inception to February 2021. Screening of article titles and abstracts and data extraction were performed in duplicate. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk Bias Tool 2.0 and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions for RCTs and NRTs, respectively. As per the GRADE methodology, critically important and important outcomes were identified. Critically important outcomes included utilization of pain management strategies and infant pain. Important outcomes included parental knowledge about pain mitigation strategies, parental attitudes, compliance with painful procedures, procedure outcomes, and safety. Data were combined and presented as relative risk (RR) or mean or standardized mean difference (MD or SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Of the six studies eligible for inclusion, four studies were RCTs and two studies were NRTs. Written information and/or video were used to deliver parental education during the neonatal period in hospital settings in all studies. Four studies (two RCTs and two NRTs) reported on critically important outcomes. The risk of bias was low for the two RCTs and moderate to serious for the two NRTs. Utilization of pain management strategies was assessed for heel lance in the first 48 hours of life in two studies and for vaccine injection at 2 to 6 months of life in two studies. Higher utilization rate for pain management strategies was reported in the pain education group in three studies (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.04, 1.26; N=2712). There was no difference in the mean number of pain management strategies used in one NRT tracking utilization tracking utilization as continuous data (MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.01, 0.41; N=178). Parent-reported infant pain scores were lower in the pain education group in one RCT (MD -0.16, 95% CI -0.27, -0.06; N=1615). The quality of evidence for the outcome of utilization of pain management strategies was very low while for the outcome of infant pain the quality of evidence was moderate. Five studies (3 RCTs and 2 NRTs) reported on important outcomes. The risk of bias was low for two RCTs and high for one RCT and moderate to serious for the two NRTs. Parental knowledge about pain management strategies (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.26, 0.82), parental confidence in their ability to manage pain (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.14, 0.34), parental satisfaction with education (MD 1.18, 95% CI 0.84, 1.52) and parental satisfaction with pain management (RR 1.05. 95% CI 1.01, 1.08) were increased in the pain education group. None of the included studies reported on procedural outcomes. No adverse events with the pain education nor the use of pain management interventions were reported in one study. Conclusions: Parental education in the neonatal period was effective in increasing utilization of pain management strategies during painful procedures. Reduction of pain in infants is based on one study of moderate quality. Furthermore, parental education increased parental knowledge about pain management strategies, confidence in their ability to manage infant pain, and satisfaction with the education and pain management. Parental pain education should be incorporated into postnatal care.

Feasibility of implementation of CARD™ for school-based immunizations in Calgary, Alberta: a cluster trial.

BACKGROUND: Negative experiences with school-based immunizations can contribute to vaccine hesitancy in youth and adulthood. We developed an evidence-based, multifaceted and customizable intervention to improve the immunization experience at school called the CARD™ (C-Comfort, A-Ask, R-Relax, D-Distract) system. We evaluated the feasibility of CARD™ implementation for school-based immunizations in Calgary, Canada. METHODS: In a mixed methods study, two Community Health Centres providing immunization services, including 5 schools each with grade 9 students (aged approximately 14 years), were randomized to CARD™ or control (usual care). In the CARD™ group, public health staff and students were educated about coping strategies prior to immunization clinics. Clinics were organized to reduce fear and to support student's choices for coping strategies. Public health staff in the CARD™ group participated in a focus group discussion afterwards. We sought a recruitment rate of 80% for eligible schools, an external stakeholder focus group (e.g., school staff) with 6 or more individuals, 85% of individual injection-related data acquisition (student and immunizer surveys), and 80% absolute agreement between raters for a subset of data that were double-coded. Across focus groups, we examined perceptions of acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility and fidelity of CARD™. RESULTS: Nine (90%) of eligible schools participated. Of 219 students immunized, injection-related student and immunizer data forms were acquired for 195 (89.0%) and 196 (89.5%), respectively. Reliability of data collection was high. Fifteen public health and 5 school staff participated in separate focus groups. Overall, attitudes towards CARD™ were positive and compliance with individual components of CARD™ was high. Public health staff expressed skepticism regarding the value of student participation in the CARD™ system. Suggestions were made regarding processes to refine implementation. CONCLUSION: While most outcome criteria were satisfied and overall perceptions of implementation outcomes were positive, some important challenges and opportunities were identified. Feedback is being used to inform a large cluster trial that will evaluate the impact of CARD™ during school-based immunizations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03948633 ); Submitted April 24, 2019.

