Development of a Health Disparities Index: Proof of Concept with Chest Radiography in Asthma.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a tool for quantifying health disparity (Health Disparity Index[HDI]) and explore hospital variation measured by this index using chest radiography (CXR) in asthma as the proof of concept. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study using the Pediatric Health Information System database including children with asthma between 5 and 18 years old. Inpatient and emergency department (ED) encounters from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2018, with low or moderate severity were included. Exclusions included hospitals with <10 cases in any racial/ethnic group. The HDI measured variation in CXR use among children with asthma based on race/ethnicity. The HDI was calculated as the absolute difference between maximum and minimum percentages of CXR use (range = 0-100) when there was statistical evidence that the percentages were different. RESULTS: Data from 36 hospitals included 16 744 inpatient and 75 805 ED encounters. Overall, 19.7% of encounters had a CXR (34.3% for inpatient; 16.5% for ED). In inpatient encounters, 47.2% (17/36) of hospitals had a significant difference in imaging across racial/ethnic groups. Of these, the median hospital-level HDI was 19.4% (IQR 13.5-20.1). In ED encounters, 78.8% (28/36) of hospitals had a statistically significant difference in imaging across racial/ethnic groups, with a median hospital-level HDI of 10.2% (IQR 8.3-14.1). There was no significant association between the inpatient HDI and ED HDI (P = .46). CONCLUSIONS: The HDI provides a practical measure of disparity. To improve equity in healthcare, metrics are needed that are intuitive, accurate, usable, and actionable. Next steps include application of this index to other conditions.

Implementing pediatric inpatient asthma pathways.

OBJECTIVE: Pathways are succinct, operational versions of evidence-based guidelines. Studies have demonstrated pathways improve quality of care for children hospitalized with asthma, but we have limited information on other key factors to guide hospital leaders and clinicians in pathway implementation efforts. Our objective was to evaluate the adoption, implementation, and reach of inpatient pediatric asthma pathways. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods study of hospitals participating in a national collaborative to implement pathways. Data sources included electronic surveys of implementation leaders and staff, field observations, and chart review of children ages 2-17 years admitted with a primary diagnosis of asthma. Outcomes included adoption by hospitals, pathway implementation factors, and reach of pathways to children hospitalized with asthma. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and multivariable regression. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Eighty-five hospitals enrolled; 68 (80%) adopted/completed the collaborative. These 68 hospitals implemented pathways with overall high fidelity, implementing a median of 5 of 5 core pathway components (Interquartile Range [IQR] 4-5) in a median of 5 months (IQR 3-9). Implementation teams reported a median time cost of 78 h (IQR: 40-120) for implementation. Implementation leaders reported the values of pathway implementation included improvements in care, enhanced interdisciplinary collaboration, and access to educational resources. Leaders reported barriers in modifying electronic health records (EHRs), and only 63% of children had electronic pathway orders placed. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals implemented pathways with high fidelity. Barriers in modifying EHRs may have limited the reach of pathways to children hospitalized with asthma.

Changes in pediatric hospital care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated rapid changes in healthcare delivery in the United States, including changes in the care of hospitalized children. The objectives of this study were to identify major changes in healthcare delivery for hospitalized children during the COVID-19 pandemic, identify lessons learned from these changes, and compare and contrast the experiences of children's and community hospitals. METHODS: We purposefully sampled participants from both community and children's hospitals serving pediatric patients in the six U.S. states with the highest COVID-19 hospitalization rates at the onset of the pandemic. We recruited 2-3 participants from each hospital (mix of administrators, front-line physicians, nurses, and parents/caregivers) for semi-structured interviews. We analyzed interview data using constant comparative methods to identify major themes. RESULTS: We interviewed 30 participants from 12 hospitals. Participants described how leaders rapidly developed new hospital policies (e.g., directing use of personal protective equipment) and how this was facilitated by reviewing internal and external data frequently and engaging all relevant stakeholders. Hospital leaders optimized communication through regular, transparent, multi-modal, and bi-directional communication. Clinicians increased use of videoconference and telehealth to facilitate physical distancing, but these technologies may have disadvantaged non-English speakers. Due to declining volumes of hospitalized children and surges of adult patients, clinicians newly provided care for hospitalized adults. This was facilitated by developing care teams supported by adult hospitalists, multidisciplinary support via videoconference, and educational resources. Participants described how the pandemic negatively impacted clinicians' mental health, and they stressed the importance of mental health resources and wellness activities/spaces. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several major changes in inpatient pediatric care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the adoption of new hospital policies, video communication, staffing models, education strategies, and staff mental health supports. We outline important lessons learned, including strategies for successfully developing new policies, effectively communicating with staff, and supporting clinicians' expanding scope of practice. Potentially important focus areas in pandemic recovery include assessing and supporting clinicians' mental health and well-being, re-evaluating trainees' skills/competencies, and adapting educational strategies as needed. These findings can help guide hospital leaders in supporting pandemic recovery and addressing future crises.

