ABSTRACT
Objective: To analyze the challenges for exercising health advocacy to hospitalized children during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: This is an online descriptive-exploratory qualitative study. Participants were 28 nursing professionals enrolled in the subject Nursing in Health Care for Children and Adolescents in a graduate program at a federal university in northeastern Brazil. Data collection took place in June 2021 through a conversation wheel and press conference. As instruments, we used Google forms and a semi-structured script. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee. As an analysis method, Discursive Textual Analysis (DTA) was used. For data organization, Atlas.ti 8.4.15 software (Qualitative Research and Solutions) was used.Results: Two categories emerged: 1) Impacts of the pandemic on pediatric care and advocacy: child isolation and a health care scenario where children were placed in the background were observed. 2) Existing barriers that worsened with the health crisis: work overload, precarious structure and difficulty in working conditions were identified, which led to violations of children's rights and aggravated the overview of difficulties in the provision of pediatric services.Conclusion: The challenges for exercising health advocacy for hospitalized children during the pandemic, evidenced by the impacts and barriers to care, have expanded health teams' work, making the exercise of advocacy in pediatric care even more difficult. It is necessary to rethink and adjust access and care policies after the pandemic to ensure that child care is not restricted.
ABSTRACT
Resumo Objetivo Analisar os desafios para o exercício da advocacia em saúde à criança hospitalizada durante a pandemia COVID-19. Métodos Estudo qualitativo descritivo-exploratório on-line. Participaram 28 profissionais de enfermagem matriculados na disciplina Enfermagem na Atenção à Saúde da Criança e do Adolescente em um Programa de pós-graduação de uma universidade federal do nordeste brasileiro. A coleta de dados ocorreu em junho de 2021 através de roda de conversa e entrevista coletiva. Como instrumentos utilizou-se: o formulário do google forms e roteiro semiestruturado. O estudo foi aprovado pelo Comitê de Ética em Pesquisa. Como método de análise, foi empregada a Análise Textual Discursiva (ATD). Para a organização dos dados, utilizou-se o software Atlas.ti 8.4.15 (Qualitative Research and Solutions). Resultados Emergiram duas categorias: 1) Impactos da pandemia para assistência e advocacia pediátrica, constatou-se o isolamento infantil e um cenário de atenção à saúde onde a criança foi colocada em segundo plano. 2) Barreiras existentes que se agravaram com a crise sanitária, identificou-se: sobrecarga de trabalho, precarização da estrutura e dificuldade nas condições de trabalho, que gerou violações nos direitos infantis e agravou o panorama de dificuldades na oferta de serviços pediátricos. Conclusão Os desafios para o exercício da advocacia em saúde à criança hospitalizada durante a pandemia, evidenciados pelos impactos e barreiras para a assistência, ampliaram o trabalho das equipes de saúde tornando o exercício da advocacia no cuidado pediátrico ainda mais dificultoso. Cabe repensar e ajustar políticas de acesso e atendimento após a pandemia para assegurar que o cuidado infantil não seja restringido.
Resumen Objetivo Analizar los desafíos para el ejercicio de la defensa en salud de niños hospitalizados durante la pandemia de COVID-19. Métodos Estudio cualitativo descriptivo exploratorio en línea. Participaron 28 profesionales de enfermería inscriptos en la asignatura Enfermería en Atención a la Salud del Niño y del Adolescente en un programa de posgrado de una universidad nacional del nordeste brasileño. La recopilación de datos ocurrió en junio de 2021 a través de rondas de conversación y entrevista colectiva. Como instrumentos se utilizaron: un formulario de google forms y un guion semiestructurado. El estudio fue aprobado por el Comité de Ética en Investigación. Como método de análisis, se utilizó el Análisis Textual Discursivo (ATD). Para la organización de los datos, se utilizó el software Atlas.ti 8.4.15 (Qualitative Research and Solutions). Resultados Surgieron dos categorías: 1) Impactos de la pandemia en la atención y en la defensa pediátrica, se verificó el aislamiento infantil y un escenario de atención en salud en la que el niño fue colocado en segundo plano. 2) Barreras existentes que se agravaron con la crisis sanitaria, se identificó: sobrecarga de trabajo, precarización de la estructura y dificultad en las condiciones de trabajo, lo que generó violaciones de los derechos infantiles y agravó el panorama de dificultades en la oferta de servicios pediátricos. Conclusión Los desafíos para el ejercicio de la defensa en salud de niños hospitalizados durante la pandemia, evidenciados por los impactos y barreras para la atención, ampliaron el trabajo de los equipos de salud, lo que dificultó aún más el ejercicio de la defensa del cuidado pediátrico. Cabe reflexionar y ajustar políticas de acceso y atención después de la pandemia para asegurar que no se restrinja el cuidado infantil.