Factors associated with parents' experiences using a knowledge translation tool for vaccination pain management: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is a common painful procedure for children. Parents' concern regarding vaccination pain is a significant driver of vaccine hesitancy. Despite the wealth of evidence-based practices available for managing vaccination pain, parents lack knowledge of, and access to, these strategies. Knowledge translation (KT) tools can communicate evidence-based information to parents, however little is known about what factors influence parents' use of these tools. A two-page, electronic KT tool on psychological, physical, and pharmacological vaccination pain management strategies for children, was shared with parents as part of a larger mixed methods study, using explanatory sequential design, exploring factors related to uptake of this KT tool. The aim of this qualitative study was to understand what influenced parents' perceptions of the relevance of the KT tool, as well as their decision as to whether to use the tool. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive design was used. A total of 20 parents of children aged 0-17 years (n = 19 mothers) reviewed the KT tool ahead of their child's upcoming vaccination and participated in a semi-structured interview at follow-up. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed with reflexive thematic analysis using an inductive approach. RESULTS: The analysis generated three interrelated themes which described factors related to parents' use of the KT tool: (1) Relevance to parents' needs and circumstances surrounding their child's vaccination; (2) Alignment with parents' personal values around, and experiences with, vaccination pain management (e.g., the importance of managing pain); and (3) Support from the clinical environment for implementing evidence-based strategies (e.g., physical clinical environment and quality of interactions with the health care provider). CONCLUSIONS: Several factors were identified as central to parents' use of the KT tool, including the information itself and the clinical environment. When the tool was perceived as relevant, aligned with parents' values, and was supported by health care providers, parents were more inclined to use the KT tool to manage their children's vaccination pain. Future research could explore other factors related to promoting engagement and uptake when creating parent-directed KT tools for a range of health-related contexts.

A modified Delphi to define drug dosing errors in pediatric critical care.

BACKGROUND: There is no globally accepted definition for dosing error in adult or pediatric practice. The definition of pediatric dosing error varies greatly in the literature. The objective of this study was to develop a framework, informed by a set of principles, for a clinician-based definition of drug dosing errors in critically ill children, and to identify the range that practitioners agree is a dosing error for different drug classes and clinical scenarios. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide three staged modified Delphi from May to December 2019. Expert clinicians included Canadian pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) physicians, pharmacists and nurses, with a least 5 years' experience. Outcomes were underlying principles of drug dosing, and error thresholds, as defined by proportion above and below reference range, for common PICU medications and clinical scenarios. RESULTS: Forty-four participants met eligibility, and response rates were 95, 86 and 84% for all three rounds respectively. Consensus was achieved for 13 of 15 principles, and 23 of 30 error thresholds. An over-dosed drug that is intercepted, an under-dose of a possibly life-saving medication, dosing 50% above or below target range and not adjusting for a drug interaction were agreed principles of dosing error. Altough there remained much uncertainty in defining dosing error, expert clinicians agreed that, for most medication categories and clinical scenarios, dosing over or below 10% of reference range was considered an error threshold. CONCLUSION: Dosing principles and threshold are complex in pediatric critical care, and expert clinicians were uncertain about whether many scenarios were considered in error. For most intermittent medications, dosing over 10% below or above reference range was considered a dosing error, although this was largely influenced by clinical context and drug properties. This consensus driven error threshold will help guide routine clinical dosing practice, standardized reporting and drug quality improvement in pediatric critical care.

Effect of Electronic Prescribing Strategies on Medication Error and Harm in Hospital: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems are electronic prescribing strategies that are increasingly used to improve patient safety. Previous reviews show limited effect on patient outcomes. Our objective was to assess the impact of electronic prescribing strategies on medication errors and patient harm in hospitalized patients. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL were searched from January 2007 to January 2018. We included prospective studies that compared hospital-based electronic prescribing strategies with control, and reported on medication error or patient harm. Data were abstracted by two reviewers and pooled using random effects model. Study quality was assessed using the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care and evidence quality was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies were included; comprised of 11 randomized control trials and 27 non-randomized interventional studies. Electronic prescribing strategies reduced medication errors (RR 0.24 (95% CI 0.13, 0.46), I2 98%, n = 11) and dosing errors (RR 0.17 (95% CI 0.08, 0.38), I2 96%, n = 9), with both risk ratios significantly affected by advancing year of publication. There was a significant effect of electronic prescribing strategies on adverse drug events (ADEs) (RR 0.52 (95% CI 0.40, 0.68), I2 0%, n = 2), but not on preventable ADEs (RR 0.55 (95% CI 0.30, 1.01), I2 78%, n = 3), hypoglycemia (RR 1.03 (95% CI 0.62-1.70), I2 28%, n = 7), length of stay (MD - 0.18 (95% - 1.42, 1.05), I2 94%, n = 7), or mortality (RR 0.97 (95% CI 0.79, 1.19), I2 74%, n = 9). The quality of evidence was rated very low. DISCUSSION: Electronic prescribing strategies decrease medication errors and adverse drug events, but had no effect on other patient outcomes. Conservative interpretations of these findings are supported by significant heterogeneity and the preponderance of low-quality studies.

