Can we screen for heart disease in children at public health centres? A multicentre observational study of screening for heart disease with a risk of sudden death in children.

Sudden cardiac death in children is a rare event, but of great social significance. Generally, it is related to heart disease with a risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD), which may occur with cardiovascular symptoms and/or electrocardiographic markers; thus, a primary care paediatrician (PCP) could detect them. Therefore, we proposed a study that assesses how to put into practice and conduct a cardiovascular assessment within the routine healthy-child check-ups at six and twelve years of age; that reflects cardiovascular signs and symptoms, as well as the electrocardiographic alterations that children with a risk of SCD in the selected population present; and that assesses the PCP's skill at electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation. In collaboration with PCPs, primary care nurses, and paediatric cardiologists, an observational, descriptive, multicentre, cross-sectional study was carried out in the Balearic Islands (Spain), from April 2021 to January 2022, inclusive. The PCPs gathered patient data through forms (medical record, electrocardiogram, and physical examination) and sent them to the investigator, together with the informed consent document and electrocardiogram. The investigator passed the electrocardiogram on to the paediatric cardiologists for reading, in an identical form to those the paediatricians had filled in. The variables were collected, and a descriptive analysis performed. Three paediatric cardiologists, twelve PCPs, and nine nurses from seven public health centres took part. They collected the data from 641 patients, but 233 patients did not participate (in 81.11% due to the PCP's workload). Therefore, the study coverage was around 64%, representing the quotient of the total number of patients who participated, divided by the total number of patients who were eligible for the study. We detected 30 patients with electrocardiographic alterations compatible with SCD risk. Nine of these had been examined by a paediatric cardiologist at some time (functional murmur in 8/9), five had reported shortness of breath with exercise, and four had reported a family history of sudden death. The physical examination of all the patients whose ECG was compatible with a risk of SCD was normal. Upon analysing to what extent the ECG results of the PCP and the paediatric cardiologist agreed, the percentage of agreement in the final interpretation (normal/altered) was 91.9%, while Cohen's kappa coefficient was 31.2% (CI 95%: 13.8-48.6%). The sensitivity of the ECG interpretation by the PCP to detect an ECG compatible with a risk of SCD was 29% and the positive predictive value 45%.     Conclusions: This study lays the foundations for future SCD risk screening in children, performed by PCPs. However, previously, it would be important to optimise their training in reading and interpreting paediatric ECGs. What is Known: • In Spain at present, there is a programme in place to detect heart disease with a risk of sudden death [1], but it targets only children who are starting on or are doing a physical activity as a federated sport. Implementing such screening programmes has proven effective in several countries [2]. However, several studies showed that the incidence of sudden cardiac death is no higher in children competing in sport activities than in those who do not do any sport [3]. This poses an ethical conflict, because at present, children who do not do any federated sport are excluded from screening. According to the revised literature, so far, only in two studies did they screen the child population at schools, and in both, they successfully detected patients with heart disease associated to the risk of sudden death [4, 5]. We have found no studies where the screening of these features was included within the routine healthy-child check-ups by primary care paediatricians. What is New: • We did not know whether-in our setting, at present-the primary care paediatrician could perform a screening method within the routine healthy-child check-ups, in order to detect presumably healthy children at risk of sudden cardiac death, as they present one of the SCD risks. In this regard, we proposed our project: to assess how to put into practice and conduct a cardiovascular assessment via SCD risk screening in the healthy child population by primary care paediatricians and appraise primary care paediatricians' skills in identifying the electrocardiographic alterations associated with SCD risk. The ultimate intention of this pilot study was to make it possible, in the future, to design and justify a study aimed at universalising cardiovascular screening and achieving a long-term decrease in sudden cardiac death events in children.

Quality indicators in interhospital transport: Multicentre project.

