Burns and Scalds Assessment Template: standardising clinical assessment of childhood burns in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: The Burns and Scalds Assessment Template (BaSAT) is an evidence-based proforma coproduced by researchers and ED staff with the aim of (1) standardising the assessment of children attending ED with a burn, (2) improving documentation and (3) screening for child maltreatment. This study aimed to test whether the BaSAT improved documentation of clinical, contributory and causal factors of children's burns. METHODS: A retrospective before-and-after study compared the extent to which information was recorded for 37 data fields after the BaSAT was introduced in one paediatric ED. Pre-BaSAT, a convenience sample of 50 patient records of children who had a burn was obtained from the hospital electronic database of 2007. The post-BaSAT sample included 50 randomly selected case notes from 2016/2017 that were part of another research project. Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U tests were conducted to test for statistical significance. RESULTS: Pre-BaSAT, documentation of key data fields was poor. Post-BaSAT, this varied less between patients, and median completeness significantly (p<0.001) increased from 44% (IQR 4%-94%) to 96% (IQR 94%-100%). Information on 'screening for maltreatment, referrals to social care and outcome' was poorly recorded pre-BaSAT (median of 4% completed fields) and showed the greatest overall improvement (to 95%, p<0.001). Documentation of domestic violence at home and child's ethnicity improved significantly (p<0.001) post-BaSAT; however, these were still not recorded in 36% and 56% of cases, respectively. CONCLUSION: Introduction of the BaSAT significantly improved and standardised the key clinical data routinely recorded for children attending ED with a burn.

Exploring the acceptability of a clinical decision rule to identify paediatric burns due to child abuse or neglect.

OBJECTIVE: An evidence based clinical decision rule (CDR) was developed from a systematic review and epidemiological study to identify burns due to child maltreatment (abuse or neglect). Prior to an implementation evaluation, we aim to explore clinicians' views of the CDR, the likelihood that it would influence their management and factors regarding its acceptability. METHODS: A semistructured questionnaire exploring demographics, views of the CDR and data collection pro forma, ability to recognise maltreatment and likelihood of following CDR recommended child protection (CP) action, was administered to 55 doctors and nurses in eight emergency departments and two burns units. Recognition of maltreatment was assessed via four fictitious case vignettes. ANALYSIS: Fisher's exact test and variability measured by coefficient of unalikeability. RESULTS: The majority of participants found the CDR and data collection pro forma useful (45/55, 81.8%). Only five clinicians said that they would not take the action recommended by the CDR (5/54, 9.3%). Lower grade doctors were more likely to follow the CDR recommendations (p=0.04) than any other grade, while senior doctors would consider it within their decision making. Factors influencing uptake include: brief training, background to CDR development and details of appropriate actions. CONCLUSIONS: It is apparent that clinicians are willing to use a CDR to assist in identifying burns due to child maltreatment. However, it is clear that an implementation evaluation must encompass the influential variables identified to maximise uptake.