Stakeholder perspectives on navigating the pediatric concussion experience: Exploring the needs for improved communication across the care continuum.

BACKGROUND: For children, the post-concussion return to school process is a critical step towards achieving positive health outcomes. The process requires integration between healthcare professionals, parents, and school personnel. OBJECTIVE: This research team conducted focus groups with stakeholders including parents, education personnel, school nurses, external healthcare providers (nurses) and athletic trainers to identify communication patterns between healthcare providers outside of the school setting and school personnel. METHODS: Data from focus groups were analyzed using a Thematic Analysis approach. Researchers used an inductive (bottom-up) coding process to describe semantic themes and utilized a critical realist epistemology. RESULTS: We identified four key themes within focus group data: (1) lack of effective communication between hospital and outpatient healthcare providers to school personnel; (2) parents who were strong advocates had improved communication with healthcare professionals and garnered more accommodations for their children; (3) non-school professionals and families were often confused about who the point of contact was at a given school; and (4) differing experiences for athletes vs. non-athletes. CONCLUSION: This study suggests gaps in communication between healthcare and school professionals when children return to school following a concussion. Improving communication between healthcare providers and school staff will require a multi-faceted approach.

Concordance of SARS-CoV-2 Results in Self-collected Nasal Swabs vs Swabs Collected by Health Care Workers in Children and Adolescents.

Importance: Despite the expansion of SARS-CoV-2 testing, available tests have not received Emergency Use Authorization for performance with self-collected anterior nares (nasal) swabs from children younger than 14 years because the effect of pediatric self-swabbing on SARS-CoV-2 test sensitivity is unknown. Objective: To characterize the ability of school-aged children to self-collect nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing compared with collection by health care workers. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional study of 197 symptomatic children and adolescents aged 4 to 14 years old. Individuals were recruited based on results of testing in the Children's Healthcare of Atlanta system from July to August 2021. Exposures: Children and adolescents were given instructional material consisting of a short instructional video and a handout with written and visual steps for self-swab collection. Participants first provided a self-collected nasal swab. Health care workers then collected a second specimen. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 detection and relative quantitation by cycle threshold (Ct) in self- vs health care worker-collected nasal swabs when tested with a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction test with Emergency Use Authorization. Results: Among the study participants, 108 of 194 (55.7%) were male and the median age was 9 years (IQR, 6-11). Of the 196 participants, 87 (44.4%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 105 (53.6%) tested negative by both self- and health care worker-collected swabs. Two children tested positive by self- or health care worker-collected swab alone; 1 child had an invalid health care worker swab. Compared with health care worker-collected swabs, self-collected swabs had 97.8% (95% CI, 94.7%-100.0%) and 98.1% (95% CI, 95.6%-100.0%) positive and negative percent agreement, respectively, and SARS-CoV-2 Ct values did not differ significantly between groups (mean [SD] Ct, self-swab: 26.7 [5.4] vs health care worker swab: 26.3 [6.0]; P = .65). Conclusions and Relevance: After hearing and seeing simple instructional materials, children and adolescents aged 4 to 14 years self-collected nasal swabs that closely agreed on SARS-CoV-2 detection with swabs collected by health care workers.

Pediatric Caregiver Behaviors Related to Oral Antibiotic Use.

In a survey of 396 caregivers of children, 119 (30%) reported requesting antibiotics from clinicians and 65 (16%) had stored antibiotics at home. In addition, 47 (12%) reported past or intended nonprescription antibiotic administration; this finding was associated with household income of ≥$75 000 annually (odds ratio 2.042, 95% confidence interval 1.01-4.14, P = .048).

Application of the RE-AIM Framework for the Pediatric Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Evaluation and Management Intervention: A Study Protocol for Program Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Children who experience a mild Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI) may encounter cognitive and behavioral changes that often negatively impact school performance. Communication linkages between the various healthcare systems and school systems are rarely well-coordinated, placing children with an mTBI at risk for prolonged recovery, adverse impact on learning, and mTBI re-exposure. The objective of this study is to rigorously appraise the pediatric Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Evaluation and Management (TEaM) Intervention that was designed to enhance diagnosis and management of pediatric mTBI through enhanced patient discharge instructions and communication linkages between school and primary care providers. METHODS: This is a combined randomized and 2 × 2 quasi-experimental study design with educational and technology interventions occurring at the clinician level with patient and school outcomes as key endpoints. The RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework will be utilized as a mix methods approach to appraise a multi-disciplinary, multi-setting intervention with the intent of improving outcomes for children who have experienced mTBI. DISCUSSION: Utilization of the RE-AIM framework complemented with qualitative inquiry is suitable for evaluating effectiveness of the TEaM Intervention with the aim of emphasizing priorities regarding pediatric mTBI. This program evaluation has the potential to support the knowledge needed to critically appraise the impact of mTBI recovery interventions across multiple settings, enabling uptake of the best-available evidence within clinical practice.