Pathways to Improve Pediatric Asthma Care: A Multisite, National Study of Emergency Department Asthma Pathway Implementation.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of pediatric asthma pathway implementation in a diverse, national sample of emergency departments (EDs). STUDY DESIGN: In this quality improvement study, a national sample of EDs were provided pathways to tailor to local needs. Implementation strategies included local champions, external facilitators/mentors, educational seminars, and audit and feedback. Outcomes included systemic corticosteroid administration within 60 minutes (primary), assessment of severity at ED triage, chest radiograph use, hospital admission or transfer for higher level of care, and ED length of stay (balancing). Each month, EDs reviewed all charts (to a maximum of 20) of children ages 2-17 years with a primary diagnosis of asthma. Analyses were done using multilevel regression models with an interrupted time-series approach, adjusting for patient characteristics. RESULTS: We enrolled 83 EDs (37 in children's hospitals, 46 in community hospitals) and 61 (73%) completed the study (n = 22 963 visits). Pathway implementation was associated with significantly increased odds of systemic corticosteroid administration within 60 minutes of arrival (aOR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.02-1.55), increased odds of severity assessment at triage (aOR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.22-2.90), and decreased rate of change in odds of hospital admission/transfer (aOR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99). Pathway implementation was not associated with chest radiograph use or ED length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Pathway implementation was associated with improved quality of care for children with asthma in a diverse, national group of EDs.

Best practices in implementing inpatient pediatric asthma pathways: a qualitative study.

Objective: Clinical pathways (operational versions of practice guidelines) can improve guideline adherence and quality of care for children hospitalized with asthma. However, there is limited guidance on how to implement pathways successfully. Our objective was to identify potential best practices in pathway implementation.Methods: In a previous observational study, we identified higher and lower performing children's hospitals based on hospital-level changes in asthma patient length of stay after implementation of a pathway. In this qualitative study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of healthcare providers involved in pathway implementation at these hospitals. We used constant comparative methods to develop a conceptual model of potential best practices in implementation.Results: Healthcare providers (n = 24) from 6 higher performing and 2 lower performing hospitals were interviewed about pathway implementation. We identified several practices that addressed barriers and promoted successful pathway implementation: (1) utilizing quality improvement (QI) methodology and a data-driven approach helped overcome inertia of current practice; (2) getting teams to commit to shared goals around asthma care helped overcome disagreements in the implementation process; (3) integrating pathways into the electronic medical record decreased some burdens of implementation; (4) leveraging multidisciplinary teams by developing protocols for nurses and/or respiratory therapists to titrate medications reduced variability in provider practice; and (5) engaging hospital leaders with pathway implementation teams helped secure crucial resources.Conclusions: We identified several potential best practices to support pathway implementation. Hospitals implementing pathways should consider applying these strategies to better ensure success in improving quality of asthma care for children.