Abstract Objective To analyze the challenges for exercising health advocacy to hospitalized children during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods This is an online descriptive-exploratory qualitative study. Participants were 28 nursing professionals enrolled in the subject Nursing in Health Care for Children and Adolescents in a graduate program at a federal university in northeastern Brazil. Data collection took place in June 2021 through a conversation wheel and press conference. As instruments, we used Google forms and a semi-structured script. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee. As an analysis method, Discursive Textual Analysis (DTA) was used. For data organization, Atlas.ti 8.4.15 software (Qualitative Research and Solutions) was used. Results Two categories emerged: 1) Impacts of the pandemic on pediatric care and advocacy: child isolation and a health care scenario where children were placed in the background were observed. 2) Existing barriers that worsened with the health crisis: work overload, precarious structure and difficulty in working conditions were identified, which led to violations of children's rights and aggravated the overview of difficulties in the provision of pediatric services. Conclusion The challenges for exercising health advocacy for hospitalized children during the pandemic, evidenced by the impacts and barriers to care, have expanded health teams' work, making the exercise of advocacy in pediatric care even more difficult. It is necessary to rethink and adjust access and care policies after the pandemic to ensure that child care is not restricted.
ABSTRACT
This research study describes parent anxiety and family distress among three study groups of varying restrictions in parent presence for children in the PICU during a pandemic. A retrospective study was conducted to describe differences in parent anxiety and family distress for parents of children hospitalized before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants fell into three study groups based on the dates of the child's hospital stay and the level of parent and family presence or restriction they experienced. Participants were asked to complete a survey that included basic demographic information along with utilization of the GAD-7 and FDI measures. The data were assessed using descriptive statistics, Fisher's exact test, and the Kruskal-Wallis test. A total of 82 parents of children hospitalized during the specified times in the PICU participated. There was a statistically significant difference among the three cohorts in diagnoses (respiratory, cardiovascular, and medical-surgical), p ≤0.001. A larger percentage of children of the study participants were hospitalized with respiratory illnesses (62.5%) in the unrestricted study group when compared to the other study groups with higher patient acuity. There was also a statistical significance among the three study groups regarding whether the second parent was able to visit the child during the PICU admission (p = 0.007). Our study suggests that restricting parent and visitor presence does not increase parent anxiety or family distress during a child's admission to the PICU. The literature widely supports that having a critically ill child is undoubtedly stressful for parents and families, but the most significant causation for the anxiety and stress remains unknown and is likely multifactorial. Parents who experienced rigid restrictions in parent and visitor presence did not have increased anxiety. Other impactful variables such as a child's mortality risk and the uncertainty of outcome may have impacted anxiety for parents whose children were critically ill. Further research is needed to understand which stressors are most significant, during a critically ill child's hospitalization, from a parent's perspective. Limiting staff and patient exposure to persons who may have contagious illness (restricting parent and family presence) may not in itself lead to increased anxiety and distress for parents and families. This study may provide context for careful development of hospital visitation policies to ensure balance between patient and family centered care and protection from infectious disease. • A child's admission to a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) is one of the most stressful and anxiety-provoking situations for parents. • Restricting parent presence interrupts the social and emotional relationship and offers less time for bonding.. • Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) forced hospitals to make abrupt changes to existing visitation policies. • This research provides context for support of careful development and implementation of hospital visitation policies.
