Conectar
To describe the implementation of a trauma-informed model of care in the Post COVID Respiratory Clinic of a large tertiary referral centre in NSW.
Discussion paper.
Evidence gathered from a literature search (2008–2022) was used to develop a framework for management of patients presenting to this Post COVID Respiratory Clinic. This paper outlines the personal reflections of the clinic staff as they developed and implemented this framework. Ethical approval was obtained to report the data collected from patient reviews.
The literature highlights the high prevalence of trauma in patients following COVID-19 infection, as well as the larger population both during and after the pandemic. This experience of trauma was observed in patients seen within the clinic, indicating a need for specialized care. In response, a trauma-informed model of care was implemented.
Reconceptualizing COVID-19 as a ‘collective trauma’ can help healthcare workers understand the needs of post-COVID patients and enable them to respond empathetically. A trauma-informed model is complementary to this cohort as it specifically addresses vulnerable populations, many of whom have been further marginalized by the pandemic.
Frontline healthcare workers, particularly nurses, are well positioned to implement trauma-informed care due to their high-level of patient contact. Adequate allocation of resources and investment in staff is essential to ensure such care can be provided.
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to adverse physical and mental health outcomes for many. Trauma-informed care is a way to promote reengagement with the healthcare system in this group. Post COVID patients globally may benefit from this approach, as it aims to build trust and independence.
Feedback was sought from a patient representative to ensure this paper adequately reflected the experience of the post-COVID patient.
Patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer living in more deprived areas experience worse survival than those in more affluent areas. Those living in more deprived areas face barriers to accessing timely, quality healthcare. These barriers may contribute to socioeconomic inequalities in survival. We evaluated the literature for any association between socioeconomic group, hospital delay and treatments received among patients with colorectal cancer in the UK, a country with universal healthcare.
MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, SCIE, AMED and PsycINFO were searched from inception to January 2023. Grey literature, including HMIC, BASE and Google Advanced Search, and forward and backward citation searches were conducted. Two reviewers independently reviewed titles, abstracts and full-text articles. Observational UK-based studies were included if they reported socioeconomic measures and an association with either hospital delay or treatments received. The QUIPS tool assessed bias risk, and a narrative synthesis was conducted. The review is reported to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020.
41 of the 7209 identified references were included. 12 studies evaluated 7 different hospital intervals. There was a significant association between area-level deprivation and a longer time from first presentation in primary care to diagnosis. 32 studies evaluated treatments received. There were socioeconomic inequalities in surgery and chemotherapy but not radiotherapy.
Patients with colorectal cancer face inequalities across the cancer care continuum. Further research is needed to understand why and what evidence-based actions can reduce these inequalities in treatment. Qualitative research of patients and clinicians conducted across various settings would provide a rich understanding of the complex factors that drive these inequalities. Further research should also consider using a causal approach to future studies to considerably strengthen the interpretation. Clinicians can try and mitigate some potential causes of colorectal cancer inequalities, including signposting to financial advice and patient transport schemes.
CRD42022347652.
Headache is a common chief complaint of children presenting to emergency departments (EDs). Approximately 0.5%–1% will have emergent intracranial abnormalities (EIAs) such as brain tumours or strokes. However, more than one-third undergo emergent neuroimaging in the ED, resulting in a large number of children unnecessarily exposed to radiation. The overuse of neuroimaging in children with headaches in the ED is driven by clinician concern for life-threatening EIAs and lack of clarity regarding which clinical characteristics accurately identify children with EIAs. The study objective is to derive and internally validate a stratification model that accurately identifies the risk of EIA in children with headaches based on clinically sensible and reliable variables.
Prospective cohort study of 28 000 children with headaches presenting to any of 18 EDs in the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN). We include children aged 2–17 years with a chief complaint of headache. We exclude children with a clear non-intracranial alternative diagnosis, fever, neuroimaging within previous year, neurological or developmental condition such that patient history or physical examination may be unreliable, Glasgow Coma Scale score
Ethics approval was obtained for all participating sites from the University of Utah single Institutional Review Board. A waiver of informed consent was granted for collection of ED data. Verbal consent is obtained for follow-up contact. Results will be disseminated through international conferences, peer-reviewed publications, and open-access materials.
FreshRSS 