Search

Aim: Triage is key to effective management of major incidents, yet there is scarce evidence surrounding the optimal method of paediatric major incident triage (MIT). This study aimed to derive consensus on key components of paediatric MIT among healthcare professionals responsible for triage during paediatric major incidents. Methods: Two‐round online Delphi consensus study delivered July 2021–October 2021, including participants from pre‐hospital and hospital specialities responsible for triage during paediatric major incidents. A 5‐point Likert scale was used to determine consensus, set a priori at 70%. Results: 111 clinicians completed both rounds; 13 of 17 statements reached consensus. Positive consensus was reached on rescue breaths in mechanisms associated with hypoxia or asphyxiation, mobility assessment as a crude discriminator and use of adult physiology for older children. Whilst positive consensus was reached on the benefits of a single MIT tool across all adult and paediatric age ranges, there was negative consensus in relation to clinical implementation. Conclusions: This Delphi study has established consensus among a large group of clinicians involved in the management of major incidents on several key elements of paediatric major incident triage. Further work is required to develop a triage tool that can be implemented based on emerging and ongoing research and which is acceptable to clinicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To describe variation in the initial management of children presenting to Emergency Departments (ED) with coins lodged in the oesophagus. To determine the usage of hand-held metal detectors (HHMDs) in EDs, including their role in clinical decision-making, and training in their use.Methods: Online multicentre cross-sectional survey of EDs in the UK and Ireland, with results described using descriptive statistics.Results: Fifty-five (90%) of 61 sites responded. The two main strategies described for lodged oesophageal coins were endoscopic removal or observation with reassessment, dependent on location. For coins in the proximal third of the oesophagus 43/55 (78.2%) referred for endoscopic removal, 6/55 (10.9%) observed and the remaining 10.9% used a variety of methods, including: Foley catheter removal with fluoroscopy, blind Foley catheter removal, referral to paediatric surgery/ENT. Thirty (55%) of 55 used HHMDs, 21/30 (70%) had guidelines for their use, and 3/30 (10%) provided formal training. Twenty (67%) of 30 used the xiphisternum as the anatomical cut-off for assuming safe passage of metallic foreign bodies (FB) beyond the lower oesophageal sphincter.Conclusions: There is considerable variation in the management of oesophageal coins in children, though two dominant strategies were identified. As endoscopy is significantly more invasive than observation, future research should aim to determine whether either is more effective and safer in children. There is a clear division in departmental adoption of HHMDs. However, in those sites using HHMDs there was little formal training in their use, and there are large variations in techniques and their role in clinical decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]