Involving stakeholders in informing the development of a Knowledge Translation (KT) intervention to improve the vaccination experience at school.

OBJECTIVE: Pain, fear, and fainting management during school-based vaccinations is suboptimal. The objective was to examine stakeholder perceptions of barriers and facilitators to better practices. Method: Six semi-structured focus groups were conducted in Niagara Region, Ontario: two parent groups (n=7); one grade 7 to 8 student group (n=9); two nurse groups (n=12); and one school staff group (n=6). Participants shared perceptions about school vaccination clinics and the implementation of specific strategies and tools. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used as the framework for analysis. RESULTS: Feedback from stakeholders was categorized into four domains of CFIR: intervention characteristics, inner setting, outer setting, and characteristics of individuals. Intervention characteristics included: vaccine educational materials, vaccination accommodations, distraction techniques, topical anaesthetics, and food. Inner setting factors included: school vaccination procedures, relationships between school staff and nurses, assessment and documentation of student fear, and factors that contribute to a chaotic vaccination clinic. Outer setting factors were: the social environment and addressing parent and student needs. Stakeholder roles were discussed in characteristics of individuals. CONCLUSION: This study identified elements that can facilitate and challenge pain and fear mitigation tools and strategies; these elements should be considered in the development of a Knowledge Translation (KT) intervention to improve the school vaccination experience.

Stakeholder feedback on The CARD™ System to improve the vaccination experience at school.

OBJECTIVE: School-based vaccination programs can be a source of distress for many students due to the pain from the needle injection and related fears. We created a multifaceted Knowledge Translation (KT) intervention to address vaccination and pain, fear, and fainting called The CARD™ System. The objectives were to document acceptability of key tools included in the multifaceted KT intervention and their effectiveness in improving knowledge and attitudes about vaccination pain and fear. METHODS: Quantitative and qualitative methods were used. Students, school staff, public health nurses, and parents participated in separate focus groups whereby they independently completed a knowledge and attitudes survey and provided structured and qualitative feedback on key KT tools of the multifaceted KT intervention. They then repeated the knowledge and attitudes survey. RESULTS: Altogether, 22 students (grade 6 and 7), 16 school staff (principals, grade 7 and 8 teachers, resource teachers, secretaries), 10 nurses (injecting, charge, and school nurses), and 3 parents participated. Knowledge test scores increased post-KT tool review: 8.5 (2.1) versus 7.3 (1.9); P<0.001. Attitudes were more positive about the individual nature of pain and fear experience during vaccination. Student fear scores were lower post-tool review: 5.1 (2.9) versus 4.6 (3.0); P<0.001. The majority of the participants reported they understood all the information, the amount was just right and that the information was useful. DISCUSSION: The KT tools were demonstrated to be acceptable and to improve knowledge. Future research is warranted to determine their impact on student experience during school vaccinations.

The CARD™ System for improving the vaccination experience at school: Results of a small-scale implementation project on program delivery.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a small-scale implementation study that integrated The CARD™ System (C-Comfort, A-Ask, R-Relax, D-Distract)-a multifaceted knowledge translation intervention designed to improve the vaccination experience at school-within the school vaccination program. METHODS: Mixed methods design, including a controlled clinical trial and focus group interviews. The experimental group included five schools whereby CARD™ was implemented. The control group included five schools whereby no changes were made. Focus groups were held at the end of the school year. For nurses trained in CARD™, additional focus groups were held at CARD™ training and after the first round of vaccine clinic visits. Outcomes included vaccination rate at school and adult stakeholder perceptions. RESULTS: Altogether, 323 students attended study schools. Fifty-five nurses, school staff, and parents participated in 15 focus groups. The school vaccination rate did not differ (P>0.05) between groups for round 1 clinics (76% versus 77%) or round 2 clinics (68% versus 70%). Participants reported acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and satisfaction with CARD™. Experimental group nurses were able to integrate CARD™ within usual activities, including clinic planning, student education, and clinic-day set-up and student vaccinations. Students in experimental schools were described by nurses and school staff as more prepared and less fearful during vaccinations. Nurses reported that CARD™ built on their practice; they had higher confidence in their ability to assess pain and fear and higher satisfaction with their ability to manage it. Nurses also reported improved collaboration with students and with each other. All stakeholder groups recommended continuing CARD™. Some additional time was required, primarily related to clinic planning activities and data collection for study purposes. CONCLUSION: CARD™ is a promising new approach for improving the delivery of vaccinations at school. Exploration of approaches to increase parental reach and monitoring of vaccination uptake rate over time are recommended.

