Pandemic Planning, Response, and Recovery for Pediatricians: A Focus on Health Equity and Social Determinants of Health.

This article summarizes how pediatricians may be uniquely positioned to mitigate the long-term trajectory of COVID-19 on the health and wellness of pediatric patients especially with regard to screening for social determinants of health that are recognized drivers of disparate health outcomes. Health inequities, that is, disproportionately deleterious health outcomes that affect marginalized populations, have been a major source of vulnerability in past public health emergencies and natural disasters. Recommendations are provided for pediatricians to collaborate with disaster planning networks and lead strategies for public health communication and community engagement in pediatric pandemic and disaster planning, response, and recovery efforts.

Prevalence of Low-Acuity Pediatric Emergency Medical Services Transports to a Pediatric Emergency Department in an Urban Area.

OBJECTIVES: Many patients transported by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) do not have emergent resource needs. Estimates for the proportion of pediatric EMS calls for low-acuity complaints, and thus potential candidates for alternative dispositions, vary widely and are often based on physician judgment. A more accurate reference standard should include patient assessments, interventions, and dispositions. The objective of this study was to describe the prevalence and characteristics of low-acuity pediatric EMS calls in an urban area. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study of children transported by EMS to a tertiary care pediatric emergency department. Patient acuity was defined using a novel composite measure that included physiologic assessments, resources used, and disposition. Bivariable and multivariable logistic regression were conducted to assess for factors associated with low-acuity status. RESULTS: A total of 996 patients were enrolled, of whom 32.9% (95% confidence interval, 30.0-36.0) were low acuity. Most of the sample was Black, non-Hispanic with a mean age of 7 years. When compared with adolescents, children younger than 1 year were more likely to be low acuity (adjusted odds ratio, 3.1 [1.9-5.1]). Patients in a motor vehicle crash were also more likely to be low acuity (adjusted odds ratio, 2.4 [1.2-4.6]). All other variables, including race, insurance status, chief complaint, and dispatch time, were not associated with low-acuity status. CONCLUSIONS: One third of pediatric patients transported to the pediatric emergency department by EMS in this urban area are for low-acuity complaints. Further research is needed to determine low-acuity rates in other jurisdictions and whether EMS providers can accurately identify low-acuity patients to develop alternative EMS disposition programs for children.

Caregiver Perspectives on Including Children in Alternative Emergency Medical Services Disposition Programs: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVES: Almost half of pediatric EMS calls may be for low-acuity problems. Many EMS agencies have implemented alternative disposition programs for low-acuity patients, including transportation to clinics, substituting taxis for ambulances, and treatment in place without transport to an emergency department. Including children in such programs poses specific challenges, with one concern being potential caregiver opposition. Limited published evidence addresses caregiver perspectives on including children in alternative disposition programs. Our objective was to describe caregiver perspectives of alternative EMS disposition systems for low-acuity pediatric patients. METHODS: We conducted six virtual focus groups (one in Spanish) with caregivers. A PhD-trained facilitator moderated all groups using a semi-structured moderator guide. A hybrid inductive and deductive analytical strategy was used. Multiple investigators independently coded a deidentified sample transcript. One team member then completed axial coding of the remaining transcripts. Thematic saturation was achieved. Clusters of similar codes were grouped into themes by consensus. RESULTS: We recruited 38 participants. Participants had diverse race-ethnicity (39% non-Hispanic white, 29% non-Hispanic Black, and 26% Hispanic) and insurance status (42% Medicaid and 58% private health insurance). There was agreement that caregivers often utilize 9-1-1 for low-acuity complaints. Caregivers were generally supportive of alternative disposition programs, with some important caveats. Potential advantages of alternative dispositions included freeing up resources for more emergent cases, quicker access to care, and more cost-effective and patient-centered care. Caregivers had multiple concerns regarding the effects of alternative disposition programs, including timeliness in receiving care, capabilities of receiving sites (including pediatric expertise), and challenges to care coordination. Additional logistical concerns with alternative disposition programs for children included the safety of taxi services, the loss of parental autonomy, and the potential for inequitable implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers in our study generally supported alternative EMS dispositions for some children and identified multiple potential benefits of such programs for both children and the health care system. Caregivers were concerned about the safety and logistical details of how such programs would be implemented and wanted to retain final decision-making authority. Caregiver perspectives should be considered when designing and implementing alternative EMS disposition programs for children.

Pediatric Primary Care Provider Perspectives on Including Children in Alternative Emergency Medical Services Disposition Programs.

