Parent perspectives on children and young people's mental health services in Victoria - What's wrong and how to fix it: A multi-site qualitative study.

AIM: The number of children and young people presenting to emergency departments (EDs) with anxiety and depression is increasing. We aimed to determine parent perspectives on: (i) barriers to accessing non-ED mental health services; and (ii) improving access in the paediatric mental health service system. METHODS: Qualitative study with parents of children and young people aged 0-19 years who attended one of four EDs across Victoria between October 2017 and September 2018 and received a primary diagnosis of anxiety or depression. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: child or young person without a parent/guardian, or presented with self-harm or suicide attempt. Eligible participants completed semi-structured phone interviews. Interviews were recorded and transcripts were coded and analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 72 parents completed interviews. The average child age was 14 years (standard deviation 2.5) and two thirds identified as female (64%). A total of 57% of children and young people presented with a primary diagnosis of anxiety. Parents reported barriers in accessing care including: service shortages and inaccessibility, underresourced schools, lack of clinician mental health expertise, lack of child-clinician rapport, inconsistent care, financial constraints, lack of mental health awareness among parents, and stigma. Parents want expanded and improved access to services, more respite and support services, supportive schools, and improved mental health education for parents. CONCLUSIONS: Parents of children and young people attending the ED for anxiety and depression are generally dissatisfied with services for child mental health. Solutions that enable parents to better care for their child in the community are needed to improve care.

Factors influencing the successful implementation of a novel digital health application to streamline multidisciplinary communication across multiple organisations for emergency care.

RATIONALE: Delivering optimal patient health care requires interdisciplinary clinician communication. A single communication tool across multiple pre-hospital and hospital settings, and between hospital departments is a novel solution to current systems. Fit-for-purpose, secure smartphone applications allow clinical information to be shared quickly between health providers. Little is known as to what underpins their successful implementation in an emergency care context. AIMS: To identify (a) whether implementing a single, digital health communication application across multiple health care organisations and hospital departments is feasible; (b) the barriers and facilitators to implementation; and (c) which factors are associated with clinicians' intentions to use the technology. METHODS: We used a multimethod design, evaluating the implementation of a secure, digital communication application (Pulsara™). The technology was trialled in two Australian regional hospitals and 25 Ambulance Victoria branches (AV). Post-training, clinicians involved in treating patients with suspected stroke or cardiac events were administered surveys measuring perceived organisational readiness (Organisational Readiness for Implementing Change), clinicians' intentions (Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology) and internal motivations (Self-Determination Theory) to use Pulsara™, and the perceived benefits and barriers of use. Quantitative data were descriptively summarised with multivariable associations between factors and intentions to use Pulsara™ examined with linear regression. Qualitative data responses were subjected to directed content analysis (two coders). RESULTS: Participants were paramedics (n = 82, median 44 years) or hospital-based clinicians (n = 90, median 37 years), with organisations perceived to be similarly ready. Regression results (F(11, 136) = 21.28, p = <0.001, Adj R2 = 0.60) indicated Habit, Effort Expectancy, Perceived Organisational Readiness, Performance Expectancy and Organisation membership (AV) as predictors of intending to use Pulsara™. Themes relating to benefits (95% coder agreement) included improved communication, procedural efficiencies and faster patient care. Barriers (92% coder agreement) included network accessibility and remembering passwords. PulsaraTM was initiated 562 times. CONCLUSION: Implementing multiorganisational, digital health communication applications is feasible, and facilitated when organisations are change-ready for an easy-to-use, effective solution. Developing habitual use is key, supported through implementation strategies (e.g., hands-on training). Benefits should be emphasised (e.g., during education sessions), including streamlining communication and patient flow, and barriers addressed (e.g., identify champions and local technical support) at project commencement.

