Mobile Social Screening and Referral Intervention in a Pediatric Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVE: Many families in pediatric emergency departments (PED) have unmet social needs, which may be detected and addressed with the use of a digital social needs intervention. Our objective was to characterize the feasibility and effectiveness of utilizing personal phones or a PED tablet for screening and referral to social services. METHODS: We conducted a prospective single-arm intervention study using a convenience sample of caregivers and adult patients in an urban PED between May 2019 and October 2020. Participants chose either their personal phone or a PED-provided tablet to use an app, "HelpSteps." Participants self-selected need(s) then referrals to service agencies. Participants completed a 1-month follow-up. Clinicians were surveyed about screening and impact on visit. RESULTS: Of 266 participants enrolled, 55% of participants elected to use their personal phone. Of all participants, 67% self-selected at least 1 health-related social need; 34% selected 3 or more. The top 3 "most important" needs were housing (14%), education (12%), and fitness (12%). At one month follow-up, 44% of participants reported their top need was "completely" or "somewhat" solved. For 95% of encounters, clinicians reported the intervention did not increase length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: A mobile social needs intervention was feasible and effective at identifying and referring participants in the PED setting. While more than half of participants used their personal phones, several smartphone owners cited barriers and elected to use a tablet. Overall, participants found the app easy to use, appropriate for the PED, and the intervention had minimal impact on clinical flow.

Increasing inclusivity in patient centered research begins with language.

Emergency departments frequently serve marginalized populations. Spanish-speaking families who come to the ED often have high rates of unmet social needs. Our study investigated how to efficiently screen families for unmet social needs in an emergency department. Participants who screened positive for needs were referred to geographically convenient, community-based resources. It became clear that barriers related to language discordance existed for recruiting Spanish-speaking participants that were not present for English-speaking participants, which we believe exacerbate existing inequities and must be addressed. We advocate for the extension of the Affordable Care Act Section 1557 to mandate expanded teams of interpreters to meet both clinical and research demands in conjunction with purposeful hiring of multilingual research assistants, along with concerted effort to standardize the certification process for multilingual staff. Prohibitive costs for the translation of written research materials need to be decreased and journals should evaluate submitted research with a language equity lens, which will help the field of clinical research prioritize inclusivity and diversity in research populations. Currently, systemic barriers complicate enrolling research participants who speak a language other than English, and we believe the proposed changes are feasible solutions to overcome these obstacles. Equitable representation in research is a critical part of addressing the legacy of oppression and exclusion within healthcare systems. Language equity is not a panacea for the distrust and systemic racism patients of color experience within our healthcare system that often prevent participation in clinical research, but it is a key first step.