INTRODUCTION: Many emergency medical services (EMS) agencies have implemented alternative disposition programs for low-acuity complaints, including transportation to clinics. Our objectives were to describe pediatric primary care providers' views on alternative EMS disposition programs. METHOD: We conducted virtual focus groups with pediatric primary care providers. A hybrid inductive and deductive analytical strategy was used. Codes were grouped into themes by consensus. RESULTS: Participants identified the benefits of alternative dispositions, including continuity of care, higher quality care, and freeing up emergency resources. Participants' concerns included undertriage, difficulty managing patients not previously known to a clinic, and inequitable implementation. Commonly identified logistical barriers included inadequate equipment, scheduling capacity, and coordinating triage. DISCUSSION: Participants agreed there could be significant benefits from including clinics in EMS disposition programs. Participants identified several logistical constraints and raised concerns about patient safety and equitable implementation. These perspectives should be considered when designing pediatric alternative EMS disposition programs.

Emergency Medical Services Clinicians' Perspectives on Pediatric Non-Transport.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency medical services clinicians do not transport one-third of all children assessed, even without official pediatric non-transport protocols. Little is known about how EMS clinicians and caregivers decide not to transport a child. Our objectives were to describe how EMS clinicians currently decide whether or not to transport a child and identify barriers to and enablers of successfully implementing an EMS clinician-initiated pediatric non-transport protocol. METHODS: We conducted six virtual focus groups with EMS clinicians from the mid-Atlantic. A PhD trained facilitator moderated all groups using a semi-structured moderator guide. Multiple investigators independently coded a deidentified sample transcript. One team member then completed axial coding of the remaining transcripts. Thematic saturation was achieved. Clusters of similar codes were grouped into themes by consensus. RESULTS: We recruited 50 participants, of whom 70% were paramedics and 28% emergency medical technicians. There was agreement that caregivers often use 9-1-1 for low acuity complaints. Participants stated that non-transport usually occurs after shared decision-making between EMS clinicians and caregivers; EMS clinicians advise whether transport is necessary, but caregivers are responsible for making the final decision and signing refusal documentation. Subthemes for how non-transport decisions were made included the presence of agency protocols, caregiver preferences, absence of a guardian on the scene, EMS clinician variability, and distance to the nearest ED. Participants identified the following features that would enable successful implementation of an EMS clinician-initiated non-transport process: a user-friendly interface, clear protocol endpoints, the inclusion of vital sign parameters, resources to leave with caregivers, and optional direct medical oversight. CONCLUSIONS: EMS clinicians in our study agreed that non-transport is currently a caregiver decision, but noted a collaborative process of shared decision-making where EMS clinicians advise caregivers whether transport is indicated. Further research is needed to understand the safety of this practice. This study suggests there may be a need for EMS-initiated alternative disposition/non-transport protocols.

Clinician and Caregiver Determinations of Acuity for Children Transported by Emergency Medical Services: A Prospective Observational Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Many Emergency Medical Services (EMS) agencies have developed alternative disposition processes for patients with nonemergency problems, but there is a lack of evidence demonstrating EMS clinicians can accurately determine acuity in pediatric patients. Our study objective was to determine EMS and other stakeholders' ability to identify low acuity pediatric EMS patients. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational study of children transported to a pediatric emergency department (ED) by EMS. Acuity was defined using a composite measure that included data from the patient's vital signs and examination, resources used (laboratory results, radiographs, etc), and disposition. For each patient, an EMS clinician, patient caregiver, ED nurse, and ED provider completed a survey as soon as possible after the patient's arrival at the ED. The survey asked respondents 2 questions: to state their level of agreement that a patient was low acuity and could the patient have been managed by various alternative dispositions. For each respondent group, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for low acuity versus the composite measure. RESULTS: From August 2020 through September 2021, we approached 1,015 caregivers, of whom 996 (99.8%) agreed to participate and completed the survey. Survey completion varied between 78.7% and 84.1% for EMS and ED nurses and providers. The mean patient age was 7 years, 62.6% were non-Hispanic Black, and 60% were enrolled in public insurance programs. Of the 996 patient encounters, 33% were determined to be low acuity by the composite measure. The positive predictive value for EMS clinicians when identifying low acuity children was 0.60 (95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.58 to 0.67). The positive predictive value for ED nurses and providers was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.61 to 0.72) and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.63 to 0.74) respectively. The negative predictive value for EMS clinicians when identifying not low acuity children was 0.62 (95% CI, 0.58 to 0.67). The negative predictive value for ED nurses and providers was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.68 to 0.76) and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.77) respectively. Caregivers had the lowest positive predictive value 0.34 (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.40) but the highest negative predictive value 0.82 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.85). The EMS clinicians, ED nurses and providers were more likely than caregivers to think that a child with a low acuity complaint could have been safely managed by alternative disposition. CONCLUSION: All 4 groups studied had a limited ability to identify which children transported by EMS would have no emergency resource needs, and support for alternative disposition was limited. For children to be included in alternative disposition processes, novel triage tools, training, and oversight will be required to prevent undertriage.