Effectiveness of Pediatric Asthma Pathways for Hospitalized Children: A Multicenter, National Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if clinical pathways affect care and outcomes for children hospitalized with asthma using a multicenter study. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective, multicenter cohort study using an administrative database, the Pediatric Health Information System. We evaluated the impact of inpatient pediatric asthma pathways on children age 2-17 years admitted for asthma from 2006 to 2015 in 42 children's hospitals. Date of pathway implementation for each hospital was collected via survey. Using generalized estimating equations with an interrupted time series approach (to account for secular trends), we determined the association of pathway implementation with length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission, chest radiograph utilization, ipratropium administration >24 hours, and administration of bronchodilators, systemic steroids, and antibiotics. All analyses were risk-adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: Clinical pathway implementation was associated with an 8.8% decrease in LOS (95% CI 6.7%-10.9%), 3.1% decrease in hospital costs (95% CI 1.9%-4.3%), increased odds of bronchodilator administration (OR 1.53[1.21-1.95]) and decreased odds of antibiotic administration (OR 0.93[0.87-0.99]) (n = 189 331). We found no associations between pathway implementation and systemic steroid administration, ipratropium administration for >24 hours, chest radiograph utilization, or 30-day readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical pathways can decrease LOS, costs, and unnecessary antibiotic use without increasing rates of readmissions, leading to higher value care.

Rising utilization of inpatient pediatric asthma pathways.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical pathways are detailed care plans that operationalize evidence-based guidelines into an accessible format for health providers. Their goal is to link evidence to practice to optimize patient outcomes and delivery efficiency. It is unknown to what extent inpatient pediatric asthma pathways are being utilized nationally. OBJECTIVES: (1) Describe inpatient pediatric asthma pathway design and implementation across a large hospital network. (2) Compare characteristics of hospitals with and without pathways. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive, cross-sectional, survey study of hospitals in the Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings Network (75% children's hospitals, 25% community hospitals). Our survey determined if each hospital used a pathway and pathway characteristics (e.g. pathway elements, implementation methods). Hospitals with and without pathways were compared using Chi-square tests (categorical variables) and Student's t-tests (continuous variables). RESULTS: Surveys were distributed to 3-5 potential participants from each hospital and 302 (74%) participants responded, representing 86% (106/123) of surveyed hospitals. From 2005-2015, the proportion of hospitals utilizing inpatient asthma pathways increased from 27% to 86%. We found variation in pathway elements, implementation strategies, electronic medical record integration, and compliance monitoring across hospitals. Hospitals with pathways had larger inpatient pediatric programs [mean 12.1 versus 6.1 full-time equivalents, p = 0.04] and were more commonly free-standing children's hospitals (52% versus 23%, p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: From 2005-2015, there was a dramatic rise in implementation of inpatient pediatric asthma pathways. We found variation in many aspects of pathway design and implementation. Future studies should determine optimal implementation strategies to better support hospital-level efforts in improving pediatric asthma care and outcomes.

Hospital-Based Pediatric Quality Improvement Interventions and Health Disparities: A Scoping Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Quality improvement (QI) has the potential to reduce health disparities through multiple mechanisms, including by standardizing care and addressing social barriers to health. National organizations require that hospital systems integrate equity into quality efforts, but effective approaches remain unclear. We aimed to examine the association of hospital-based pediatric QI interventions and racial and ethnic, language, and socioeconomic disparities in health outcomes. METHODS: Quantitative studies from January 1, 2000 to December 11, 2023 reporting the effects of pediatric hospital-based QI were selected from PubMed and Embase. Studies were excluded if outcomes were not stratified by race and ethnicity, language, or socioeconomic status. Studies were reviewed in duplicate for inclusion and by 1 author for data extraction. RESULTS: A total of 22 studies were included. Most studies (n = 19, 86%) revealed preexisting disparities, and 68% of those (n = 13) found disparities reductions post-intervention. Studies with disparity-focused objectives or interventions more commonly found reduced disparities than studies of general QI (85% vs 33%). Hospital-based process standardization was associated with reduced disparities in provider practices. Most interventions associated with reduced disparities in patient-facing outcomes involved community/ambulatory partnership. Limitations included potential exclusion of relevant studies, topic heterogenity, and risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Although the authors of few published hospital-based QI initiatives assessed their equity effect, intentionally designed QI studies were associated with reduced disparities. Interventions focused on care standardization may reduce disparities in care quality, although multilevel interventions are likely needed to affect the health care structures that influence more significant patient outcomes.

