Intimate Partner Violence and the Pediatric Electronic Health Record: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore expert perspectives on risks associated with the pediatric electronic health record (EHR) for intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors and their children and to identify strategies that may mitigate these risks. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with multidisciplinary pediatric IPV experts (nursing, physicians, social workers, hospital security, IPV advocates) recruited via snowball sampling. We coded interview transcripts using thematic analysis, then consolidated codes into themes. RESULTS: Twenty-eight participants completed interviews. Participants identified the primary source of risk as an abuser's potential access to a child's EHR by legal and illegal means. They noted that abuser's access to multiple pediatric EHR components (eg, online health portals, clinical notes, contact information) may result in escalated violence, stalking, and manipulation of IPV survivors. Suggested risk mitigation strategies included limited and coded documentation, limiting EHR access, and discussing documentation with the IPV survivor. Challenges to using these strategies included healthcare providers' usual practice of detailed documentation and that information documented may confer both risk and benefit concurrently. Reported potential benefits of the pediatric EHR for IPV survivors included ensuring continuity of care, decreasing need to repeatedly talk about trauma histories, and communication of safety plans. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest the pediatric EHR may confer both risks and benefits for IPV survivors and their children. Further work is needed to develop best practices to address IPV risks related to the pediatric EHR, to ensure consistent use of these practices, and to include these practices as standard functionalities of the pediatric EHR.

Closing the Loop: Program Description and Qualitative Analysis of a Pediatric Posttransfer Follow-up and Feedback Program.

OBJECTIVES: Follow-up and feedback foster improvement. General emergency medicine providers working in community hospitals desire follow-up and feedback on pediatric patients transferred to children's hospitals. We implemented a novel program to provide these data to our colleagues. The objective of this study was to explore stakeholder perspectives of our program. METHODS: We provided secure, electronic reports on transfers from 7 general emergency departments (GEDs). Patient follow-up and feedback data were delivered to the GED's pediatric emergency care coordinator. Seven pediatric emergency care coordinators and 2 children's hospital liaisons participated in semistructured interviews. Five researchers coded and analyzed transcribed data using the constant comparative method of grounded theory. Codes were refined and clustered to develop themes. RESULTS: Perceived values of the program included GED appreciation of closing the loop on transferred patients, providing education, and informing quality improvement. Participants valued the concise and timely nature of the reports and their empathetic delivery. Facilitators of program implementation included established professional relationships between the GED and the children's hospital liaisons and a GED's culture of self-inquiry. Barriers to program implementation included potential medicolegal exposure and the time burden for report generation and processing. Suggested programmatic improvements included focusing on generalizable, evidence-based learning points and analyzing care trends. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholders of our pediatric posttransfer follow-up and feedback program reported many benefits and provided key suggestions that may promote successful dissemination of similar programs nationwide. Examining data trends in transferred children may focus efforts to improve the care of children across all emergency care settings.

Expert Perspectives on Intimate Partner Violence Power and Control in Pediatric Healthcare Settings.

OBJECTIVE: Childhood exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV) is a pervasive public health epidemic with profound impact on child health. While past work has demonstrated how abusive partners exert control over IPV survivors in a variety of settings (eg workplace, courts, home), scant research has examined how IPV power and control behaviors manifest themselves in pediatric healthcare settings. In this study, we explore the perspectives of pediatric IPV experts about: (1) behaviors used by abusive partners to control IPV survivors in pediatric healthcare settings; (2) how controlling behaviors impact healthcare access and quality; and (3) recommendations for the pediatric healthcare team. METHODS: Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with pediatric IPV experts recruited through snowball sampling. Interviews were individually coded by two research team members and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-eight pediatric IPV experts participated. Participants described several types of controlling behaviors including limiting healthcare access, dominating conversations during medical visits, controlling medical decision making, and manipulating perceptions of the healthcare team. Participants acknowledged the challenges of recognizing controlling behaviors and provided several recommendations to addressing behaviors such as leveraging the expertise of multidisciplinary teams. CONCLUSIONS: Participants described how abusive partners may attempt to control or discredit their partners in pediatric healthcare settings, using subtle behaviors that may be easily missed by the healthcare team. These results set the stage for further research and clinical practice innovation including triangulating the findings with IPV survivors, examining how frequently these behaviors occur, and developing multidisciplinary IPV training for the pediatric healthcare team.

Minding the Gap: A Qualitative Study of Provider Experience to Optimize Care for Critically Ill Children in General Emergency Departments.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric emergency care provision in the United States is uneven. Institutional barriers to readiness in the general emergency department (GED) are known, but little is understood about the frontline providers. Our objective was to explore the lived experiences of emergency medicine (EM) providers caring for acutely ill children in the GED and identify opportunities to optimize their pediatric practice. METHODS: This grounded theory study used theoretical sampling with snowball recruitment to enroll EM physicians and advanced practice providers from 25 Wisconsin GEDs. Participants completed one-on-one, semistructured interviews. Audio recordings were transcribed and coded by a multi-investigator team drawing on theory produced from comparative analysis. RESULTS: We reached theoretical saturation with 18 participants. The data suggested that providers felt competent managing routine pediatric care, but critically ill children outstripped their resources and expertise. They recognized environmental constraints on the care they could safely provide, which were intensified by unanticipated knowledge gaps and lack of awareness regarding pediatric practice guidelines. A fragmented medical network to support their pediatric practice was identified as a challenge to their care provision at critical junctures. Due to lack of guidance and feedback, providers internalized their experience with critically ill children with uncertainty, which limited learning and practice change. They benefited from meaningful relationships with pediatricians and pediatric subspecialists, targeted education, timely consults, and looped feedback about care provided and patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: General ED providers struggled with critically ill children because they could not anticipate their pediatric-specific knowledge gaps and only realized them at critical junctures. EM providers were isolated and frustrated when seeking help; without guidance and feedback they internalized their experience with uncertainty and were left underprepared for subsequent encounters. The data suggested the need for provider-focused interventions to address gaps in pediatric-specific continuing medical education, just-in-time assistance, and knowledge transfer.