Dataset Information

The utility of universal screening for somatization in a pediatric emergency department: A prospective evaluation.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate clinical utility and feasibility of universal somatization screening in the pediatric emergency department (ED) using a standardized approach of (1) identifying potential somatizing symptoms within the ED, (2) introducing these patients and their caregivers to the concept of the 'mind-body connection', (3) corroborating the likelihood of a somatization diagnosis via brief psychiatric assessment, and (4) inviting families to a psychoeducational follow-up session.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study to carry out this approach with families visiting a pediatric ED. Our primary outcome of screening utility was measured as the proportion of youth who screened positive for somatization by the ED clinician. Our secondary outcome of screening feasibility was measured as the proportion of patients with positives who (1) agreed to meet with the study psychiatrist, (2) consented to an ED psychiatric assessment, (3) were assessed by the study psychiatrist as likely experiencing somatization, and (4) were invited for follow-up and attended.

Results

Of the 344 screened patients, 27 (7.8%) screened positive for somatization. Of these, 25 (92.6%) families verbally consented to meet the study psychiatrist to learn about the mind-body connection, and 21 (77.8%) consented to further psychiatric assessment. Upon assessment, the somatization likelihood was supported for all 21 youth. Twenty families were invited to follow-up and ultimately two (10%) attended.

Conclusions

Somatization can be detected through ED-based universal screening. Few families attended psychoeducational follow-up. Further research is needed to determine appropriate ED-initiated pediatric somatization intervention.

SUBMITTER: Virk P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8593319 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionChildren with food insecurity (FI) experience adverse health outcomes due to inadequate quantity or quality of food. Food insecurity may be high among families seeking emergency care. The Hunger Vital Sign (HVS) is a two-question validated tool used to screen families for FI. Our goal in this study was to assess prevalence of FI among emergency department (ED) patients, patient-level risk factors for FI, and the feasibility of screening.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional analysis of FI in the ED. Parents or guardians of ED patients and adult patients (18 years or older) were approached for screening using the HVS during screening periods spanning weekdays/weekends and days/evenings. All ED patients were eligible, excluding siblings, repeat visits, critically ill patients, minors without a guardian, and families that healthcare staff asked us not to disturb. Families answered the HVS questions verbally or in writing, based on preference. Families with positive screens received information about food resources. We summarized patient and visit characteristics and defined medical complexity using a published algorithm. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess FI risk factors.ResultsIn July-August 2019, 527 patients presented during screening periods: 439 agreed to screening, 18 declined, 19 met exclusions, and 51 were missed. On average the screening tool required five minutes (range 3-10 minutes) to complete. Most families (328; 75%) preferred to answer in writing rather than verbally. Overall, 77 participants (17.5%) screened positive for FI. In regression analyses, FI was associated with self-reported race/ethnicity (combined variable) of African American or Black (odds ratio [OR] 5.21, 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13-12.77), Hispanic (OR 3.47, 95% CI, 1.48-8.15), or mixed/other (OR 3.81, 95% CI, 1.54-9.39), compared to non-Hispanic white. FI was also associated with public insurance type (OR 5.74, 95% CI, 2.52-13.07, reference: private insurance), and each year of increasing patient age (OR 1.05, 95% CI, 1.01-1.09). There were no associations between FI and medical complexity or preferred language.ConclusionFood insecurity was common among our ED patients. Race and ethnicity, insurance status, and increasing patient age were associated with increased odds of FI. Efforts to include universal FI screening for ED patients with immediate connection to resources will enhance overall care quality and address important health needs.

