Search

OBJECTIVES Current screening questions for pediatric tobacco smoke exposure are suboptimal. Factors influencing screening accuracy, particularly in the pediatric inpatient setting, are unknown. Our objective was to identify facilitators of and barriers to parental disclosure of smoke exposure when screened during their child’s hospitalization and strategies to promote accurate disclosure. METHODS This qualitative study was conducted with a convenience sample of parents of children admitted to the medical and surgical unit of a Midwest tertiary care children’s hospital. Eligible parents included those with documented disclosure of smoke exposure in the child’s electronic health record. A researcher trained in qualitative methods conducted semistructured, in-depth interviews with parents regarding their experiences with smoke exposure screening in the inpatient pediatric setting. Two researchers independently identified concepts directed at barriers, facilitators, and strategies for effective screening, which were compared and reconciled by a third researcher. RESULTS Facilitators of disclosing their child’s smoke exposure included the following: (1) the caregiver’s internal characteristic(s) promoting disclosure, (2) perceived relevance of the screening question to the child’s health, and (3) the questioner being viewed positively. Barriers included the following: (1) fear of negative consequences, (2) a vague question, (3) lack of knowledge, (4) guilt, and (5) unconducive environment and timing. The strategies parents suggested to improve screening for smoke exposure included the following: (1) communicate preemptively, (2) provide specific exposure examples, (3) improve questioner-caregiver rapport, and (4) improve screening environment and timing. CONCLUSIONS Parents identified various mechanisms to improve tobacco smoke exposure screening. The facilitators, barriers, and strategies provide opportunities to improve the inpatient pediatric screening process.

Background: Although people who smoke cigarettes are overrepresented among hospital inpatients, few are connected with smoking cessation treatment during their hospitalization. Training, accountability for medication use, and monitoring of all patients position pharmacists well to deliver cessation interventions to all hospitalized patients who smoke. Methods: A large Midwestern University hospital implemented a pharmacist-led smoking cessation intervention. A delegation protocol for hospital pharmacy inpatients who smoked cigarettes gave hospital pharmacists the authority to order nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) during hospitalization and upon discharge, and for referral to the Wisconsin Tobacco Quit Line (WTQL) at discharge. Eligible patients received the smoking cessation intervention unless they actively refused (ie, “opt-out”). The program was pilot tested in phases, with pharmacist feedback between phases, and then implemented hospital-wide. Interviews, surveys, and informal mechanisms identified ways to improve implementation and workflows. Results: Feedback from pharmacists led to changes that improved workflow, training and patient education materials, and enhanced adoption and reach. Refining implementation strategies across pilot phases increased the percentage of eligible smokers offered pharmacist-delivered cessation support from 37% to 76%, prescribed NRT from 2% to 44%, and referred to the WTQL from 3% to 32%. Conclusion: Hospitalizations provide an ideal opportunity for patients to make a tobacco quit attempt, and pharmacists can capitalize on this opportunity by integrating smoking cessation treatment into existing inpatient medication reconciliation workflows. Pharmacist-led implementation strategies developed in this study may be applicable in other inpatient settings.

Background: There is mixed evidence about the relations of current versus past cancer with severe COVID-19 outcomes and how they vary by patient and cancer characteristics. Methods: Electronic health record data of 104,590 adult hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were obtained from 21 United States health systems from February 2020 through September 2021. In-hospital mortality and ICU admission were predicted from current and past cancer diagnoses. Moderation by patient characteristics, vaccination status, cancer type, and year of the pandemic was examined. Results: 6.8% of the patients had current (n = 7,141) and 6.5% had past (n = 6,749) cancer diagnoses. Current cancer predicted both severe outcomes but past cancer did not; adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for mortality were 1.58 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.46–1.70] and 1.04 (95% CI, 0.96–1.13), respectively. Mortality rates decreased over the pandemic but the incremental risk of current cancer persisted, with the increment being larger among younger vs. older patients. Prior COVID-19 vaccination reduced mortality generally and among those with current cancer (aOR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53–0.90). Conclusions: Current cancer, especially among younger patients, posed a substantially increased risk for death and ICU admission among patients with COVID-19; prior COVID-19 vaccination mitigated the risk associated with current cancer. Past history of cancer was not associated with higher risks for severe COVID-19 outcomes for most cancer types. Impact: This study clarifies the characteristics that modify the risk associated with cancer on severe COVID-19 outcomes across the first 20 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. See related commentary by Egan et al., p. 3