INTRODUCTION: Interhospital transport is carried out by variable teams in different regions of our country, and this makes quality evaluation and benchmarking complicated. Project objective: Select and define a consensual list of quality measurement that may be used by national transport units, whether specialised or not. METHODS: Initial set of quality indicators was proposed by coordinators (members of representative specialised transport units in Spain). Evaluation by selected transport specialists from participating units and SECIP (Society of Paediatric Intensive Care) and SENeo (Spanish Neonatology Society) work teams. Selection of definitive indicators by Delphi method according to relevance and feasibility. RESULTS: A total of 35 quality indicators were included in the initial set. Evaluation was carried out by 22 specialists from 7 transport teams. In a first round, 4 indicators were consensually included in the definitive list. Results for the rest of metrics and comments were sent to all participants, and after a second assessment, 11 other indicators reached enough consensus. After list accomplishment, a consensual final definition for every indicator was established. CONCLUSIONS: Using a consensual research method, a list of 15 common indicators was obtained, which may be used by specialised transport teams in our country, and by non-specialised clinics in charge of interhospital paediatric transport. It will allow individual performance to be assessed, as well as benchmarking, in order to find improvement opportunities and ensure the highest quality during interhospital transport.

Desarrollo de un sistema de indicadores para la evaluación de la calidad en transporte interhospitalario: proyecto multicéntrico / Quality indicators in interhospital transport: multicentre project

Introducción: El traslado interhospitalario se realiza por equipos muy diferentes en las distintas regiones de nuestro país, lo que dificulta la comparación de su calidad asistencial. Objetivo: Seleccionar y definir una lista consensuada de indicadores de calidad aplicable a todas las unidades de transporte, especializadas o no, a nivel nacional. Material y métodos: Realización de una propuesta inicial de indicadores por el comité coordinador con representantes del transporte especializado de nuestro país. Valoración del listado por especialistas en transporte de las unidades participantes y los grupos de trabajo de SECIP y SENeo. Selección de los indicadores mediante el método Delphi según su relevancia y factibilidad. Resultados: El listado inicial incluyó 35 posibles indicadores. Fueron valorados por 22 especialistas pertenecientes a siete unidades de transporte. En una primera fase se eligieron por consenso cuatro indicadores, que pasaron directamente al listado definitivo. Se enviaron a los encuestados los resultados del resto de indicadores y las observaciones realizadas por los participantes, y tras ello se realizó una segunda valoración, en la que alcanzaron un consenso aceptable otros 11 indicadores. Tras la elaboración del listado, se estableció de forma consensuada la definición final de cada indicador elegido. Conclusiones: Utilizando un sistema de búsqueda de consenso, definimos una lista de 15 indicadores comunes, que podría ser utilizada por las unidades especializadas de nuestro país y personal asistencial no especializado que realiza traslados pediátricos. Permitirá evaluar el rendimiento individual y comparar las diferentes unidades para encontrar oportunidades de mejora y asegurar la máxima calidad durante el transporte. (AU)

Introduction: Interhospital transport is carried out by variable teams in different regions of our country, and this makes quality evaluation and benchmarking complicated. Project objective: select and define a consensual list of quality measurement that may be used by national transport units, whether specialised or not. Methods: Initial set of quality indicators was proposed by coordinators (members of representative specialised transport units in Spain). Evaluation by selected transport specialists from participating units and SECIP (Society of Paediatric Intensive Care) and SENeo (Spanish Neonatology Society) work teams. Selection of definitive indicators by Delphi method according to relevance and feasibility. Results: A total of 35 quality indicators were included in the initial set. Evaluation was carried out by 22 specialists from seven transport teams. In a first round, four indicators were consensually included in the definitive list. Results for the rest of metrics and comments were sent to all participants, and after a second assessment, 11 other indicators reached enough consensus. After list accomplishment, a consensual final definition for every indicator was established. Conclusions: Using a consensual research method, a list of 15 common indicators was obtained, which may be used by specialised transport teams in our country, and by non-specialised clinics in charge of interhospital paediatric transport. It will allow individual performance to be assessed, as well as benchmarking, in order to find improvement opportunities and ensure the highest quality during interhospital transport. (AU)