Overview of a Knowledge Translation (KT) Project to improve the vaccination experience at school: The CARD™ System.

BACKGROUND: Students experience fear, pain, and fainting during vaccinations at school. While evidence-based interventions exist, no Knowledge Translation (KT) interventions have been developed to mitigate these symptoms. A multidisciplinary team-the Pain Pain Go Away Team-was assembled to address this knowledge-to-care gap. This manuscript provides an overview of the methodology, knowledge products, and impact of an evidence-based KT program developed and implemented to improve the vaccination experience at school. METHODS: We adapted knowledge and assessed the barriers to knowledge use via focus group interviews with key stakeholder groups involved in school-based vaccinations: students, nurses, school staff, and parents. Next, we developed project-specific goals and data collection tools and collected baseline data. We then created a multifaceted KT intervention called The CARD™ System (C-Comfort, A-Ask, R-Relax, D-Distract) to provide a framework for planning and delivering vaccinations using a student-centred approach. Selected KT tools from this framework were reviewed in additional focus groups held in all stakeholder groups. The multifaceted KT intervention was then finalized and implemented in stages in two projects including grade 7 students undergoing school vaccinations and impact on student outcomes (e.g., symptoms of fear, pain, dizziness) and process outcomes (e.g., utilization of interventions that reduce student symptoms, vaccination rate) were assessed. RESULTS: Participants reported that improving the vaccination experience is important. Based on participant feedback, an evidence-based multifaceted KT intervention called The CARD™ System was developed that addresses user needs and preferences. Selected KT tools of this intervention were demonstrated to be acceptable and to improve knowledge and attitudes about vaccination in the stakeholder groups. In two separate implementation projects, CARD™ helped grade 7 students prepare for vaccinations and positively impacted on their vaccination experiences. CARD™ improved vaccination experiences for other stakeholder groups as well. There was no evidence of an impact on school vaccination rates. CONCLUSION: We developed and implemented a promising multifaceted KT intervention called The CARD™ System to address vaccination-associated pain, fear, and fainting. Future research is recommended to determine impact in students of different ages and in different geographical regions and clinical contexts.

Piloting The CARD™ System for education of students about vaccination: Does it improve the vaccination experience at school?

OBJECTIVE: Many students are fearful of vaccine injection-associated pain. In prior research, we created Knowledge Translation (KT) tools to address school vaccinations and associated pain, fear, and fainting. The objectives of this pilot implementation project were to determine the acceptability and impact of these KT tools on student knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of their vaccination experience. METHODS: Pre-post mixed methods design. Students in an independent school in the Greater Toronto Area, Ontario, participated in two separate focus groups before and after school vaccinations. In both sessions, they independently completed a knowledge and attitudes survey, reviewed three KT tools (two videos and one pamphlet) and then repeated the knowledge and attitudes survey. They provided structured and qualitative feedback about the KT tools and described the impact of the education on the vaccination experience. RESULTS: Altogether, 11 grade 7 students participated. Knowledge scores were higher post-tool review compared to baseline in the first focus group. There was no significant difference in fear scores and attitudes about getting vaccinated. Qualitative feedback was categorized into two themes: intervention characteristics and characteristics of the school environment. Students reported the KT tools helped them to prepare for vaccination. They used the information on vaccination day to reduce their own fear and pain and to assist peers. They believed all students should view the KT tools. Students reported that teachers and nurses did not do enough to make vaccinations a positive experience. For example, they did not provide a private setting as an option for vaccination and prevented them from using some coping strategies recommended in the KT tools. DISCUSSION: This study provides preliminary evidence of the acceptability and positive impact of the KT tools on students' vaccination experiences. Future research is recommended that involves inclusion of all students and adults in the KT intervention.