BackgroundTobacco smoke exposure leads to numerous adverse health effects in children. Providing cessation interventions to caregivers who smoke during pediatric hospitalizations can help protect children from such exposure. Both pediatric registered nurses (RNs) and pediatric respiratory therapists (RTs) are well positioned to provide these interventions. Little is known about their rates of participation in cessation efforts. Our objective was to compare the attitudes and practice of pediatric RNs versus pediatric RTs to evaluate their relative cessation-intervention practices in the in-patient pediatric setting.MethodsAn online survey was sent to pediatric RNs and RTs at 4 tertiary pediatric hospitals in California. The survey assessed individual demographics, work environment, experience, beliefs, and practices related to smoking cessation activities. Questions used 3-point and 5-point Likert scales and were compared with the chi-square test. Institutions with a response rate < 20% were excluded.ResultsA total of 401 respondents were included in the final analysis (292 RNs, 109 RTs). RTs versus RNs were older (42.0 y vs 35.4 y, respectively, P < .001) and more likely to be former smokers (29.9% vs 13.3%, respectively, P < .001). RNs reported lower levels of confidence in discussing smoking cessation with parents, with 11.7% saying they felt "very confident" compared to 29.0% of RTs (P < .001). RNs also reported screening for smoke exposure less frequently than RTs, with 18.8% responding "often" or "always" compared to 28.9% of RTs (P = .033). RNs had lower rates of advising parents "to make a smoke-free home policy" compared to RTs (ie, 13.4% vs 26.9%, respectively, P = .002).ConclusionsCompared to in-patient pediatric RNs, RTs reported higher rates of confidence in providing cessation interventions, screening for smoke exposure, and counseling on reducing smoke exposure, suggesting that they may be better positioned for intervening. These results can inform the design of an in-patient cessation intervention for caregivers of hospitalized children.

Introduction Available evidence is mixed concerning associations between smoking status and COVID-19 clinical outcomes. Effects of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and vaccination status on COVID-19 outcomes in smokers are unknown. Methods Electronic health record data from 104 590 COVID-19 patients hospitalized February 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021 in 21 U.S. health systems were analyzed to assess associations of smoking status, in-hospital NRT prescription, and vaccination status with in-hospital death and ICU admission. Results Current (n = 7764) and never smokers (n = 57 454) did not differ on outcomes after adjustment for age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance, body mass index, and comorbidities. Former (vs never) smokers (n = 33 101) had higher adjusted odds of death (aOR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06–1.17) and ICU admission (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04–1.11). Among current smokers, NRT prescription was associated with reduced mortality (aOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50–0.82). Vaccination effects were significantly moderated by smoking status; vaccination was more strongly associated with reduced mortality among current (aOR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.16–0.66) and former smokers (aOR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.39–0.57) than for never smokers (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57, 0.79). Vaccination was associated with reduced ICU admission more strongly among former (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.66–0.83) than never smokers (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79–0.97). Conclusions Former but not current smokers hospitalized with COVID-19 are at higher risk for severe outcomes. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is associated with better hospital outcomes in COVID-19 patients, especially current and former smokers. NRT during COVID-19 hospitalization may reduce mortality for current smokers. Implications Prior findings regarding associations between smoking and severe COVID-19 disease outcomes have been inconsistent. This large cohort study suggests potential beneficial effects of nicotine replacement therapy on COVID-19 outcomes in current smokers and outsized benefits of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in current and former smokers. Such findings may influence clinical practice and prevention efforts and motivate additional research that explores mechanisms for these effects.

The aim of this study was to examine the feasibility of integrating teamwork training into an established Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) program to assess the effect on teamwork and collaboration among interprofessionals.Lack of teamwork and ineffective communication are common contributors to hospital sentinel events. Interprofessional teamwork training to support a culture of patient safety is advocated; however, training methods and related expenses vary widely.This study used a descriptive design. All participants received PALS recertification training; the intervention group received an additional 2-hour TeamSTEPPS (R) 2.0 Essentials curriculum with didactic and video critique including role-play on error, communication behaviors, and standard terms. Data were collected on perceptions of teamwork and collaboration. χ, Mann-Whitney U, and t tests were used.The intervention group reported significantly higher perceptions of teamwork and collaboration, situational awareness, and ability to help a team make decisions.Results suggest that integrating brief team training into an existing PALS program is a feasible, cost-effective, and sustainable method to provide interprofessional team training and positively influence the culture of safety.

Purpose Pegloticase-associated adverse events reported to the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database in the United States were evaluated. Methods Retrospective data-mining analysis of FAERS case reports listing Krystexxa or pegloticase as the suspect drug and specific adverse events (cardiovascular events, infusion-related reactions, gout flares, and anaphylaxis) was conducted from the drug’s approval date (September 14, 2010) through August 27, 2012. Initial and follow-up reports with the same primary linked identification number were identified as unique to each patient case. When multiple reports for the same patient were identified with a common case number, the report with the most recent date was used to eliminate duplicate reports. Bayesian confidence propagation neural network methodology was used to identify signals of drug-associated adverse events. A potential signal for drug–adverse event reports is generated when the lower limit of the 95% two-sided confidence interval of the information component is greater than 0. Results A total of 118 unique cases of adverse events involving pegloticase in the United States were identified during the study period. Fourteen reports were related to pegloticase-associated cardiovascular events, and 35 were related to pegloticase-associated infusion-related reactions. Twenty-six reports were related to pegloticase-associated gout, and 11 were reports of pegloticase-associated anaphylaxis. Bayesian statistics identified potential signals for all pegloticase-associated adverse events (cardiovascular events, infusion reactions, gout flares, and anaphylaxis). Conclusion Analysis of pegloticase-associated adverse events submitted to the FAERS database found that cardiovascular events, infusion-related reactions, gout flares, and anaphylaxis occurred more frequently than was statistically expected.