Caregiver Perceptions Regarding Alternative Emergency Medical Services Dispositions for Children: A Cross-Sectional Survey Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency medical services (EMS) systems have developed alternative disposition processes for patients (including leaving the patient at the scene, using taxis, and transporting to clinics) vs taking patients directly to an emergency department (ED). Studies show that patients favorably support these alternative options but have not included the perspectives of caregivers of children. Our objective was to describe caregivers' views about these alternative disposition processes and analyze whether caregiver support is associated with sociodemographic factors. METHODS: We surveyed a convenience sample of caregivers in a pediatric ED. We asked caregivers 15 questions based on a previously validated survey. We then conducted logistic regressions to determine whether sociodemographic factors were associated with levels of support. RESULTS: We enrolled 241 caregivers. The median age of their children was five years. The majority of respondents were non-Hispanic Black (57%) and had public insurance (65%). We found that a majority of respondents supported all alternative EMS disposition options. The overall level of agreement for survey questions ranged from 51-93%. We grouped questions by theme: non-transport; alternative destinations; communication with EMS physician; communication with primary care physician and sharing records; restricted EMS role; and shared decision-making. Regression analyses for each theme found that race/ethnicity, public insurance, and patient age were not significantly associated with the level of support. CONCLUSION: Most caregivers were supportive of alternative EMS disposition options for children with low-acuity complaints. Support did not vary significantly by respondent race/ethnicity, public insurance status, or patient age.

Factors Associated With Severe Illness in Patients Aged <21 Years Hospitalized for COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: To describe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related pediatric hospitalizations during a period of B.1.617.2 (Δ) variant predominance and to determine age-specific factors associated with severe illness. METHODS: We abstracted data from medical charts to conduct a cross-sectional study of patients aged <21 years hospitalized at 6 United States children's hospitals from July to August 2021 for COVID-19 or with an incidental positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 test. Among patients with COVID-19, we assessed factors associated with severe illness by calculating age-stratified prevalence ratios (PR). We defined severe illness as receiving high-flow nasal cannula, positive airway pressure, or invasive mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: Of 947 hospitalized patients, 759 (80.1%) had COVID-19, of whom 287 (37.8%) had severe illness. Factors associated with severe illness included coinfection with respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) (PR 3.64) and bacteria (PR 1.88) in infants; RSV coinfection in patients aged 1 to 4 years (PR 1.96); and obesity in patients aged 5 to 11 (PR 2.20) and 12 to 17 years (PR 2.48). Having ≥2 underlying medical conditions was associated with severe illness in patients aged <1 (PR 1.82), 5 to 11 (PR 3.72), and 12 to 17 years (PR 3.19). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized for COVID-19, factors associated with severe illness included RSV coinfection in those aged <5 years, obesity in those aged 5 to 17 years, and other underlying conditions for all age groups <18 years. These findings can inform pediatric practice, risk communication, and prevention strategies, including vaccination against COVID-19.

Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Children and Adolescents Aged <18 Years Hospitalized with COVID-19 - Six Hospitals, United States, July-August 2021.