Disparities in Racial, Ethnic, and Payer Groups for Pediatric Safety Events in US Hospitals.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Health care disparities are pervasive, but little is known about disparities in pediatric safety. We analyzed a national sample of hospitalizations to identify disparities in safety events. METHODS: In this population-based, retrospective cohort study of the 2019 Kids' Inpatient Database, independent variables were race, ethnicity, and payer. Outcomes were Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality pediatric safety indicators (PDIs). Risk-adjusted odds ratios were calculated using white and private payer reference groups. Differences by payer were evaluated by stratifying race and ethnicity. RESULTS: Race and ethnicity of the 5 243 750 discharged patients were white, 46%; Hispanic, 19%; Black, 15%; missing, 8%; other race/multiracial, 7%, Asian American/Pacific Islander, 5%; and Native American, 1%. PDI rates (per 10 000 discharges) were 331.4 for neonatal blood stream infection, 267.5 for postoperative respiratory failure, 114.9 for postoperative sepsis, 29.5 for postoperative hemorrhage/hematoma, 5.6 for central-line blood stream infection, 3.5 for accidental puncture/laceration, and 0.7 for iatrogenic pneumothorax. Compared with white patients, Black and Hispanic patients had significantly greater odds in 5 of 7 PDIs; the largest disparities occurred in postoperative sepsis (adjusted odds ratio, 1.55 [1.38-1.73]) for Black patients and postoperative respiratory failure (adjusted odds ratio, 1.34 [1.21-1.49]) for Hispanic patients. Compared with privately insured patients, Medicaid-covered patients had significantly greater odds in 4 of 7 PDIs; the largest disparity occurred in postoperative sepsis (adjusted odds ratios, 1.45 [1.33-1.59]). Stratified analyses demonstrated persistent disparities by race and ethnicity, even among privately insured children. CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in safety events were identified for Black and Hispanic children, indicating a need for targeted interventions to improve patient safety in the hospital.

Prioritization of Randomized Clinical Trial Questions for Children Hospitalized With Common Conditions: A Consensus Statement.

Importance: There is a lack of randomized clinical trial (RCT) data to guide many routine decisions in the care of children hospitalized for common conditions. A first step in addressing the shortage of RCTs for this population is to identify the most pressing RCT questions for children hospitalized with common conditions. Objective: To identify the most important and feasible RCT questions for children hospitalized with common conditions. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this consensus statement, a 3-stage modified Delphi process was used in a virtual conference series spanning January 1 to September 29, 2022. Forty-six individuals from 30 different institutions participated in the process. Stage 1 involved construction of RCT questions for the 10 most common pediatric conditions leading to hospitalization. Participants used condition-specific guidelines and reviews from a structured literature search to inform their development of RCT questions. During stage 2, RCT questions were refined and scored according to importance. Stage 3 incorporated public comment and feasibility with the prioritization of RCT questions. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was RCT questions framed in a PICO (population, intervention, control, and outcome) format and ranked according to importance and feasibility; score choices ranged from 1 to 9, with higher scores indicating greater importance and feasibility. Results: Forty-six individuals (38 who shared demographic data; 24 women [63%]) from 30 different institutions participated in our modified Delphi process. Participants included children's hospital (n = 14) and community hospital (n = 13) pediatricians, parents of hospitalized children (n = 4), other clinicians (n = 2), biostatisticians (n = 2), and other researchers (n = 11). The process yielded 62 unique RCT questions, most of which are pragmatic, comparing interventions in widespread use for which definitive effectiveness data are lacking. Overall scores for importance and feasibility of the RCT questions ranged from 1 to 9, with a median of 5 (IQR, 4-7). Six of the top 10 selected questions focused on determining optimal antibiotic regimens for 3 common infections (pneumonia, urinary tract infection, and cellulitis). Conclusions and Relevance: This consensus statementhas identified the most important and feasible RCT questions for children hospitalized with common conditions. This list of RCT questions can guide investigators and funders in conducting impactful trials to improve care and outcomes for hospitalized children.