Project description:Importance:According to National Patient Safety Goal 15.01.01, all individuals being treated or evaluated for behavioral health conditions as their primary reason for care in hospitals and behavioral health care organizations accredited by The Joint Commission should be screened for suicide risk using a validated tool. Existing suicide risk screens have minimal or no high-quality evidence of association with future suicide-related outcomes. Objective:To test the association between results of the Ask Suicide-Screening Questions (ASQ) instrument in a pediatric emergency department (ED), implemented through selective and universal screening approaches, and subsequent suicide-related outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants:In this retrospective cohort study at an urban pediatric ED in the United States, the ASQ was administered to youths aged 8 to 18 years with behavioral and psychiatric presenting problems from March 18, 2013, to December 31, 2016 (selective condition), and then to youths aged 10 to 18 years with medical presenting problems (in addition to those aged 8-18 years with behavioral and psychiatric presenting problems) from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2018 (universal condition). Exposure:Positive ASQ screen at baseline ED visit. Main Outcomes and Measures:The main outcomes were subsequent ED visits with suicide-related presenting problems (ie, ideation or attempts) based on electronic health records and death by suicide identified through state medical examiner records. Association with suicide-related outcomes was calculated over the entire study period using survival analyses and at 3-month follow-up for both conditions using relative risk. Results:The complete sample was 15?003 youths (7044 [47.0%] male; 10?209 [68.0%] black; mean [SD] age, 14.5 [3.1] years at baseline). The follow-up for the selective condition was a mean (SD) of 1133.7 (433.3) days; for the universal condition, it was 366.2 (209.2) days. In the selective condition, there were 275 suicide-related ED visits and 3 deaths by suicide. In the universal condition, there were 118 suicide-related ED visits and no deaths during the follow-up period. Adjusting for demographic characteristics and baseline presenting problem, positive ASQ screens were associated with greater risk of suicide-related outcomes among both the universal sample (hazard ratio, 6.8 [95% CI, 4.2-11.1]) and the selective sample (hazard ratio, 4.8 [95% CI, 3.5-6.5]). Conclusions and Relevance:Positive results of both selective and universal screening for suicide risk in pediatric EDs appear to be associated with subsequent suicidal behavior. Screening may be a particularly effective way to detect suicide risk among those who did not present with ideation or attempt. Future studies should examine the impact of screening in combination with other policies and procedures aimed at reducing suicide risk.

Project description:BackgroundAccording to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, suicidality and suicidal behavior among youth continues to increase significantly each year. Many of those who die by suicide interact with health services in the year before death. This systematic review sought to identify and describe empirically tested screening tools for suicidality in youth presenting to Emergency Departments (ED).Objective(1) To identify and compare existing tools used to screen for suicidality in children and adolescents who present to the ED and (2) to ascertain the prevalence of suicidality in pediatric populations found with these tools.MethodsWe searched Ovid Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, and Cochrane databases for primary research studies that identified and evaluated screening tools for suicide risk in pediatric ED patients. A total of 7,597 publications published before August 25, 2021 met search criteria and were screened by two independent reviewers based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria, with any conflicts resolved via consensus meetings or an independent reviewer. A total of 110 papers were selected for full text review, of which 67 were excluded upon further inspection. Covidence was used to extract and synthesize results.Results43 articles were eligible for inclusion. Most studies (n = 33) took place in general pediatric EDs; the quality was generally high. Patients ranged from 4-24 years old, with most screening tested in patients 12 years and older. The most researched tools were the Ask-Suicide Screening Questions (ASQ) (n = 15), Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) (n = 12), Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire (SIQ) (n = 11), and the Risk of Suicide Questionnaire (RSQ) (n = 7). Where screening was applied to all patients, about one-fifth of pediatric ED patients screened positive; where suicide screening was applied to psychiatric patients only, over half screened positive. Positive screens were more likely to be female and older than negative screens and they were more likely to be assessed and admitted.ConclusionSeveral validated screening tools exist for the purpose of screening pediatric populations in EDs for suicidality. Such tools may help to support early detection and appropriate intervention for youth at risk of suicide.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=276328, identifier: 276328.

Project description:BackgroundDuring the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic period, the use of emergency services with pediatric non-COVID patients has decreased considerably. We aimed to examine whether there was a change in the demographic data, triage profile, causes, management, and cost of pediatric emergency department (PED) visits of non-COVID patients during the pandemic period.MethodsThis study was a retrospective, single-center, observational comparative study that was conducted at the PED. Patient records were examined during "the pandemic spring" and the same period of the previous year. Patient demographics, waiting time, and outcome of the PED visit were analyzed in the entire population of children admitted to the PED during the study period, whereas more precise data such as the reason for PED use, duration of symptoms, urgency levels according to the Emergency Severity Index (ESI), final diagnosis, management, and cost of patient care were analyzed in a sample of admitted patients. We used the chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test for statistical analyses.ResultsA total of 62,593 PED visits occurred. During the pandemic period, PED visits showed a decrease of 55.8% compared to the previous year. Patients included in the sampling study group were selected using a systematic random sampling method. The median waiting time during the pandemic period was significantly shorter than the previous year (median 14 min [IQR: 5-32] vs. median 5 min [IQR: 2-16]; p<0.001). The median duration of symptoms was 1 day (1-2) in both groups. Emergency Severity Index (ESI) levels I, II, and III showed a significant increase (27.7% vs. 37.3%) in triage scoring compared to levels IV and V (72.3% vs. 62.7%) during the pandemic period (p<0.001). The median cost per patient during the pandemic period was statistically higher compared to the previous year ($19.57 [19.57-40.50] vs. $25.34 [31.50-52.01]; p<0.001). Overall costs during the pandemic period had a 1.6-fold decline.ConclusionWe highlighted the changes in an ordinary PED profile during an extraordinary period. A shift in ESI levels in a more emergent direction was observed. While the number of nonurgent patients, especially those with infections, decreased, the rates of surgical cases, acute neurological and heart diseases, home accidents, and poisoning increased relative to the pre-pandemic period.