During June 2021, the highly transmissible† B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, became the predominant circulating strain in the United States. U.S. pediatric COVID-19-related hospitalizations increased during July-August 2021 following emergence of the Delta variant and peaked in September 2021.§ As of May 12, 2021, CDC recommended COVID-19 vaccinations for persons aged ≥12 years,¶ and on November 2, 2021, COVID-19 vaccinations were recommended for persons aged 5-11 years.** To date, clinical signs and symptoms, illness course, and factors contributing to hospitalizations during the period of Delta predominance have not been well described in pediatric patients. CDC partnered with six children's hospitals to review medical record data for patients aged <18 years with COVID-19-related hospitalizations during July-August 2021.†† Among 915 patients identified, 713 (77.9%) were hospitalized for COVID-19 (acute COVID-19 as the primary or contributing reason for hospitalization), 177 (19.3%) had incidental positive SARS-CoV-2 test results (asymptomatic or mild infection unrelated to the reason for hospitalization), and 25 (2.7%) had multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a rare but serious inflammatory condition associated with COVID-19.§§ Among the 713 patients hospitalized for COVID-19, 24.7% were aged <1 year, 17.1% were aged 1-4 years, 20.1% were aged 5-11 years, and 38.1% were aged 12-17 years. Approximately two thirds of patients (67.5%) had one or more underlying medical conditions, with obesity being the most common (32.4%); among patients aged 12-17 years, 61.4% had obesity. Among patients hospitalized for COVID-19, 15.8% had a viral coinfection¶¶ (66.4% of whom had respiratory syncytial virus [RSV] infection). Approximately one third (33.9%) of patients aged <5 years hospitalized for COVID-19 had a viral coinfection. Among 272 vaccine-eligible (aged 12-17 years) patients hospitalized for COVID-19, one (0.4%) was fully vaccinated.*** Approximately one half (54.0%) of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 received oxygen support, 29.5% were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), and 1.5% died; of those requiring respiratory support, 14.5% required invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Among pediatric patients with COVID-19-related hospitalizations, many had severe illness and viral coinfections, and few vaccine-eligible patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were vaccinated, highlighting the importance of vaccination for those aged ≥5 years and other prevention strategies to protect children and adolescents from COVID-19, particularly those with underlying medical conditions.

Creating a Pediatric Prehospital Destination Decision Tool Using a Modified Delphi Method.

Decisions for patient transport by emergency medical services (EMS) are individualized; while established guidelines help direct adult patients to specialty hospitals, no such pediatric equivalents are in wide use. When children are transported to a hospital that cannot provide definitive care, care is delayed and may cause adverse events. Therefore, we created a novel evidence-based decision tool to support EMS destination choice. A multidisciplinary expert panel (EP) of stakeholders reviewed published literature. Four facility capability levels for pediatric care were defined. Using a modified Delphi method, the EP matched specific conditions to a facility pediatric-capability level in a draft tool. The literature review and EP recommendations identified seventeen pediatric medical conditions at risk for secondary transport. In the first voting round, two were rejected, nine met consensus for a specific facility capability level, and six did not reach consensus on the destination facility level. A second round reached consensus on a facility level for the six conditions as well as revision of one previously rejected condition. In the third round, the panel selected a visual display format. Finally, the panel unanimously approved the PDTree. Using a modified Delphi technique, we developed the PDTree EMS destination decision tool by incorporating existing evidence and the expertise of a multidisciplinary panel.

Estimated SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in Healthy Children and Those with Chronic Illnesses in the Washington Metropolitan Area as of October 2020.

The estimated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 seroprevalence in children was found to be 9.46% for the Washington Metropolitan area. Hispanic/Latinx individuals were found to have higher odds of seropositivity. While chronic medical conditions were not associated with having antibodies, previous fever and body aches were predictive symptoms.

Children's Hospital Ambulatory Response to the 2019 Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Pandemic.

The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic produced an abrupt and near shutdown of nonemergent patient care. Children's National Hospital (CNH) mounted a multidisciplinary, coordinated ambulatory response that included supply chain management, human resources, risk management, infection control, and information technology. To ensure patient access, CNH expanded telemedicine and instituted operational innovations for outpatient procedures. While monthly in-person ambulatory subspecialty visits decreased from 25 889 pre-COVID-19 to 4484 at nadir of the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine visits increased from 70 to 13 539. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of innovations in health care delivery and operations that the crisis prompted.

Results of Testing Children for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 Through a Community-based Testing Site.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the demographics, clinical features, and test results of children referred from their primary provider for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the community setting. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study of children ≤22 years of age who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 at a community-based specimen collection site in Washington, DC, affiliated with a large children's hospital between March 21 and May 16, 2020. RESULTS: Of the 1445 patients tested at the specimen collection site for SARS-CoV-2 virus, 408 (28.2%) had a positive polymerase chain reaction test. The daily positivity rate increased over the study period, from 5.4% during the first week to a peak of 47.4% (Ptrend < .001). Patients with fever (aOR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.3-2.3) or cough (aOR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9) and those with known contact with someone with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (aOR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.0-2.4.) were more likely have a positive test, but these features were not highly discriminating. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of mildly symptomatic or well children and adolescents referred to a community drive-through/walk-up SARS-CoV-2 testing site because of risk of exposure or clinical illness, 1 in 4 patients had a positive test. Children and young adults represent a considerable burden of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Assessment of their role in transmission is essential to implementing appropriate control measures.

