Search

Background: There is little experience on the use of the WHO Standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children. We describe the use of four prioritised WHO Standard-based Quality Measures to assess the provision of care for children with pain in emergency departments (EDs)., Methods: In a multicentre observational study in 10 EDs with different characteristics in Italy, we collected data on 3355 children accessing the EDs between January 2019 and December 2020. The association between children and facility characteristics and quality measures was analysed through multivariate analyses., Results: The proportion of children whose pain was measured was 68.7% (n=2305), with extreme variations across different centres (from 0.0% to 99.8%, p<0.001). The proportion of children treated for pain was 28.9% (n=970) again with a wide range (5.3%-56.3%, p<0.001). The difference between the frequency of children with pain measured and pain treated varied widely between the facilities (ranging from -24.3 to 82). Children with moderate and severe pain were more frequently treated (48.9% and 62.9% of cases, respectively), although with large variations across centres (ranges: 0%-74.8% and 0%-100% respectively, p<0.001). After correction for children's characteristics, the variable more strongly associated with analysed outcomes was the facility which the child accessed for care. Being a facility in Northern Italy was associated with a higher rate of pain measurement (67.3%-95% CI: 39.9% to 94.6%, p<0.001) compared with facilities in South Italy (-22.1% lower (95% CI: -41.7% to -2.50%, p=0.03)., Conclusions: The use of few WHO Standard-based measures related to pain can help identifying priority gaps in QOC for children and in monitoring it over time. There is a need for more implementation research to establish which are the most sustainable and effective interventions to improve the QOC for acute pain in children., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: There is little experience in implementing the WHO Standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children. We describe the use of 75 WHO-Standard based Quality Measures to assess paediatric QOC, using health workers (HWs) as data sources., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: 12 Italian hospitals., Participants: The minimum target of 75% of HWs was reached in all facilities; answers from 598 HWs were analysed., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: 75 prioritised WHO Quality Measures were collected using a validated, and Italian-language questionnaire exploring views of HWs providing care to children. A QOC index was also calculated based on the assessed Quality Measures., Results: In both the domain of resources and work organisation, most Quality Measures showed a high overall frequency of reported 'need for improvement', with high variability across hospitals. Key needs for improvement included: availability of clear and complete protocols (eg, on paediatric emergencies: 44.6%; range 10.6%-92.6%); clear hospitalisation criteria for diarrhoea (50.5%; range 30.3%-71.7%); number of hand-washing stations (13.2%; range 3.4%-37.0%); equipped working rooms with computers for HWs (66.1%; range: 32.1%-97.0%); training (eg, on pain management: 43.5%; range 17.9%-76.7%), periodic discussion of clinical cases (43.5%; range 8.1%-83.7%) audits (48.8%; range 29.7%-76.7%); and all indicators related to system to improve QOC. Factors significantly associated with a lower QOC Index included HWs working in facilities in Southern Italy (p=0.001) and absence of a paediatric emergency department (p=0.011)., Conclusions: The use of the 75 prioritised Quality Measures, specific to HWs provide valuable data on paediatric QOC, which can be used to drive a quality improvement process., Competing Interests: Competing interests: No, there are no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: There is no documented experience in the use of the WHO standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children at the facility level. We describe the use of 10 prioritised WHO-Standard-based Quality Measures to assess QOC for children with acute diarrhoea (AD) in Italy., Methods: In a multicentre observational study in 11 paediatric emergency departments with different characteristics and geographical location, we collected data on 3061 children aged 6 months to 15 years with AD and no complications. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted., Results: Study findings highlighted both good practices and gaps in QoC, with major differences in QOC across facilities. Documentation of body weight and temperature varied from 7.7% to 98.5% and from 50% to 97.7%, respectively (p<0.001); antibiotic and probiotic prescription rates ranged from 0% to 10.1% and from 0% to 80.8%, respectively (p<0.001); hospitalisations rates ranged between 8.5% and 62.8% (p<0.001); written indications for reassessment were provided in 10.4%-90.2% of cases (p<0.001). When corrected for children's individual characteristics, the variable more consistently associated with each analysed outcome was the individual facility. Higher rates of antibiotics prescription (+7.6%, p=0.04) and hospitalisation (+52.9%, p<0.001) were observed for facilities in Southern Italy, compared with university centres (-36%, p<0.001), independently from children characteristics. Children's clinical characteristics in each centre were not associated with either hospitalisation or antibiotic prescription rates., Conclusions: The 10 prioritised WHO-Standard-based Quality Measures allow a rapid assessment of QOC in children with AD. Action is needed to identify and implement sustainable and effective interventions to ensure high QOC for all children., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)