Improving the evaluation of non-accidental trauma across multiple specialties at a single institution

Background Based on the presenting injury, patients undergoing abuse evaluation may be managed by different specialties. Our local child abuse specialist expressed concern over the variability in evaluation of patients presenting with injuries concerning for non-accidental trauma (NAT). The aim of t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Courtney Port, Lani Kroese, William Hauda
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2025-01-01
Series:BMJ Open Quality
Online Access:https://bmjopenquality.bmj.com/content/14/1/e002953.full
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832542672307355648
author Courtney Port
Lani Kroese
William Hauda
author_facet Courtney Port
Lani Kroese
William Hauda
author_sort Courtney Port
collection DOAJ
description Background Based on the presenting injury, patients undergoing abuse evaluation may be managed by different specialties. Our local child abuse specialist expressed concern over the variability in evaluation of patients presenting with injuries concerning for non-accidental trauma (NAT). The aim of this quality improvement project was to increase the percentage of patients for whom there is a concern for NAT who receive a guideline-adherent evaluation from 7.7% to 50% in 6 months’ time.Methods A committee of physician stakeholders developed criteria for a complete NAT evaluation which were integrated into an order panel with built-in clinical guidance for test selection within our electronic medical record. Data on the completeness of NAT evaluation in paediatric patients 0–18 years of age were collected before and after the order panel release and analysed by admitting service, injury category and equity factors.Results This initiative increased the percentage of patients with a guideline-adherent evaluation from a mean of 7.7% to 25% within 6 months’ time. The number of days between patients with complete evaluations decreased from 63 days to 35 days. Order panel utilisation increased to 55%, and the percentage of evaluation opportunities was more complete when the order panel was used (79% vs 92%).Conclusions Standardisation of NAT evaluations through creation of an order panel with a clinical decision tool resulted in more guideline-adherent evaluations. The potential reduction of bias in such evaluations remains an area of interest.
format Article
id doaj-art-a47c4858e3d44e6da5a5ae6aadfe5ad4
institution Kabale University
issn 2399-6641
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format Article
series BMJ Open Quality
spelling doaj-art-a47c4858e3d44e6da5a5ae6aadfe5ad42025-02-03T19:05:09ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open Quality2399-66412025-01-0114110.1136/bmjoq-2024-002953Improving the evaluation of non-accidental trauma across multiple specialties at a single institutionCourtney Port0Lani Kroese1William Hauda21 Pediatrics, Inova Fairfax Medical Campus, Falls Church, Virginia, USA1 Pediatrics, Inova Fairfax Medical Campus, Falls Church, Virginia, USA2 Inova Fairfax Medical Campus, Falls Church, Virginia, USABackground Based on the presenting injury, patients undergoing abuse evaluation may be managed by different specialties. Our local child abuse specialist expressed concern over the variability in evaluation of patients presenting with injuries concerning for non-accidental trauma (NAT). The aim of this quality improvement project was to increase the percentage of patients for whom there is a concern for NAT who receive a guideline-adherent evaluation from 7.7% to 50% in 6 months’ time.Methods A committee of physician stakeholders developed criteria for a complete NAT evaluation which were integrated into an order panel with built-in clinical guidance for test selection within our electronic medical record. Data on the completeness of NAT evaluation in paediatric patients 0–18 years of age were collected before and after the order panel release and analysed by admitting service, injury category and equity factors.Results This initiative increased the percentage of patients with a guideline-adherent evaluation from a mean of 7.7% to 25% within 6 months’ time. The number of days between patients with complete evaluations decreased from 63 days to 35 days. Order panel utilisation increased to 55%, and the percentage of evaluation opportunities was more complete when the order panel was used (79% vs 92%).Conclusions Standardisation of NAT evaluations through creation of an order panel with a clinical decision tool resulted in more guideline-adherent evaluations. The potential reduction of bias in such evaluations remains an area of interest.https://bmjopenquality.bmj.com/content/14/1/e002953.full
spellingShingle Courtney Port
Lani Kroese
William Hauda
Improving the evaluation of non-accidental trauma across multiple specialties at a single institution
BMJ Open Quality
title Improving the evaluation of non-accidental trauma across multiple specialties at a single institution
title_full Improving the evaluation of non-accidental trauma across multiple specialties at a single institution
title_fullStr Improving the evaluation of non-accidental trauma across multiple specialties at a single institution
title_full_unstemmed Improving the evaluation of non-accidental trauma across multiple specialties at a single institution
title_short Improving the evaluation of non-accidental trauma across multiple specialties at a single institution
title_sort improving the evaluation of non accidental trauma across multiple specialties at a single institution
url https://bmjopenquality.bmj.com/content/14/1/e002953.full
work_keys_str_mv AT courtneyport improvingtheevaluationofnonaccidentaltraumaacrossmultiplespecialtiesatasingleinstitution
AT lanikroese improvingtheevaluationofnonaccidentaltraumaacrossmultiplespecialtiesatasingleinstitution
AT williamhauda improvingtheevaluationofnonaccidentaltraumaacrossmultiplespecialtiesatasingleinstitution