Child Opportunity Index and Rehospitalization for Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions at US Children's Hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: Child Opportunity Index (COI) measures neighborhood contextual factors (education, health and environment, social and economic) that may influence child health. Such factors have been associated with hospitalizations for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSC). Lower COI has been associated with higher health care utilization, yet association with rehospitalization(s) for ACSC remains unknown. Our objective is to determine the association between COI and ACSC rehospitalizations. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective cohort study of children ages 0 to 17 years with a hospital admission for ambulatory care sensitive conditions in 2017 or 2018. Exposure was COI. Outcome was rehospitalization within 1 year of index admission (analyzed as any or ≥2 rehospitalization) for ACSC. Logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, severity, and complex and mental health conditions. RESULTS: The study included 184 478 children. Of hospitalizations, 28.3% were by children from very low COI and 16.5% were by children from very high COI neighborhoods. In risk-adjusted models, ACSC rehospitalization was higher for children from very low COI than very high COI neighborhoods; any rehospitalization occurred for 18.7% from very low COI and 13.5% from very high COI neighborhoods (adjusted odds ratio 1.14 [1.05-1.23]), whereas ≥2 rehospitalization occurred for 4.8% from very low COI and 3.2% from very high COI neighborhoods (odds ratio 1.51 [1.29-1.75]). CONCLUSIONS: Children from neighborhoods with low COI had higher rehospitalizations for ACSCs. Further research is needed to understand how hospital systems can address social determinants of health in the communities they serve to prevent rehospitalizations.

Characterization of Birth Hospitalizations in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: A broad understanding of the scope of birth hospitalizations in the United States is lacking. We aimed to describe the demographics and location of birth hospitalizations in the United States and rank the most common and costly conditions documented during birth hospitalizations. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the 2019 Kids' Inpatient Database, a nationally-representative administrative database of pediatric discharges. All hospitalizations with the indicator "in-hospital birth" and any categorized by the Pediatric Clinical Classification System as "liveborn" were included. Discharge-level survey weights were used to generate nationally-representative estimates. Primary and secondary conditions coded during birth hospitalizations were categorized using the Pediatric Clinical Classification System, rank-ordered by total prevalence and total marginal costs (calculated using design-adjusted lognormal regression). RESULTS: In 2019, there were an estimated 5 299 557 pediatric hospitalizations in the US and 67% (n = 3 551 253) were for births, totaling $18.1 billion in cost. Most occurred in private, nonprofit hospitals (n = 2 646 685; 74.5%). Prevalent conditions associated with birth admissions included specified conditions originating in the perinatal period (eg, pregnancy complications, complex births) (n = 1 021 099; 28.8%), neonatal hyperbilirubinemia (n = 540 112; 15.2%), screening or risk for infectious disease (n = 417 421; 11.8%), and preterm newborn (n = 314 288; 8.9%). Conditions with the highest total marginal costs included specified conditions originating in perinatal period ($168.7 million) and neonatal jaundice with preterm delivery ($136.1 million). CONCLUSIONS: Our study details common and costly areas of focus for future quality improvement and research efforts to improve care during term and preterm infant birth hospitalizations. These include hyperbilirubinemia, infectious disease screening, and perinatal complications.

Pediatric Respiratory Illnesses: An Update on Achievable Benchmarks of Care.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pediatric respiratory illnesses (PRI): asthma, bronchiolitis, pneumonia, croup, and influenza are leading causes of pediatric hospitalizations, and emergency department (ED) visits in the United States. There is a lack of standardized measures to assess the quality of hospital care delivered for these conditions. We aimed to develop a measure set for automated data extraction from administrative data sets and evaluate its performance including updated achievable benchmarks of care (ABC). METHODS: A multidisciplinary subject-matter experts team selected quality measures from multiple sources. The measure set was applied to the Public Health Information System database (Children's Hospital Association, Lenexa, KS) to cohorts of ED visits and hospitalizations from 2017 to 2019. ABC for pertinent measures and performance gaps of mean values from the ABC were estimated. ABC were compared with previous reports. RESULTS: The measure set: PRI report includes a total of 94 quality measures. The study cohort included 984 337 episodes of care, and 82.3% were discharged from the ED. Measures with low performance included bronchodilators (19.7%) and chest x-rays (14.4%) for bronchiolitis in the ED. These indicators were (34.6%) and (29.5%) in the hospitalized cohort. In pneumonia, there was a 57.3% use of narrow spectrum antibiotics. In general, compared with previous reports, there was improvement toward optimal performance for the ABCs. CONCLUSIONS: The PRI report provides performance data including ABC and identifies performance gaps in the quality of care for common respiratory illnesses. Future directions include examining health inequities, and understanding and addressing the effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on care quality.