Real-world, feasibility study to investigate the use of a multidisciplinary app (Pulsara) to improve prehospital communication and timelines for acute stroke/STEMI care.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if a digital communication app improves care timelines for patients with suspected acute stroke/ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). DESIGN: Real-world feasibility study, quasi-experimental design. SETTING: Prehospital (25 Ambulance Victoria branches) and within-hospital (2 hospitals) in regional Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Paramedics or emergency department (ED) clinicians identified patients with suspected acute stroke (onset <4.5 hours; n=604) or STEMI (n=247). INTERVENTION: The Pulsara communication app provides secure, two-way, real-time communication. Assessment and treatment times were recorded for 12 months (May 2017-April 2018), with timelines compared between 'Pulsara initiated' (Pulsara) and 'not initiated' (no Pulsara). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Door-to-treatment (needle for stroke, balloon for STEMI) Secondary outcome measures: ambulance and hospital processes. RESULTS: Stroke (no Pulsara n=215, Pulsara n=389) and STEMI (no Pulsara n=76, Pulsara n=171) groups were of similar age and sex (stroke: 76 vs 75 years; both groups 50% male; STEMI: 66 vs 63 years; 68% and 72% male). When Pulsara was used, patients were off ambulance stretcher faster for stroke (11(7, 17) vs 19(11, 29); p=0.0001) and STEMI (14(7, 23) vs 19(10, 32); p=0.0014). ED door-to-first medical review was faster (6(2, 14) vs 23(8, 67); p=0.0001) for stroke but only by 1 min for STEMI (3 (0, 7) vs 4 (0, 14); p=0.25). Door-to-CT times were 44 min faster (27(18, 44) vs 71(43, 147); p=0.0001) for stroke, and percutaneous intervention door-to-balloon times improved by 17 min, but non-significant (56 (34, 88) vs 73 (49, 110); p=0.41) for STEMI. There were improvements in the proportions of patients treated within 60 min for stroke (12%-26%, p=0.15) and 90 min for STEMI (50%-78%, p=0.20). CONCLUSIONS: In this Australian-first study, uptake of the digital communication app was strong, patient-centred care timelines improved, although door-to-treatment times remained similar.

Restrictive interventions in Victorian emergency departments: A study of current clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE: To determine current clinical practices for managing behavioural emergencies within Victorian public hospital EDs. METHODS: A multi-centre retrospective study involving all patients who attended ED in 2016 at the Alfred, Ballarat, Dandenong, Geelong and Royal Melbourne Hospitals. The primary outcome was the rate of patient presentations with at least one restrictive intervention. Secondary outcomes included the rate of security calls for unarmed threats (Code Grey), legal status under the Mental Health Act at both the time of ED arrival and the restrictive intervention, and intervention details. For each site, data on 100 patients who had a restrictive intervention were randomly extracted for indication and methods of restraint. RESULTS: In 2016, 327 454 patients presented to the five EDs; the Code Grey rate was 1.49% (95% CI 1.45-1.54). Within the Code Grey population, 942 had at least one restrictive intervention (24.3%, 95% CI 23.0-25.7). Details were extracted on 494 patients. The majority (62.8%, 95% CI 58.4-67.1) were restrained under a Duty of Care. Physical restraint was used for 165 (33.4%, 95% CI 29.3-37.8) patients, 296 were mechanically restrained (59.9%, 95% CI 55.4-64.3), median mechanical restraint time 180 min (IQR 75-360), and 388 chemically restrained (78.5%, 95% CI 74.6-82.0). CONCLUSIONS: Restrictive interventions in the ED largely occurred under a Duty of Care. Care of patients managed under legislation that covers assessment and treatment of mental illness has a strong clinical governance framework and focus on minimising restrictive interventions. However, this is not applied to the majority of patients who experience restraint in Victorian EDs.

Understanding parent-reported factors that influence children and young people's anxiety and depression presentations to emergency departments: A multi-site study.

OBJECTIVE: Victorian ED data show increased presentations for anxiety and depression in children. We aimed to determine parent-reported factors contributing to these presentations. METHODS: Qualitative study with parents of children and young people aged 0-17 years who attended one of four EDs across Victoria between October 2017 and September 2018 and received a primary diagnosis of anxiety or depression (excluding self-harm or suicide attempt). Eligible parents completed semi-structured phone interviews, which were audio-recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were coded and qualitatively analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Seventy parents completed interviews. The average age of children and young people was 14 years (standard deviation 2.4) and 63% (n = 44) identified as female. Thirty (43%) children received a primary diagnosis of depression, compared to 40 (57%) children who received a primary diagnosis of anxiety. The majority of respondents were mothers (n = 59; 84%). Key themes as to why families presented to EDs included: listening to trusted professionals, desperation, a feeling of no alternative, respecting their child's need to feel safe and to rule out a potentially serious medical condition. CONCLUSIONS: Parents bring their children to the ED for many reasons. Policy makers, managers and clinicians should work with parents to develop alternative approaches that provide families with community-based support, particularly for younger children and after hours, in order to provide an appropriate source of care for children and young people with anxiety and depression.