ABSTRACT
Background At the beginning of the current COVID-19 pandemic, it became critical to isolate all infected patients, regardless of their age. In the case of hospitalized children, isolation imposes a significant, negative impact on the well-being of isolated infants and their parents, in addition to the deleterious effect that the clinical condition and hospitalization by itself inflicts on patients and their families;this negative effect must be weighed against the potential risk that visitation might have on COVID-19 dissemination, mostly among hospital workers. Method Parents were gradually allowed during supervised, restricted visit time, progressively increasing the visitation time, and carefully monitoring for the presence of COVID-19 symptoms among healthcare workers (HCW) in the COVID-19 area, who were also tested for the infection when clinically justified. Family members were interrogated about symptoms and signs suggestive of COVID-19 infection, or positive PCR testing within 14 days of hospital stay. Results We found that, when safely implemented, allowing parents to spend time with their hospitalized COVID-19 children does not increase the contagion risk for hospital workers. The percentage of COVID-19 cases among HCW decreased after parents were allowed to visit their children in the COVID-19 areas. The percentage dropped from 27.78% to 12.77% (p=0.022). The rate of workers with COVID-19 for every 1000 shifts per worker was reduced after the parents were allowed to visit, although no statistically significant differences were found. Only 6 out of 129 parents (4.65%), that visited their children, were infected and there is no guarantee that they got infected within the hospital. Conclusion With proper training, parents do not increase the risk of infection among healthcare workers or among themselves. To develop and implement policies to permit the children to be accompanied during their suffering should be a standard in the context of an epidemic and out of it.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine if corticosteroid administration is associated with a SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test-positive result and to describe therapies administered to SARS-CoV-2 infected children. METHODS: We collected cross-sectional data from participants recruited in 41 pediatric emergency departments (ED) in 10 countries between March 2020 and June 2021. Participants were <18 years old, had signs or symptoms of, or risk factors for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, and had nucleic acid testing performed. To determine if SARS-CoV-2 test status was independently associated with corticosteroid administration, we used a multivariable conditional logistic regression model matched by study site to compare treatments administered based on SARS-CoV-2 test and disposition status. This analysis was repeated for the subgroup of study participants who were hospitalized. RESULTS: 30.3% (3,121/10,315) of participants were SARS-CoV-2-positive. Although remdesivir was more commonly administered to SARS-CoV-2-positive children, use was infrequent (25/3120 [0.8%] vs 1/7188 [0.01%]; P = .001). Corticosteroid use was less common among SARS-CoV-2-positive children (219/3120 [7.0%] vs 759/7190 [10.6%]; P < .001). Among hospitalized children, there were no differences in provision of inotropes, respiratory support, chest drainage or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation between groups. Corticosteroid administration was associated with age, history of asthma, wheezing, study month, hospitalization and intensive care unit admission; it was not associated with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result overall (aOR: 0.91; 95%CI: 0.74, 1.12) or among the subgroup of those hospitalized (aOR: 1.04; 95%CI: 0.75, 1.44). CONCLUSIONS: Few disease-specific treatments are provided to SARS-CoV-2-positive children; clinical trials evaluating therapies in children are urgently needed.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Nucleic Acids , Adolescent , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated rapid changes in healthcare delivery in the United States, including changes in the care of hospitalized children. The objectives of this study were to identify major changes in healthcare delivery for hospitalized children during the COVID-19 pandemic, identify lessons learned from these changes, and compare and contrast the experiences of children's and community hospitals. METHODS: We purposefully sampled participants from both community and children's hospitals serving pediatric patients in the six U.S. states with the highest COVID-19 hospitalization rates at the onset of the pandemic. We recruited 2-3 participants from each hospital (mix of administrators, front-line physicians, nurses, and parents/caregivers) for semi-structured interviews. We analyzed interview data using constant comparative methods to identify major themes. RESULTS: We interviewed 30 participants from 12 hospitals. Participants described how leaders rapidly developed new hospital policies (e.g., directing use of personal protective equipment) and how this was facilitated by reviewing internal and external data frequently and engaging all relevant stakeholders. Hospital leaders optimized communication through regular, transparent, multi-modal, and bi-directional communication. Clinicians increased use of videoconference and telehealth to facilitate physical distancing, but these technologies may have disadvantaged non-English speakers. Due to declining volumes of hospitalized children and surges of adult patients, clinicians newly provided care for hospitalized adults. This was facilitated by developing care teams supported by adult hospitalists, multidisciplinary support via videoconference, and educational resources. Participants described how the pandemic negatively impacted clinicians' mental health, and they stressed the importance of mental health resources and wellness activities/spaces. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several major changes in inpatient pediatric care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the adoption of new hospital policies, video communication, staffing models, education strategies, and staff mental health supports. We outline important lessons learned, including strategies for successfully developing new policies, effectively communicating with staff, and supporting clinicians' expanding scope of practice. Potentially important focus areas in pandemic recovery include assessing and supporting clinicians' mental health and well-being, re-evaluating trainees' skills/competencies, and adapting educational strategies as needed. These findings can help guide hospital leaders in supporting pandemic recovery and addressing future crises.