Health-Related Social Risks Versus Needs in a Pediatric Emergency Department.

INTRODUCTION: Health-related social problems may be conceptualized as the presence of either a social risk (i.e., food insecurity as defined by a screening tool) or a social need (i.e., desire for referral to a food program). Identification of social risks may not correlate with patients' desire to receive help. This study aimed to identify and compare patients and families with social risks versus social needs in a pediatric emergency department. METHODS: This was a planned secondary analysis conducted in 2023 of a previously published prospective intervention study, which screened and referred caregivers and adult patients for health-related social problems in an urban tertiary pediatric emergency department between May 2019 and October 2020. Participants completed a screening tool for social risks and self-identified social needs by selecting desired assistance from a list of social service categories. Participants' social risk screening results were compared with their selection of resources for social needs across demographic and socioeconomic characteristics and the number of positive social risks using chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: Of 258 participants, 42.2% (109) screened positive for any social risk, and 38.0% (98) self-selected a social need. Of those, only 59.2% (77/130) both screened positive and self-selected a need. Among those who screened positive for a social risk, several demographic and socioeconomic factors including race, ethnicity, and income were significantly different between those interested versus not interested in assistance. CONCLUSIONS: Both social risks and self-identified social needs should be considered within social care interventions in the pediatric healthcare setting.

Mobile Social Screening and Referral Intervention in a Pediatric Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVE: Many families in pediatric emergency departments (PED) have unmet social needs, which may be detected and addressed with the use of a digital social needs intervention. Our objective was to characterize the feasibility and effectiveness of utilizing personal phones or a PED tablet for screening and referral to social services. METHODS: We conducted a prospective single-arm intervention study using a convenience sample of caregivers and adult patients in an urban PED between May 2019 and October 2020. Participants chose either their personal phone or a PED-provided tablet to use an app, "HelpSteps." Participants self-selected need(s) then referrals to service agencies. Participants completed a 1-month follow-up. Clinicians were surveyed about screening and impact on visit. RESULTS: Of 266 participants enrolled, 55% of participants elected to use their personal phone. Of all participants, 67% self-selected at least 1 health-related social need; 34% selected 3 or more. The top 3 "most important" needs were housing (14%), education (12%), and fitness (12%). At one month follow-up, 44% of participants reported their top need was "completely" or "somewhat" solved. For 95% of encounters, clinicians reported the intervention did not increase length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: A mobile social needs intervention was feasible and effective at identifying and referring participants in the PED setting. While more than half of participants used their personal phones, several smartphone owners cited barriers and elected to use a tablet. Overall, participants found the app easy to use, appropriate for the PED, and the intervention had minimal impact on clinical flow.

Increasing inclusivity in patient centered research begins with language.

Emergency departments frequently serve marginalized populations. Spanish-speaking families who come to the ED often have high rates of unmet social needs. Our study investigated how to efficiently screen families for unmet social needs in an emergency department. Participants who screened positive for needs were referred to geographically convenient, community-based resources. It became clear that barriers related to language discordance existed for recruiting Spanish-speaking participants that were not present for English-speaking participants, which we believe exacerbate existing inequities and must be addressed. We advocate for the extension of the Affordable Care Act Section 1557 to mandate expanded teams of interpreters to meet both clinical and research demands in conjunction with purposeful hiring of multilingual research assistants, along with concerted effort to standardize the certification process for multilingual staff. Prohibitive costs for the translation of written research materials need to be decreased and journals should evaluate submitted research with a language equity lens, which will help the field of clinical research prioritize inclusivity and diversity in research populations. Currently, systemic barriers complicate enrolling research participants who speak a language other than English, and we believe the proposed changes are feasible solutions to overcome these obstacles. Equitable representation in research is a critical part of addressing the legacy of oppression and exclusion within healthcare systems. Language equity is not a panacea for the distrust and systemic racism patients of color experience within our healthcare system that often prevent participation in clinical research, but it is a key first step.

Pediatric Emergency Department Visits for Homelessness After Shelter Eligibility Policy Change.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In 2012, Massachusetts changed its emergency shelter eligibility policy for homeless families. One new criterion to document homelessness was staying in a location "not meant for human habitation," and the emergency department (ED) fulfilled this requirement. Our aim for this study is to analyze the frequency and costs of pediatric ED visits for homelessness before and after this policy. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of ED visits for homelessness at a children's hospital from March 2010 to February 2016. A natural language processing tool was used to identify cases, which were manually reviewed for inclusion. We compared demographic and homelessness circumstance characteristics and conducted an interrupted time series analysis to compare ED visits by homeless children before and after the policy. We compared the change in ED visits for homelessness to the number of homeless children in Massachusetts. We analyzed payment data for each visit. RESULTS: There were 312 ED visits for homelessness; 95% (n = 297) of visits were after the policy. These visits increased 4.5 times after the policy (95% confidence interval: 1.33 to 15.23). Children seen after the policy were more likely to have no medical complaint (rate ratio: 3.27; 95% confidence interval: 1.18 to 9.01). Although the number of homeless children in Massachusetts increased 1.4 times over the study period, ED visits for homelessness increased 13-fold. Payments (average: $557 per visit) were >4 times what a night in a shelter would cost; 89% of payments were made through state-based insurance plans. CONCLUSIONS: A policy change to Massachusetts' shelter eligibility was associated with increased pediatric ED visits for homelessness along with substantial health care costs.