The CARD™ System for improving the vaccination experience at school: Results of a small-scale implementation project on student symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Many students are afraid of receiving vaccinations at school. We implemented a novel, multifaceted knowledge translation intervention incorporating evidence-based vaccination coping strategies-The CARD™ System (C-Comfort, A-Ask, R-Relax, D-Distract)-and evaluated impact on student attitudes, knowledge, coping strategies used, and symptoms during school-based vaccinations. METHODS: Mixed methods. Ten schools participated in a controlled clinical trial: five experimental and five control. Experimental School (ES) students completed a knowledge and attitudes survey during an in-class CARD™ educational session prior to school vaccinations and selected coping strategies for upcoming vaccinations. Control School (CS) students received the usual vaccine education lesson, which did not include information about or selection of coping strategies. At all schools and during both vaccination clinic visits (fall and spring), injecting nurses recorded specific coping strategies used, and students independently rated their fear, pain, and dizziness during vaccinations. Focus groups were conducted at five schools after all clinics were completed (three ES, two CS). RESULTS: ES students had higher knowledge (P<0.001), less fear (P=0.03), and greater willingness to be vaccinated (P=0.001) after the in-class education session. Students rated the education as understandable, sufficient, useful, and that it prepared them for vaccinations. During school vaccination clinics, ES students selected more coping interventions than CS students. There were fewer students with high levels of fear (P=0.008) and dizziness (P=0.04) in the ES group. In round 2, fewer students (P=0.02) in the ES group returned to the clinic postvaccination because they were feeling unwell. ES students participating in focus groups scored higher on their knowledge test (P<0.001) compared with CS students and reported learning and benefitting from CARD™. DISCUSSION: This small-scale implementation study provides preliminary evidence of the effectiveness of CARD™ in improving vaccination experiences for students at school. Future research is recommended that examines CARD™ in different settings to confirm these results.

Effectiveness of a hospital-based postnatal parent education intervention about pain management during infant vaccination: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Parents have reported that they want to learn how to reduce pain in infants during vaccinations. Our objective was to compare different levels of intensity of postnatal education about pain mitigation on parental self-reported use of interventions at future infant vaccinations. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal, 3-group parallel, add-on, randomized controlled trial on the postnatal ward of a hospital. New mothers, unaware of the hypothesis, were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 intervention groups and 3 follow-up groups (i.e., 9 groups, 3 × 3). The 3 intervention groups were control (general immunization information), pain pamphlet (pain mitigation information), and pain pamphlet and pain video (pain mitigation information). Both pain mitigation education groups also received general immunization information. The 3 follow-up groups were 2-, 4- and 6-month infant vaccinations. Mothers reported use of breastfeeding, sucrose and topical anesthetics during infant vaccinations in a telephone survey. RESULTS: Of 3420 participants, follow-up was available for 2549 (75%): 36.1%, 34.2% and 29.7% reported on pain mitigation practices at 2-, 4- and 6-month vaccinations, respectively (p = 0.9). Maternal characteristics did not differ (p > 0.05): mean age, 33.6 years; 58% were primipara. Utilization of any intervention (breastfeeding, sucrose or topical anesthetics) was 53.2%, 61.4% and 63.0% for control, pain pamphlet, and pain pamphlet and pain video groups, respectively (p < 0.001); both pain education groups had higher utilization than the control group, but did not differ from one another. Uptake differed among intervention groups at 2 and 4 months but not at 6 months. INTERPRETATION: Hospital-based postnatal education increased parental use of pain interventions at infant vaccinations and can be added to existing education. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01937143.

Parental Psychological Distress Moderates the Impact of a Video Intervention to Help Parents Manage Young Child Vaccination Pain.

Objective: The current study sets out to conduct a post hoc analysis of the moderating effect of parent psychological distress on a pediatric pain management intervention. Methods: Parents of 6-month-old infants (n = 64) and 18-month-old toddlers (n = 64 each) were randomized to a treatment (The ABCDs of Pain Management) or control video and videotaped during the vaccination. Parent psychological distress was also measured at the vaccination. Outcomes were children's pain, parent worry, and parent soothing behavior post-vaccination. Results: Parent psychological distress only moderated video effect on toddler pain during the regulation phase. Parent psychological distress did not moderate the impact of the video on parent worry or parent soothing post-needle at either age. The video did increase parent soothing in parents of both infants and toddlers, and reduced worry in parents of toddlers. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess a moderating factor on a child pain management intervention. The video's efficacy was moderated for toddlers' pain regulation, such that parents with high psychological distress did not show as much benefit from the intervention. No other moderations were found in either age group for any other outcome. Main effects for the video impacting soothing behavior of parents of both infants and toddlers were confirmed, and a new finding of video efficacy was seen through the significantly lower worry of toddlers' parents post-needle. Given the nonclinical sample, low levels of psychological distress were found. Efforts to replicate this study in a higher risk sample are necessary.