Continuing Care For Critically Ill Children Beyond Hospital Discharge: Current State of Follow-up

Author:

Williams Cydni N.12,Hall Trevor A.23,Francoeur Conall4,Kurz Jonathan5,Rasmussen Lindsey6,Hartman Mary E.7,O’meara AM Iqbal8,Ferguson Nikki Miller8,Fink Ericka L9,Walker Tracie10,Drury Kurt1,Carpenter Jessica L.11,Erklauer Jennifer12,Press Craig13,Wainwright Mark S.14,Lovett Marlina15,Dapul Heda16,Murphy Sarah17,Risen Sarah18,Guerriero Rejean M.19,Woodruff Alan2021,Guilliams Kristin P.72022,

Affiliation:

1. aDivisions of Pediatric Critical Care

2. bPediatric Critical Care and Neurotrauma Recovery Program, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon

3. cPediatric Psychology

4. dDepartment of Pediatrics, CHU de Québec – Université Laval Research Center, Quebec, QC, Canada

5. dTranslational Pharmacology, Merck & Co., Inc., North Wales, Pennsylvania

6. fDivision of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California

7. gDivision of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri

8. hDivision of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Richmond at Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia

9. IDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

10. jDivision of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina

11. kDivision of Pediatric Neurology, Departments of Pediatrics and Neurology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland

12. lSections of Critical Care Medicine and Pediatric Neurology and Developmental Neuroscience, Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine and Texas Children’s Hospital, Houston, Texas

13. mSection of Child Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado

14. nDivision of Pediatric Neurology, Department of Neurology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington

15. oDivision of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Columbus, Ohio

16. pDivision of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York

17. qDivision of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts

18. rSection of Pediatric Neurology and Developmental Neuroscience, Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine and Texas Children’s Hospital, Houston, Texas

19. sDivision of Pediatric and Developmental Neurology, Department of Neurology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri

20. tSection of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Anesthesiology

21. uCritical Illness, Injury and Recovery Research Center, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina

22. vWashington University School of Medicine, Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Division of Neuroradiology, St. Louis, Missouri

Abstract

OBJECTIVES Survivors of the PICU face long-term morbidities across health domains. In this study, we detail active PICU follow-up programs (PFUPs) and identify perceptions and barriers about development and maintenance of PFUPs. METHODS A web link to an adaptive survey was distributed through organizational listservs. Descriptive statistics characterized the sample and details of existing PFUPs. Likert responses regarding benefits and barriers were summarized. RESULTS One hundred eleven respondents represented 60 institutions located in the United States (n = 55), Canada (n = 3), Australia (n = 1), and the United Kingdom (n = 1). Details for 17 active programs were provided. Five programs included broad PICU populations, while the majority were neurocritical care (53%) focused. Despite strong agreement on the need to assess and treat morbidity across multiple health domains, 29% were physician only programs, and considerable variation existed in services provided by programs across settings. More than 80% of all respondents agreed PFUPs provide direct benefits and are essential to advancing knowledge on long-term PICU outcomes. Respondents identified “lack of support” as the most important barrier, particularly funding for providers and staff, and lack of clinical space, though successful programs overcome this challenge using a variety of funding resources. CONCLUSIONS Few systematic multidisciplinary PFUPs exist despite strong agreement about importance of this care and direct benefit to patients and families. We recommend stakeholders use our description of successful programs as a framework to develop multidisciplinary models to elevate continuity across inpatient and outpatient settings, improve patient care, and foster collaboration to advance knowledge.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Subject

Pediatrics,General Medicine,Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

Cited by 21 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3