The Frequency of Infant-Feeding Presentations at English Emergency Departments During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: A Nation-Wide Electronic Health Records Study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the frequency and distribution of infant feeding-related presentations at emergency departments (EDs) before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. SETTING: Attendances at 48 major EDs in England in two 50-week periods before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: period 1, April 2, 2019 to March 10, 2020 and period 2, April 1, 2020 to March 10, 2021. METHODS: We estimated the change in frequency of ED presentations by age group and diagnosis before and after the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in England. We compared changes in the frequency of attendances of infant-feeding related presentations by infant age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, rurality, arrival mode, arrival time, acuity, mother's age, gravidity and mental health, birth length of stay, attendance duration, and disposal (i.e., admission or discharge). RESULTS: While total ED attendances fell by 16.7% (95% CI -16.8% to -16.6%), infant attendances increased for feeding problems (+7.5% 95% CI 2.3% to 13.0%), neonatal jaundice (+12.8%, 95% CI 3.3% to 23.3%) and gastro-esophageal reflux (+9.7%, 95% CI 4.4% to 15.2%). These increases were more pronounced amongst first babies (+22.4%, 95% CI 13.1% to 32.5%), and where the stay in hospital after birth was brief (0-1 days, +20.1%, 95% CI 14.8% to 25.7%). Our analysis suggests that many of these attendances were of low acuity. CONCLUSIONS: While ED attendances reduced dramatically and systematically with the COVID-19 pandemic, presentations for infant feeding issues increased, implying growth in the unmet needs of new mothers and infants.

Impact of COVID-19 on paediatric emergency department attendances at four English hospitals.

Paediatric emergency department (PED) attendances reduced worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020) but anecdotally babies under 30 days (BUD) appeared less affected. We collated monthly PED attendances (16 years and under) across four hospitals (three district general hospitals and a tertiary specialist PED) in England, UK from January 2017 to December 2020. Gross PED attendances dropped by 34% in 2020 (n=98 256) compared to 2019 (n=148 640). However, cumulative BUD attendances dropped by only 6% in 2020 (n=3922) compared to 2019 (n=4162). Monthly site-specific attendances showed marginal variation. PED attendances broadly decreased in 2020 with less of an impact on BUD.

Head home: implementation during COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Recent research suggests that between 20% and 50% of paediatric head injuries attending our emergency department (ED) could be safely discharged soon after triage, without the need for medical review, using a 'Head Injury Discharge At Triage' tool (HIDAT). We sought to implement this into clinical practice. METHODS: Paediatric ED triage staff underwent competency-based assessments for HIDAT with all head injury presentations 1 May to 31 October 2020 included in analysis. We determined which patients were discharged using the tool, which underwent CT of the brain and whether there was a clinically important traumatic brain injury or representation to the ED. RESULTS: Of the 1429 patients screened; 610 (43%) screened negative with 250 (18%) discharged by nursing staff. Of the entire cohort, 32 CTs were performed for head injury concerns (6 abnormal) with 1 CT performed in the HIDAT negative group (normal). Of those discharged using HIDAT, four reattended, two with vomiting (no imaging or admission) and two with minor scalp wound infections. Two patients who screened negative declined discharge under the policy with later medical discharge (no imaging or admission). Paediatric ED attendances were 29% lower than in 2018. CONCLUSION: We have successfully implemented HIDAT into local clinical practice. The number discharged (18%) is lower than originally described; this is likely multifactorial. The relationship between COVID-19 and paediatric ED attendances is unclear but decreased attendances suggest those for whom the tool was originally designed are not attending ED and may be accessing other medical/non-medical resources.

Head home: a prospective cohort study of a nurse-led paediatric head injury clinical decision tool at a district general hospital.

