85 Parent and youth experiences of emergency department care for suspected long bone fractures in children
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Long bone fractures are a frequent reason for visits to the pediatric emergency department (ED) where patients obtain the definitive care they require. Youth are rarely involved in quality assessment and improvement initiatives. Objectives To describe parent and youth experiences of their ED care for suspected long bone fractures. Design/Methods This prospective survey study of parents/youth consulting a tertiary care pediatric ED used surveys co-constructed by ED clinicians and parent partners. English/French speaking patients aged 10 to 18 years old with suspected long-bone fracture at triage – and their parents – were eligible to complete the survey during their ED stay. Electronic surveys were developed for parents and youth and pre-tested with 12 youth and 14 parents. Descriptive data was generated using SPSS v.25 (IBM Inc.). Results Three hundred surveys were distributed to eligible participants from March 2018 to June 2019 and 249 surveys were completed (148 parents, 101 youth). At least one member from 189 families completed a survey. Parents and youth participants had median ages of 44 and 12 years old, respectively. Most patients (98%) had a radiograph as part of their work-up, usually in the ED (76%); Twenty-seven percent were referred with radiographs. Most families (61%) received a diagnosis of long-bone fracture and were referred to orthopaedics for outpatient follow-up. Families’ median length of stay was 4h08min (range 43 min-14h30min). Parents (88mm) and youth (81mm) reported high median satisfaction with their overall ED care on 100 mm visual analog scales. Most parents (81%) and youth (75%) reported receiving just enough information from ED staff, though only half (50%) of the parents received information on how to care for their child at home. More than 90% of parents believed that the ED team treated their child’s pain. Eighty-one percent of youth reported that pain was treated sufficiently although 63% believed it had been treated quickly. Most parents (56%) and youth (72%) reported their ED stay was longer than anticipated; parents’ perceptions did not correlate with ED length of stay on logistic regression (p=0.014), while youth’s did (p=0.009). Few parents (33%) or youth (32%) reported receiving regular information on ED wait times. Conclusion Parent and youth perspectives of their ED care are complementary, and both should be considered in patient-oriented quality improvement initiatives.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».