Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing the HEADS-ED: A Rapid Screening Tool for Pediatric Patients in Emergency Departments.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the HEADS-ED, a screening tool appropriate for use in the emergency department (ED) that facilitates standardized assessments, discharge planning, charting, and linking pediatric mental health patients to appropriate community resources. METHODS: A qualitative theory-based design was used to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing the HEADS-ED tool. Focus groups were conducted with participants recruited from 6 different ED settings across 2 provinces (Ontario and Nova Scotia). The Theoretical Domains Framework was used as a conceptual framework to guide data collection and to identify themes from focus group discussions. RESULTS: The following themes spanning 12 domains were identified as reflective of participants' beliefs about the barriers and facilitators to implementing the HEADS-ED tool: knowledge, skills, beliefs about capabilities, social professional role and identity, optimism, beliefs about consequences, reinforcement, environmental context and resources, social influences, emotion, behavioral regulation and memory, and attention and decision process. CONCLUSIONS: The HEADS-ED has the potential to address the need for better discharge planning, complete charting, and standardized assessments for the increasing population of pediatric mental health patients who present to EDs. This study has identified potential barriers and facilitators, which should be considered when developing an implementation plan for adopting the HEADS-ED tool into practice within EDs.

Understanding the Experience of Miscarriage in the Emergency Department.

INTRODUCTION: Up to 20% of pregnancies end in miscarriage, which can be a significant life event for women with psychological implications. Because the only preventative measure for a miscarriage is risk factor modification, the treatment focuses on confirming the miscarriage has occurred and medical management of symptoms. Although women experiencing a miscarriage are frequently directed to seek medical care in emergency departments, the patients are often triaged as nonemergent patients unless they are unstable, which exposes women to potentially prolonged wait times. Research about miscarriages and emergency departments predominantly focus on medical management with little understanding of how emergency care shapes the experience of miscarriage for women. METHODS: Seeking to describe the experiences of women coming to the emergency department for care while having a miscarriage, interpretive phenomenology-a form of qualitative research-guided this study. Eight women were recruited to participate in semi-structured face-to-face interviews of 60 to 90 minutes in length. Data were analyzed using hermeneutics and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Five themes emerged: "Pregnant/Life: Miscarriage/Death"; "Deciding to go to the emergency department: Something's wrong"; "Not an illness: A different kind of trauma"; "Need for acknowledgement"; and "Leaving the emergency department: What now?". Participants believed their losses were not acknowledged but instead dismissed. These experiences, combined with a perceived lack of discharge education and clarity regarding follow-up, created experiences of marginalization. DISCUSSION: This study describes the experience of miscarrying in emergency departments and provides insights regarding how nursing and physician care may affect patient perceptions of marginalization.

Discharge communication practices in pediatric emergency care: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: The majority of children receiving care in the emergency department (ED) are discharged home, making discharge communication a key component of quality emergency care. Parents must have the knowledge and skills to effectively manage their child's ongoing care at home. Parental fatigue and stress, health literacy, and the fragmented nature of communication in the ED setting may contribute to suboptimal parent comprehension of discharge instructions and inappropriate ED return visits. The aim of this study was to examine how and why discharge communication works in a pediatric ED context and develop recommendations for practice, policy, and research. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the published and gray literature. We searched electronic databases CINAHL, Medline, and Embase up to July 2017. Policies guiding discharge communication were also sought from pediatric emergency networks in Canada, USA, Australia, and the UK. Eligible studies included children less than 19 years of age with a focus on discharge communication in the ED as the primary objective. Included studies were appraised using relevant Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists. Textual summaries, content analysis, and conceptual mapping assisted with exploring relationships within and between data. We implemented an integrated knowledge translation approach to strengthen the relevancy of our research questions and assist with summarizing our findings. RESULTS: A total of 5095 studies were identified in the initial search, with 75 articles included in the final review. Included studies focused on a range of illness presentations and employed a variety of strategies to deliver discharge instructions. Education was the most common intervention and the majority of studies targeted parent knowledge or behavior. Few interventions attempted to change healthcare provider knowledge or behavior. Assessing barriers to implementation, identifying relevant ED contextual factors, and understanding provider and patient attitudes and beliefs about discharge communication were identified as important factors for improving discharge communication practice. CONCLUSION: Existing literature examining discharge communication in pediatric emergency care varies widely. A theory-based approach to intervention design is needed to improve our understanding regarding discharge communication practice. Strengthening discharge communication in a pediatric emergency context presents a significant opportunity for improving parent comprehension and health outcomes for children. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014007106.

Discharge instructions for caregivers in the context of pediatric emergency care: a narrative synthesis protocol.

BACKGROUND: The period following discharge from a pediatric emergency department (ED) can be a time of significant vulnerability for caregivers who provide ongoing care to their child when they return home. Discharge communication practice varies widely at the individual practitioner and departmental level. At present, there are no nationally accepted guidelines for discharge communication for children and/or their caregivers in the ED.The primary objective of this knowledge synthesis is to understand how and why discharge instructions work and under what conditions. We will also examine the contextual factors and barriers and facilitators associated with discharge communication across varied ED settings. METHODS/DESIGN: Using an integrated narrative approach, we will synthesize different types of evidence and explore relationships within and between included studies to develop a theory-based and knowledge user-informed discharge communication practice guideline. We will follow key principles for knowledge synthesis including: (1) involvement of a multidisciplinary team (for example, information specialists, statisticians, and content experts); (2) developing focused and answerable questions in collaboration with the knowledge users; (3) using a systematic method including specific tools and techniques appropriate for answering questions concerned with effectiveness and the implementation of interventions; and, (4) involving knowledge users throughout the process in an integrated knowledge translation approach. DISCUSSION: This collaborative and narrative approach will be a determining factor in increasing the reliability, validity and relevance of the study findings for healthcare practice and policy decision-makers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014007106.