Barriers and Facilitators of High-Efficiency Clinical Pathway Implementation in Community Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: An intervention that involved simultaneously implementing clinical pathways for multiple conditions was tested at a tertiary children's hospital and it improved care quality. We are conducting a randomized trial to evaluate this multicondition pathway intervention in community hospitals. Our objectives in this qualitative study were to prospectively (1) identify implementation barriers and (2) map barriers to facilitators using an established implementation science framework. METHODS: We recruited participants via site leaders from hospitals enrolled in the trial. We designed an interview guide using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and conducted individual interviews. Analysis was done using constant comparative methods. Anticipated barriers were mapped to facilitators using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behavior Framework. RESULTS: Participants from 12 hospitals across the United States were interviewed (n = 21). Major themes regarding the multicondition pathway intervention included clinician perceptions, potential benefits, anticipated barriers/challenges, potential facilitators, and necessary resources. We mapped barriers to additional facilitators using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behavior framework. To address limited time/bandwidth of clinicians, we will provide Maintenance of Certification credits. To address new staff and trainee turnover, we will provide easily accessible educational videos/resources. To address difficulties in changing practice across other hospital units, we will encourage emergency department engagement. To address parental concerns with deimplementation, we will provide guidance on parent counseling. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several potential barriers and facilitators for implementation of a multicondition clinical pathway intervention in community hospitals. We also illustrate a prospective process for identifying implementation facilitators.

Does being a coach benefit clinician-educators? A mixed methods study of faculty self-efficacy, job satisfaction and burnout.

INTRODUCTION: Coaching is a growing clinician-educator role. Self-efficacy is a powerful faculty motivator that is associated positively with job satisfaction and negatively with burnout. This study examines self-efficacy, job satisfaction, and burnout in coaches and other clinician-educators. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods study using a quantitative survey followed by qualitative interviews of faculty at the University of California, San Francisco. Coaches (funded 20% full-time equivalents), faculty with other funded education positions ("funded"), and faculty without funded education positions ("unfunded") completed a 48-item survey addressing self-efficacy (teaching, professional development, and scholarship), job satisfaction, and burnout. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance followed by post-hoc tests and chi-square tests. To elaborate quantitative results, we conducted qualitative interviews of 15 faculty and analyzed data using framework analysis. RESULTS: 202 of 384 faculty (52.6%) responded to the survey; 187 complete surveys were analyzed. Teaching self-efficacy was similar across groups. Coaches and funded educators had significantly higher professional development self-efficacy and job satisfaction than unfunded educators. Burnout was more prevalent in coaches and unfunded educators. Qualitative analysis yielded three themes: sources of reward, academic identity, and strategies to mitigate burnout. Educator roles provide reward that enhances self-efficacy and job satisfaction but also generate competing demands. Coaches cited challenges in forming professional identities and working with struggling learners. DISCUSSION: The coaching role provides faculty with benefits similar to other funded educator roles, but the particular demands of the coach role may contribute to burnout.

Strategies for sustaining high-quality pediatric asthma care in community hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To identify strategies associated with sustained guideline adherence and high-quality pediatric asthma care in community hospitals. DATA SOURCES: Primary qualitative data from clinicians in hospitals across the United States (collected December 2019-February 2021). STUDY DESIGN: Pathways for Improving Pediatric Asthma Care (PIPA) was a national quality improvement (QI) intervention. In a prior quantitative study, data from 23 community hospitals in PIPA were analyzed to identify sites with the highest and lowest performance in sustaining improvements for 2 years. In this qualitative study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with multidisciplinary clinicians from these hospitals to identify strategies associated with sustainability. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We purposefully sampled and interviewed participants involved in clinical care of children hospitalized with asthma at the identified hospitals (those with the highest/lowest sustainability performance). We transcribed and analyzed interview data using constant comparative methods. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Clinicians (n = 19) from five higher- and three lower-performing hospitals participated. In higher-performing hospitals, dedicated local champions more consistently provided reminders of evidence-based practices and delivered ongoing education. They also modified/developed electronic health record (EHR) tools (e.g., order sets with decision support). Higher-performing hospitals had a collaborative culture receptive to practice change and set firm expectations that evidence-based practices would be followed without exception. In lower-performing hospitals, participants described unique barriers, including delays in modifying the EHR and lack of automation of EHR tools (requiring clinicians to remember new EHR tasks without automated prompts). Barriers to sustainability for all hospitals included challenges with quality monitoring, decreasing focus of local champions over time, and ongoing difficulties developing consensus around evidence-based practices. CONCLUSIONS: To better ensure sustained high-quality care for children with asthma and greater returns on QI investments, QI leaders should prioritize: designating long-term local champions to continue reminders and educational efforts and developing electronic order sets to provide ongoing decision support.