OBJECTIVES: To assess if a nurse-led application of a paediatric head injury clinical decision tool would be safe compared with current practice. METHODS: All paediatric (<17 years) patients with head injuries presenting to Frimley Park Emergency Department (ED), England from 1 May to 31 October 2018 were prospectively screened by a nurse using a mandated electronic 'Head Injury Discharge At Triage' questionnaire (HIDATq). We determined which patients underwent CT of brain and whether there was a clinically important intracranial injury or re-presentation to the ED. The negative predictive value of the screening tool was assessed. We determined what proportion of patients could have been sent home from triage using this tool. RESULTS: Of the 1739 patients screened, 61 had CTs performed due to head injury (six abnormal) with a CT rate of 3.5% and 2% re-presentations. Of the entire cohort, 1052 screened negative. 1 CT occurred in this group showing no abnormalities. Of those screened negative, 349 (33%)/1052 had 'no other injuries' and 543 (52%)/1052 had 'abrasions or lacerations'. HIDATq's negative predictive value for CT was 99.9% (95% CI 99.4% to 99.9%) and 100% (95% CI 99.0% to 100%) for intracranial injury. The positive predictive value of the tool was low. Five patients screened negative and re-presented within 72 hours but did not require CT imaging. CONCLUSION: A negative HIDATq appears safe in our ED. Potentially 20% (349/1739) of all patients with head injuries presenting to our department could be discharged by nurses at triage with adequate safety netting advice. This increases to 50% (543/1739), if patients with lacerations or abrasions were given advice and discharged at triage. A large multicentre study is required to validate the tool.

What the FLOQ? A quality improvement project to reduce unnecessary paediatric respiratory viral swabs in a peripheral metropolitan hospital.

AIM: To reduce the number of paediatric respiratory viral swabs (locally referred to as a FLOQ) performed across the authors clinical centre from a baseline of over 800 ($38 000) per year by 25% over 4 months from 6 February 2017 to 31 May 2017. METHODS: A quality improvement project 'What the FLOQ?' (WTF) was instigated from 6 February 2017 to complement the Emergency Department (ED) 'Sensible Test Ordering Process' project from 1 April 2017. Stakeholder engagement across ED and general paediatric staff was sought. Alterations in practice included education of staff, targeted feedback to groups frequently ordering a FLOQ and rationalising patients appropriate for testing. Monthly requests were tallied on a run chart for FLOQs ordered in ED and the paediatric ward. A monthly audit of FLOQs performed on ED-discharged patients was conducted with feedback. RESULTS: Total FLOQ swabs decreased by 55% from 336 (February to May 2016) to 151 (February to May 2017). ED performed 66% less FLOQs from 237 (February to May 2016) to 82 (February to May 2017). There was no increase in the number of FLOQs performed on the paediatric ward February to May 2017. Monthly auditing of ED discharged patients under 2 years with a FLOQ went from 40 to 3%. CONCLUSION: Rationalising patient groups appropriate for testing with targeted feedback and broad stakeholder engagement successfully reduced FLOQs performed by 55%. This has projected savings of over $21 000 by 12 months. WTF has reduced the number of invasive patient procedures performed, benefitting staff and patients. Sustaining this change will be achieved through ongoing staff education on rationalisation criteria and consultant only requests outside of these parameters.

Fever under 3 months and the full septic screen: Time to think again? A retrospective cohort study at a tertiary-level paediatric hospital.

AIM: To assess adherence to the Iocal guideline (LG) for the management of fever in infants under 3 months and whether the application of a risk-stratified protocol (RSP) to this population would miss any serious bacterial infections (SBI) compared to current practice (CP) and LG. METHODS: All presentations to the authors' Emergency Department of infants 0-3 months with fever from 1 July 2015 to 28 April 2016 were included (n = 219), along with a detailed analysis of CP. The initial history, examination and pathology results were applied to the LG and RSP to assess what changes in management would occur. The primary end point was a missed SBI, with secondary outcomes measuring the number of invasive procedures performed, antibiotics prescribed and admissions. RESULTS: Adherence to the LG was 83% with three missed SBIs. Strict adherence would have resulted in eight missed SBIs. This indicates that both warranted and unwarranted variation exists in current clinical practice. Application of the RSP showed no missed SBIs but, compared to CP, indicates a statistically significant increase in admissions and full septic screens (admissions 95% vs. 83%, P < 0.05; full septic screens 82% vs. 72%, P < 0.05). Chest X-rays were infrequently requested (10%) and the validity of use in this group warrants further study. CONCLUSION: An ad hoc risk-stratified practice already exists at the authors' institution, and application of an RSP did not miss any SBIs. Adoption and implementation of a formal RSP is currently being formulated.