Search

BACKGROUND: Adverse health care events are injuries occurring as a result of patient care. Significant acute pain is often caused by medical and surgical procedures in children, and it has been argued that undermanaged pain should be considered to be an adverse event. Indicators are often used to identify other potential adverse events. There are currently no validated indicators for undertreated pediatric pain.OBJECTIVES: To develop a preliminary list of indicators of undermanaged pain in hospitalized pediatric patients.METHODS: The Delphi technique was used to survey experts in pediatric pain management and quality improvement. The first round used an electronic questionnaire to ask: “In your opinion, what indicators would signify that acute pain in a child has not been adequately controlled?” Responses were grouped together in semantically similar themes, providing a list of possible adverse event indicators. Using this list, an electronic questionnaire was developed for round 2 asking respondents to indicate the importance of each potential indicator.RESULTS: All but one indicator achieved a level of consensus ≥70%. Separate indicators emerged for postoperative and procedural pain. An additional distinction was made between indicators that could be identified by chart review and those requiring observation of practice and assessment from the child or parent.DISCUSSION: The adverse care indicators developed in the present study require further refinement. There is a need to test their clinical usability and to determine whether these indicators actually identify undermanaged pain in clinical practice. The present study is an important first step in identifying undermanaged pain in hospital and treating it as an adverse event.CONCLUSION: The adverse care indicators developed in the present study are the first step in conceptualizing mismanaged pain as an adverse event.

Background The period following discharge from a pediatric emergency department (ED) can be a time of significant vulnerability for caregivers who provide ongoing care to their child when they return home. Discharge communication practice varies widely at the individual practitioner and departmental level. At present, there are no nationally accepted guidelines for discharge communication for children and/or their caregivers in the ED. The primary objective of this knowledge synthesis is to understand how and why discharge instructions work and under what conditions. We will also examine the contextual factors and barriers and facilitators associated with discharge communication across varied ED settings. Methods/Design Using an integrated narrative approach, we will synthesize different types of evidence and explore relationships within and between included studies to develop a theory-based and knowledge user-informed discharge communication practice guideline. We will follow key principles for knowledge synthesis including: (1) involvement of a multidisciplinary team (for example, information specialists, statisticians, and content experts); (2) developing focused and answerable questions in collaboration with the knowledge users; (3) using a systematic method including specific tools and techniques appropriate for answering questions concerned with effectiveness and the implementation of interventions; and, (4) involving knowledge users throughout the process in an integrated knowledge translation approach. Discussion This collaborative and narrative approach will be a determining factor in increasing the reliability, validity and relevance of the study findings for healthcare practice and policy decision-makers. Trial registration PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014007106