Effect of a Quality Improvement Bundle to Standardize the Use of Intravenous Fluids for Hospitalized Pediatric Patients: A Stepped-Wedge, Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Given that hypotonic maintenance intravenous fluids (IVF) may cause hospital-acquired harm, in November 2018, the American Academy of Pediatrics released a clinical practice guideline recommending the use of isotonic IVF for patients aged 28 days to 18 years without contraindications. No recommendations were made regarding laboratory monitoring; however, unnecessary laboratory tests may contribute to health care waste and harm patients. Objective: To examine the effect of a quality improvement intervention bundle on (1) increasing the mean proportion of hours per hospital day with exclusive isotonic IVF use to at least 80% and (2) decreasing the mean proportion of hospital days with laboratory tests obtained. Design, Setting, and Participants: This stepped-wedge, cluster randomized clinical trial (Standardization of Fluids in Inpatient Settings [SOFI]) was sponsored by a national quality improvement collaborative and was conducted across 106 US pediatric hospitals. The SOFI intervention period was from September 2019 to March 2020. Interventions: Hospital sites were exposed to educational materials, a clinical algorithm and order set for IVF use, electronic medical record interventions to reduce laboratory testing, and "harms of overtesting" cards. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were mean proportion of hours per hospital day receiving exclusive isotonic IVF and mean proportion of hospital days with laboratory test values obtained. Secondary measures included total IVF duration per hospital day, daily patient weight measurement while receiving IVF, serum sodium testing, and adverse events. Baseline data were collected for 2 months; intervention period data, 7 months. Outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed-effects regression models. Results: A total of 106 hospitals were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 intervention start dates (wedges), and 100 hospitals (94%) completed the study. In total, 5215 hospitalizations were reviewed before the intervention, and 6724 hospitalizations were reviewed after the intervention. Prior to interventions, the mean (SD) proportion of hours per day with exclusive isotonic IVF use was 88.5% (31.7%). Interventions led to an absolute increase of 5.4% (95% CI, 3.9%-6.9%) above baseline in exclusive isotonic IVF use but did not change the proportion of hospital days during which a laboratory test value was obtained (estimated difference, 0.1%; 95% CI, -1.5% to 1.7%; P = .90), IVF use duration (estimated difference, -1.2%; 95% CI, -2.9% to 0.4%), serum sodium testing, or adverse events. There was an absolute increase of 4.4% (95% CI, 2.6%-6.2%) in the mean proportion of hospital days with a patient weight measurement while receiving IVF. Conclusions and Relevance: In this stepped-wedge, cluster randomized clinical trial, an intervention bundle significantly improved the use of isotonic maintenance IVF without a concomitant increase in adverse events or electrolyte testing. Further work is required to deimplement laboratory testing. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03924674.

HEROIC Trials to Answer Pragmatic Questions for Hospitalized Children.

Although the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published each year involving adult populations is steadily rising, the annual number of RCTs published involving pediatric populations has not changed since 2005. Barriers to the broader utilization of RCTs in pediatrics include a lower prevalence of disease, less available funding, and more complicated regulatory requirements. Although child health researchers have been successful in overcoming these barriers for isolated diseases such as pediatric cancer, common pediatric diseases are underrepresented in RCTs relative to their burden. This article proposes a strategy called High-Efficiency RandOmIzed Controlled (HEROIC) trials to increase RCTs focused on common diseases among hospitalized children. HEROIC trials are multicenter RCTs that pursue the rapid, low-cost accumulation of study participants with minimal burden for individual sites. Five key strategies distinguish HEROIC trials: (1) dispersed low-volume recruitment, in which a large number of sites (50-150 hospitals) enroll a small number of participants per site (2-10 participants per site), (2) incentivizing site leads with authorship, training, education credits, and modest financial support, (3) a focus on pragmatic questions that examine simple, widely used interventions, (4) the use of a single institutional review board, integrated consent, and other efficient solutions to regulatory requirements, and (5) scaling the HEROIC trial strategy to accomplish multiple trials simultaneously. HEROIC trials can boost RCT feasibility and volume to answer fundamental clinical questions and improve care for hospitalized children.