Racial and/or Ethnic and Socioeconomic Disparities of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Children.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate racial and/or ethnic and socioeconomic differences in rates of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among children. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of children tested for SARS-CoV-2 at an exclusively pediatric drive-through and walk-up SARS-CoV-2 testing site from March 21, 2020, to April 28, 2020. We performed bivariable and multivariable logistic regression to measure the association of patient race and/or ethnicity and estimated median family income (based on census block group estimates) with (1) SARS-CoV-2 infection and (2) reported exposure to SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Of 1000 children tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection, 20.7% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. In comparison with non-Hispanic white children (7.3%), minority children had higher rates of infection (non-Hispanic Black: 30.0%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-4.4]; Hispanic: 46.4%, aOR 6.3 [95% CI 3.3-11.9]). In comparison with children in the highest median family income quartile (8.7%), infection rates were higher among children in quartile 3 (23.7%; aOR 2.6 [95% CI 1.4-4.9]), quartile 2 (27.1%; aOR 2.3 [95% CI 1.2-4.3]), and quartile 1 (37.7%; aOR 2.4 [95% CI 1.3-4.6]). Rates of reported exposure to SARS-CoV-2 also differed by race and/or ethnicity and socioeconomic status. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of children tested for SARS-CoV-2 through a community-based testing site, racial and/or ethnic minorities and socioeconomically disadvantaged children carry the highest burden of infection. Understanding and addressing the causes of these differences are needed to mitigate disparities and limit the spread of infection.

Pediatric disaster preparedness: identifying challenges and opportunities for emergency department planning.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the current literature on best practices for pediatric disaster preparedness in an emergency department (ED). RECENT FINDINGS: Children have unique anatomical, physiologic, immunologic, and psychosocial needs that impact their vulnerability to and resilience in a disaster, yet they have been historically underrepresented in disaster planning at local and national levels. Lessons learned from recent disaster events, disaster research, and disaster experts provide guidance on pediatric disaster preparedness for ED. SUMMARY: All EDs should include children in their disaster plans and exercises. ED staff should be knowledgeable about their role in institutional disaster operations and familiar with standard disaster management principles.

Evaluation of a Selective Prehospital Pediatric Spinal Protection Protocol.

Background: Recent studies demonstrate an association between spinal immobilization and neck pain, increased use of radiographs, and increased admission rates for pediatric trauma patients. There is an increasing trend toward spinal protection protocols that limit the use of backboards in trauma patients. However, many of these protocols do not address the youngest patients. Objectives: The objective was to analyze whether implementation of a selective prehospital pediatric spinal protection protocol was associated with a reduction in spinal imaging, hospital admission rates, and Emergency Department (ED) length of stay (LOS). Methods: We conducted a single center retrospective chart review to assess the effect of implementing a new selective pediatric spinal immobilization protocol in an EMS system. Patients transported to the same center from a neighboring EMS jurisdiction without a protocol change were analyzed for comparison. We extracted data for all pediatric patients with trauma-related discharge diagnoses transported by EMS to a pediatric trauma center for one year before and after the implementation of the protocol. Results: There were 878 eligible trauma patients transported under the new protocol, compared to 782 transported prior to implementation. We did not find a significant difference in the percentage of trauma patients who received spinal imaging pre- and post-protocol change (20% vs. 18%, OR 0.84 [95% CI 0.66, 1.07]), but did observe a significant reduction in the proportion of trauma patients who were admitted to the hospital (25% vs. 18%, OR 0.66 [95% CI 0.52, 0.83]). This reduced admission rate was not observed in the neighboring jurisdiction. Conclusions: Implementation of a selective spinal immobilization protocol was associated with reduced admission rates, but did not significantly reduce rates of plain radiographs.

Bioterrorism attacks involving pediatric patients: preparedness and early recognition are critical.

Due to their anatomic, physiologic, developmental, and behavioral characteristics, children are particularly vulnerable to bioterrorism agents. Symptoms associated with most bioterrorism agents can be difficult to differentiate from common childhood illnesses. It is extremely important that emergency clinicians are able to recognize unusual illness patterns that could distinguish a natural outbreak from a bioterrorism attack. Resources available through government agencies and leading pediatric organizations can aid in diagnosis and treatment. This issue reviews the highest-risk bioterrorism agents and provides guidance for diagnosing and managing pediatric patients who have been exposed to these agents.