Quality Improvement Methodology to Improve Standardized Reporting of Pediatric Thyroid Ultrasounds Using TI-RADS.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The process of evaluating pediatric thyroid nodules at our institution was inconsistent with a high rate of negative biopsies raising concern of appropriate patient selection for biopsy. Our aim was to institute a standardized risk stratification reporting system for thyroid nodules to increase utilization and agreement of TI-RADS reporting at our institution. METHODS: Radiology report data were collected and analyzed as part of a quality improvement project. A standardized TI-RADS dictation template was created, ultrasound technicians were trained, a multi-disciplinary conference initiated, and education provided for radiologists and clinicians. Control charts were used to track utilization and agreement of scoring of TI-RADS reporting based upon review by a radiologist trained in TI-RADS scoring. RESULTS: From January 2019 to January 2021, 218 patients with a thyroid nodule had a thyroid ultrasound performed at our institution. TI-RADS was utilized in 0 % (0 of 57) of children in the four months prior to project initiation. Following creation of the template, utilization increased to 65 % (39 of 60) over 5 months. Utilization further increased after the first training conference and was maintained above 90 % for 13 months. Ultrasound reports were in agreement in 46.7 % (28 of 60) of children initially. Agreement in reporting improved to 71.4 % (10 of 14) in the 3 months following the first training and to 78.4 % (58 of 74) over 12 months. Agreement in reporting was maintained at 80 % in the following 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: A quality improvement initiative can improve utilization and agreement of scoring using the TI-RADS system in pediatrics. This may ultimately reduce unnecessary biopsies and sedation in children. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III. TYPE OF STUDY: Quality Improvement.

Reducing Opioid Prescriptions after Common Outpatient Pediatric Urologic Surgeries: A Quality Improvement Assessment.

Pediatric patients undergoing outpatient surgeries often receive prescriptions for postoperative pain, including opioid medications. As a result, the American Academy of Pediatrics formally challenged all pediatric surgeons to decrease opioid prescribing for common specialty-specific outpatient procedures at discharge. To meet this challenge, we designed a quality improvement project to decrease the average number of opioid doses administered to pediatric patients undergoing 3 common outpatient urologic surgeries: circumcision, orchiopexy, and inguinal hernia repair (IHR). Methods: We formally challenged providers at our institution to reduce opioid doses per prescription and administration to patients overall. We performed a retrospective chart review at our single pediatric institution to establish baseline opioid prescribing values from July 2017 to March 2018. We aimed to reduce this value by 50% in 6 months and sustain this decrease throughout the project duration. Results: We performed 1,518 orchiopexies, 1,505 circumcisions, and 531 IHRs. The percent change in the average number of opioid doses prescribed per patient from baseline values assessed to 2021 was statistically significant for orchiopexies (P < 0.0001), IHRs (P < 0.0001), and circumcisions (P < 0.0001). In addition, the change in the percentage of patients prescribed opioids from baseline was statistically significant for all 3 procedures (P < 0.001). Conclusions: This project demonstrated that through an organized quality improvement initiative, the average number of opioid medications prescribed and the total percentage of patients prescribed opioids following common outpatient pediatric urologic procedures can be decreased by at least 50% and sustained through project duration.

Both sides of the screen: Provider and patient perspective on telemedicine in pediatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: There has been increased telemedicine use secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of this study was to assess patient/parent satisfaction with their telemedicine experience, gauge provider perspective on telemedicine for the management of pediatric colorectal disease and evaluate the quality of telemedicine care being provided. METHODS: A cross sectional study was performed at a single institution from March 2020-February 2021. Patients who completed a patient/parent telemedicine survey after a telemedicine appointment and nurse practitioners/surgeons who completed a provider telemedicine survey were included. Patient and provider characteristics and responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Differences between the levels of provider confidence to provide telemedicine care were analyzed using Pearson's chi-square test. RESULTS: 118 patients/parents completed the survey. The median age of patients was 7 years. Most patients were male (59%) and White (73%). The most common diagnosis was anorectal malformation (49%). 71% of parents felt the telemedicine visit was as effective or better than an in-person visit and over 70% said they prefer a telemedicine visit to an in-person visit. Ten surgeons and 8 nurse practitioners completed the provider survey. 28% had previous telemedicine experience and 94% planned to continue offering telemedicine appointments. Providers felt significantly more confident performing clinical duties via video telemedicine compared to telephone telemedicine. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine is a useful adjunct or alternative in pediatric surgery for complex patients who require multidisciplinary care. Providers show confidence with the use of video telemedicine and parents show high satisfaction, with the majority preferring telemedicine visits over in-person visits. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

A diagnostic time-out to improve differential diagnosis in pediatric abdominal pain.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric abdominal pain is challenging to diagnose and often results in unscheduled return visits to the emergency department. External pressures and diagnostic momentum can impair physicians from thoughtful reflection on the differential diagnosis (DDx). We implemented a diagnostic time-out intervention and created a scoring tool to improve the quality and documentation rates of DDx. The specific aim of this quality improvement (QI) project was to increase the frequency of resident and attending physician documentation of DDx in pediatric patients admitted with abdominal pain by 25% over 6 months. METHODS: We reviewed a total of 165 patients admitted to the general pediatrics service at one institution. Sixty-four history and physical (H&P) notes were reviewed during the baseline period, July-December 2017; 101 charts were reviewed post-intervention, January-June 2018. Medical teams were tasked to perform a diagnostic time-out on all patients during the study period. Metrics tracked monthly included percentage of H&Ps with a 'complete' DDx and quality scores (Qs) using our Differential Diagnosis Scoring Rubric. RESULTS: At baseline, 43 (67%) resident notes and 49 (77%) attending notes documented a 'complete' DDx. Post-intervention, 59 (58%) resident notes and 69 (68%) attending notes met this criteria. Mean Qs, pre- to post-intervention, for resident-documented differential diagnoses increased slightly (2.41-2.47, p = 0.73), but attending-documented DDx did not improve (2.85-2.82, p = 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated a marginal improvement in the quality of resident-documented DDx. Expansion of diagnoses considered within a DDx may contribute to higher diagnostic accuracy.

The Diagnostic Error Index: A Quality Improvement Initiative to Identify and Measure Diagnostic Errors.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a diagnostic error index (DEI) aimed at providing a practical method to identify and measure serious diagnostic errors. STUDY DESIGN: A quality improvement (QI) study at a quaternary pediatric medical center. Five well-defined domains identified cases of potential diagnostic errors. Identified cases underwent an adjudication process by a multidisciplinary QI team to determine if a diagnostic error occurred. Confirmed diagnostic errors were then aggregated on the DEI. The primary outcome measure was the number of monthly diagnostic errors. RESULTS: From January 2017 through June 2019, 105 cases of diagnostic error were identified. Morbidity and mortality conferences, institutional root cause analyses, and an abdominal pain trigger tool were the most frequent domains for detecting diagnostic errors. Appendicitis, fractures, and nonaccidental trauma were the 3 most common diagnoses that were missed or had delayed identification. CONCLUSIONS: A QI initiative successfully created a pragmatic approach to identify and measure diagnostic errors by utilizing a DEI. The DEI established a framework to help guide future initiatives to reduce diagnostic errors.