Hospital's observed specific standard practice: A novel measure of variation in care for common inpatient pediatric conditions.

BACKGROUND: Previously few means existed to broadly examine variability across conditions/practices within or between hospitals for common pediatric conditions. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to develop a novel empiric measure of variation in care and test its association with patient-centered outcomes. DESIGNS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of children hospitalized from January 2016 to December 2018 using the Pediatric Hospital Information Systems database. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: We included children ages 0-18 years hospitalized with asthma, bronchiolitis, or gastroenteritis. INTERVENTION: We developed a hospital-specific measure of variation in care, the hospital's observed specific standard practice (HOSSP), the most common combination of laboratory studies, imaging, and medications used at each hospital. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: The outcomes were standardized costs, length of stay (LOS), and 7-day all-cause readmissions. RESULTS: Among 133,392 hospitalizations from 41 hospitals (asthma = 50,382, bronchiolitis = 54,745, and gastroenteritis = 28,265), there was significant variation in overall HOSSP adherence across hospitals for these conditions (asthma: 3.5%-47.4% [p < .001], bronchiolitis: 2.5%-19.8% [p < .001], gastroenteritis: 1.6%-11.6% [p < .001]). The majority of HOSSP variation was driven by differences in medication prescribing for asthma and bronchiolitis and laboratory ordering for gastroenteritis. For all three conditions, greater HOSSP adherence was associated with significantly lower hospital costs (asthma: p = .04, bronchiolitis: p < .001, acute gastroenteritis: p = .01), without increases in LOS or 7-day all cause readmissions. CONCLUSION: We found substantial variation in the components and adherence to HOSSP. Hospitals with greater HOSSP adherence had lower costs for these conditions. This suggests hospitals can use data around laboratory, imaging, and medication prescribing practices to drive standardization of care, reduce unnecessary testing and treatment, determine best practices, and reduce costs.

Neighborhood Child Opportunity and Emergency Department Utilization.

The Child Opportunity Index measures the structural neighborhood context that may influence a child's healthy development. We examined relationships between the Child Opportunity Index and emergency department utilization. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Child Opportunity Index (COI) is a multidimensional measure of structural neighborhood context that may influence a child's healthy development. Our objective was to determine if COI is associated with children's emergency department (ED) utilization using a national sample. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of the Pediatric Health Information Systems, a database from 49 United States children's hospitals. We analyzed children aged 0 to 17 years with ED visits from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019. We modeled associations between COI and outcomes using generalized regression models that adjusted for patient characteristics (eg, age, clinical severity). Outcomes included: (1) low-resource intensity (LRI) ED visits (visits with no laboratories, imaging, procedures, or admission), (2) ≥2 or ≥3 ED visits, and (3) admission. RESULTS: We analyzed 6 810 864 ED visits by 3 999 880 children. LRI visits were more likely among children from very low compared with very high COI (1 LRI visit: odds ratio [OR] 1.35 [1.17-1.56]; ≥2 LRI visits: OR 1.97 [1.66-2.33]; ≥3 LRI visits: OR 2.4 [1.71-3.39]). ED utilization was more likely among children from very low compared with very high COI (≥2 ED visits: OR 1.73 [1.51-1.99]; ≥3 ED visits: OR 2.22 [1.69-2.91]). Risk of hospital admission from the ED was lower for children from very low compared with very high COI (OR 0.77 [0.65-0.99]). CONCLUSIONS: Children from neighborhoods with low COI had higher ED utilization overall and more LRI visits, as well as visits more cost-effectively managed in primary care settings. Identifying neighborhood opportunity-related drivers can help us design interventions to optimize child health and decrease unnecessary ED utilization and costs.