Optimizing Pediatric Rapid Response Teams: Stakeholder Focus Groups.

OBJECTIVES: Rapid response teams (RRTs) can improve outcomes in both adult and pediatric hospitals. Most pediatric hospitals have RRT-type systems; however, little is known about stakeholders' perspectives regarding how to optimize RRT quality and efficiency. We aimed to better understand multidisciplinary stakeholder perspectives on how to improve the RRT process. METHODS: We held 4 stakeholder focus groups including floor nurses, pediatric trainees (interns and residents), pediatric hospitalists, and the responding PICU team (PICU fellows and nurses). We used deductive coding to identify potential solutions and subsequent themes. RESULTS: Focus groups identified 10 potential solutions within 3 major themes. Themes included (1) the value of a standardized RRT workflow based on stages, (2) the benefit of promoting a safety culture, and (3) the need to implement ongoing RRT education. Stakeholders described a shared mental model of RRT workflow with important events or tasks occurring within each stage. These stages were coded as 1: trigger, 2: team arrival and information sharing, 3: intervention, and 4: disposition and follow-up. Additional proposed solutions included waiting for the entire team to arrive, a systematic information sharing process, and closed loop communication for follow-up plans for patients remaining on the general care floor. CONCLUSIONS: RRT stakeholder focus groups provide valuable insight into efforts to optimize RRT events. Standardizing RRT workflow into a staged process may facilitate communication and information sharing. Promoting a culture of safety and implementing ongoing education may help reinforce RRT standardization.

Virtual Schooling and Pediatric Mental Health During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

In this single-site, retrospective, descriptive chart review and survey, we investigated changes in pediatric behavioral health needs during the COVID-19 pandemic and the relationship between virtual schooling and hospitalized children's mental health. Subjects included patients aged 6 and 18 years during the 2015 to 2019 and 2020 to 2021 school years who received inpatient mental health care. Parents of patients admitted in 2020 to 2021 were surveyed regarding their child's schooling. We additionally described and compared subjects using descriptive data, including proxies for illness severity, and assessed how these outcomes changed during the pandemic and correlated with school modality. During the pandemic, the distribution of diagnoses changed, and some markers of severity increased. Patients in exclusively virtual school had higher rates of mood and anxiety disorders and tic disorders, and lower rates of eating and disruptive behavior disorders, than patients with recent in-person school. Further study is needed regarding the impact of virtual schooling on pediatric mental health.

Gender Disparity in Teaching Evaluations of Pediatric Faculty by Residents.

OBJECTIVES: Despite their overrepresentation, female physicians continue to have lower rates of promotion compared with male physicians. Teaching evaluations play a role in physician advancement. Few studies have investigated gender disparity in resident evaluations of pediatric faculty. We hypothesized that gender disparities in resident evaluations of faculty exist and vary across subspecialties and primary work environments. METHODS: Pediatric faculty institution-specific evaluations completed by residents from January 1, 2015, to March 9, 2020, were obtained from a single academic center. Mean ratings of faculty performance were compared by gender using a Wilcoxon 2-sample test. RESULTS: Fifteen-thousand one-hundred and forty-two evaluations (5091 of male faculty and 10 051 of female faculty) were included. Female faculty were rated higher in overall teaching ability (female = 4.67 versus male = 4.65; P = .004). There was no statistical difference in the mean ratings of male and female faculty in the inpatient setting, whereas outpatient female faculty were rated higher in overall teaching ability (female = 4.79 versus male = 4.73; P = .005). For general pediatric faculty, females received higher ratings for overall teaching ability (female = 4.75 versus male = 4.70; P < .001). By contrast, there was no difference in ratings of subspecialty pediatric faculty. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric female faculty were statistically rated higher than male faculty in overall teaching ability, although these findings may not be educationally significant. The difference was driven by evaluations in the outpatient setting and for general pediatricians. This study is one of the first in pediatrics adding to the continued investigation of gender disparities in academic medicine.