Project description:This research focuses on developing an improved and robust measurement for emergency department (ED) performance and a criterion standard for global use via kinetic analysis. Based on kinetic approach, the input-throughput-output conceptual model of ED crowding is compared to the procedure of enzyme catalysis. All in average, the retented patients in EDs are defined as substrate (S), whereas the patients who depart the EDs as product (P). Therefore, the average ED departure velocity (V) can be presented as (P)divided by a given time (t) of the ED length of stay (LOS). The S-V and S²-P plots are depicted hourly for the kinetic analysis. The long-term stability of the kinetic parameters is ascertained by the method of coefficient of variation (CV). The participants collected for this study are from the EDs of Changhua Christian Medical Center and the five branched hospitals, all located in Taiwan. Based on the S-V plot analysis, the results clearly show 2 curves, an upper and a lower curve. The timeline of the lower curve includes approximately the total ED busy hours, and thus it can be used for the subsequent kinetic analysis. In order to explore the adequate kinetic parameters for ED performance, the try-and-error process was followed in this study. As a result, the S²-V plots adapted from the lower curves show the best linear regression of S² on V with a good coefficient of determination (R). The Pan-Wen constant (PW), which is the slope of the liner regression line, and the ED medical personnel unit turnover number (EDMPU TON) were deduced from the kinetic meanings of (Equation is included in full-text article.)plots. In this research, the 2 kinetic parameters, PW and EDMPU TON were applied for the ED performance evaluations. An innovative relationship between the ED retented patients and the ED departure velocity is verified as PW; whereas, a feasible kinetic parameter, the EDMPU TON explicates the teamwork efficiency of the ED providers. Moreover, the EDMPU TON may not only be a reliable universal criterion standard for the ED performance, but also a valuable reference for both ED providers and payers.

Project description:We compare rates of rapid HIV testing, test offer, and acceptance in an urban emergency department (ED) when conducted by dedicated HIV counselors versus current members of the ED staff.The Universal Screening for HIV Infection in the Emergency Room [USHER] trial is a prospective randomized controlled trial that implemented an HIV screening program in the ED of an urban tertiary medical center. ED patients were screened and consented for trial enrollment by an USHER research assistant. Eligible subjects were randomized to rapid HIV testing (oral OraQuick) offered by a dedicated counselor (counselor arm) or by an ED provider (provider arm). In the counselor arm, counselors-without other clinical responsibilities-assumed nearly all testing-related activities (consent, counseling, delivery of test results). In the provider arm, trained ED emergency service assistants (nursing assistants) consented and tested the participant in the context of other ED-related responsibilities. In this arm, ED house officers, physician assistants, or attending physicians provided HIV test results to trial participants. Outcome measures were rates of HIV testing and test offer among individuals consenting for study participation. Among individuals offered the test, test acceptance was also measured.From February 2007 through July 2008, 8,187 eligible patients were approached in the ED, and 4,855 (59%) consented and were randomized to trial participation. The mean age was 37 years, 65% were women, and 42% were white. The overall testing rate favored the counselor arm (57% versus 27%; P<.001); 80% (1,959/2,446) of subjects in the counselor arm were offered an HIV test compared with 36% (861/2,409) in the provider arm (P<.001). HIV test acceptance was slightly higher in the provider arm (counselor arm 71% versus provider arm 75%; P = .025).Routine rapid HIV testing in the ED was accomplished more frequently by dedicated HIV counselors than by ED staff in the course of routine clinical work. Without dedicated staff, HIV testing in this setting may not be truly routine.