MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4402566457 · doi:10.1080/02770903.2024.2399645

Assessing the implementation of a tertiary care comprehensive pediatric asthma education program using electronic medical records and decision support tools

2024· article· en· W4402566457 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Lynnette Lyzwinski, Madhura Thipse, Andrea Higginson, Marc Tessier, Sarina Lo, Nick Barrowman, Vid Bjelić, Dhenuka Radhakrishnan

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Asthma · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAsthma and respiratory diseases
Établissements canadiensUniversity of OttawaChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineAsthmaTertiary careElectronic medical recordMedical recordClinical decision support systemDecision support systemAsthma managementElectronic health recordFamily medicineMedical emergencyMedical educationHealth careData mining

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Self-management education is integral for proper asthma management. However, there is an accessibility gap to self-management education following asthma hospitalizations. Most pediatric patients and their families receive suboptimal or no education. OBJECTIVE: To implement a comprehensive pediatric asthma education program and evaluate subsequent self-management knowledge in patients as well as behavior change outcomes reflected in the frequency of asthma related repeat emergency department visits and hospitalization. The program implementation was informed by the Knowledge to Translation Action Framework and the i-PARIHS model for quality improvement and involved several iterative stages. METHODS: We implemented a comprehensive asthma education program for the families of all children 0-18 years old who had been admitted for an asthma exacerbation to the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO), beginning on April 1, 2018. The program was adapted to the stages of the Knowledge Translation to Action Framework including undertaking an environmental scan, expert stakeholder feedback, reviews, addressing barriers, and tailoring the intervention, along with evaluating knowledge and health outcomes. Education was delivered over 1-2 h in personalized individual or small group settings, within 4 wk of hospital discharge. All education was provided by registered nurses or respiratory therapists who were also certified asthma educators. The EPIC electronic medical record was used to facilitate referral and scheduling of asthma education sessions, and to track subsequent acute asthma visits. We compared the frequency of a repeat asthma emergency department (ED) visit or hospitalization within 1-year following an initial asthma hospitalization for children who would have received comprehensive asthma education, to a historical cohort of children who were hospitalized between April 9, 2017 - Apr 8, 2018, and did not receive asthma education. RESULTS: The program had a high enrollment, capturing nearly 75% of the target population. Most families found the program to be acceptable and reported increased knowledge of how to manage asthma. We identified a crude overall 54% reduction in repeat hospitalizations among children 1 year after implementation of the asthma education program (i.e. 10.2% (23/225) repeat hospitalization rate pre- implementation versus 4.8% (11/227) post-implementation). In adjusted time-to event analysis, this reduction was prominent at 3 months among those who received comprehensive asthma education, relative to those who did not, but this improvement was not sustained by 1 year (HR =1.1, 95% CI =0.55- 2.05; p-value = 0.6). DISCUSSION: Although we did not find long-term improvements in ED visits, or hospitalizations, in children of caregivers who participated in comprehensive asthma education, the asthma education program holds potential given that most patients found it to be acceptable and that it increased asthma management knowledge. A future asthma education program should include multiple sessions to ensure that the knowledge and behavior change will be sustained, leading ultimately to long-term reductions in repeat ED visits and hospitalizations.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Autre devis · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,963
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,676

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,018
Tête enseignante GPT0,397
Écart entre enseignants0,378 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeAutre devis
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2024
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of AsthmaMême sujetAsthma and respiratory diseasesTravaux en français237 207