Increased prevalence and severity of psychiatric illness in hospitalized youth during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Previous studies have demonstrated an increase in mental health emergencies among youth seen in ambulatory and emergency room settings during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study investigates rates of mental health-related consultation and markers of illness severity since the start of the pandemic. METHODS: We evaluated all pediatric patients admitted to a single children's hospital from March 2019 to March 2021 who received psychiatry and/or psychology consults. We report the absolute number of these patients, as well as the proportion of all study site admissions who received such consults. Severity of psychiatric illness was described in terms of LOS, disposition, and use of restraints and psychotropic medications. RESULTS: The number and proportion of pediatric patients receiving psychiatry and/or psychology consults rose during the pandemic. Participants also became proportionally more female and older. The study population had higher odds of requiring restraints and antipsychotics during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: More pediatric inpatients at the study site have required psychiatric care during the pandemic. The severity of mental illness in this population appears to have worsened based on increased utilization of as-needed psychotropic medications and restraints. These findings highlight the changes experienced by patients and providers during the pandemic and merit further study.

Weekend Admissions for Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders and Length of Stay.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether admission on weekends affects the length of stay (LOS) for patients hospitalized with somatic symptom and related disorders (SSRDs). METHODS: Data from 2012-2018 was obtained for all patients aged 4 to 21 years (N = 5459) with a primary discharge diagnosis of SSRDs from 52 tertiary care pediatric hospitals in the United States. We obtained patient demographics, admission date and/or time, LOS, procedure count, and comorbid conditions. We defined a weekend as 3 pm Friday to 3 pm Sunday. The Wilcoxon rank test was used for unadjusted analysis. Multiple logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of having LOS >1 day, >2 days, >3 days, and >4 days in weekend versus weekday groups. RESULTS: Weekend admission significantly correlated with increased LOS (P < .001). Compared with weekdays, a weekend admission was associated with increased odds of having LOS >1, >2, and >3 days. This remained statistically significant while adjusting for the number of chronic conditions, procedures, and individuals with Black or Hispanic ethnicity compared with White ethnicity. LOS was not associated with sex or age of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SSRDs admitted on the weekend have an increased LOS compared with those admitted on a weekday. This may be due to a decrease in multidisciplinary care available during weekends. In future studies, researchers should aim to better understand the specific factors that contribute to this disparity and test interventions that may close the gap in care, including expanding to 7-day services, increasing mental health resources, and working to decrease the need for inpatient admissions.

Clinical Performance Evaluations of Third-Year Medical Students and Association With Student and Evaluator Gender.

PURPOSE: Clinical performance evaluations are major components of medical school clerkship grades. But are they sufficiently objective? This study aimed to determine whether student and evaluator gender is associated with assessment of overall clinical performance. METHOD: This was a retrospective analysis of 4,272 core clerkship clinical performance evaluations by 829 evaluators of 155 third-year students, within the Alpert Medical School grading database for the 2013-2014 academic year. Overall clinical performance, assessed on a three-point scale (meets expectations, above expectations, exceptional), was extracted from each evaluation, as well as evaluator gender, age, training level, department, student gender and age, and length of observation time. Hierarchical ordinal regression modeling was conducted to account for clustering of evaluations. RESULTS: Female students were more likely to receive a better grade than males (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-1.50), and female evaluators awarded lower grades than males (AOR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.93), adjusting for department, observation time, and student and evaluator age. The interaction between student and evaluator gender was significant (P = .03), with female evaluators assigning higher grades to female students, while male evaluators' grading did not differ by student gender. Students who spent a short time with evaluators were also more likely to get a lower grade. CONCLUSIONS: A one-year examination of all third-year clerkship clinical performance evaluations at a single institution revealed that male and female evaluators rated male and female students differently, even when accounting for other measured variables.

Future health disparity initiatives at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University.

As the United States embarks on health care reform through the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary to practice medicine will change. Education centered on health disparities and social determinants of health will become increasingly more important as 32 million Americans receive coverage through the ACA. In this paper, we describe future initiatives at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University in training medical students on health disparities and social determinants of health through mechanisms such as the Primary Care-Population Medicine Program, the Rhode Island Area Health Education Center, the Scholarly Concentration program and other mechanisms.