J. S. McLeod1, W. Wendt2, M. Macy2, E. Dunbar2, A. Gavulic3, M. Hilu3, N. Sroufe2, E. E. Perrone1 1University of Michigan,Division Of Pediatric Surgery,Ann Arbor, MI, USA 2University of Michigan,Department Of Emergency Medicine,Ann Arbor, MI, USA 3University Of Michigan,Undergraduate School,Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Introduction: Previous studies have demonstrated that pediatric patients with low risk, uncomplicated intussusception can be reduced by enema and discharged from the ED after observation. Few studies have reviewed clinician satisfaction after protocol implementation. The purpose of this study was to assess clinician experiences after implementation of a new protocol involving emergency department (ED) observation of children after successful enema reduction of uncomplicated intussusception
Methods: An ED observation protocol was implemented at a level 1 pediatric trauma center in March 2017 for children who presented with uncomplicated intussusception. They were treated with air enema reduction, followed by 6-hours of ED observation, and discharged home. In April 2018, a survey was sent to Emergency Medicine (EM), Surgery, and Pediatric (Peds) clinicians. Only those who had cared for an intussusception patient took the survey, which consisted of 25 Likert-type-scale questions with 4 domains: satisfaction, safety, clinician burden, and family burden/cost. SPSS and excel were used to collect descriptive statistics. The survey will remain open for 2 more weeks and comparisons by provider group will be conducted once survey is closed.
Results: Surveys were sent to 242 staff (16.5% Surgery, 34.7% EM, 48.8% Peds). In the first 48 hours the survey was open, 93 responses were received (57% residents, 18.3% attendings, 16.1% nurses, 7.5% fellows, 1.1% PAs), and 42 were excluded. EM had the highest number of respondents (49.5%), then Peds (40.9%), and surgery (9.7%). 77.5% had positive satisfaction with the new protocol, 17.8% were neutral, and 4.6% negative satisfaction. Most felt the protocol was safe (82%). 58.5% felt that it was efficient and decreased clinician burden, 21.7% were neutral, and 19.8% thought that this was not decreased. Nearly half thought that family burden and cost were decreased (48.9%), 35.5% were neutral, and 15.6% felt it did not improve this area (Figure 1).
Conclusion: The survey suggests that clinicians are overall satisfied with the ER observation intussusception protocol and believe this protocol is safe with low risk of complications. Most felt that the protocol was efficient and decreased clinical burden, but some were either neutral or thought it hindered clinician efficiency. Continued work will further evaluate provider responses, patient satisfaction surveys, and cost.