TY - JOUR
T1 - SCREEN
T2 - A simple layperson administered screening algorithm in low resource international settings significantly reduces waiting time for critically ill children in primary healthcare clinics
AU - Hansoti, Bhakti
AU - Jenson, Alexander
AU - Kironji, Antony G.
AU - Katz, Joanne
AU - Levin, Scott
AU - Rothman, Richard
AU - Kelen, Gabor D.
AU - Wallis, Lee A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Hansoti et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2017/8
Y1 - 2017/8
N2 - Background: In low resource settings, an inadequate number of trained healthcare workers and high volumes of children presenting to Primary Healthcare Centers (PHC) result in prolonged waiting times and significant delays in identifying and evaluating critically ill children. The Sick Children Require Emergency Evaluation Now (SCREEN) program, a simple six-question screening algorithm administered by lay healthcare workers, was developed in 2014 to rapidly identify critically ill children and to expedite their care at the point of entry into a clinic. We sought to determine the impact of SCREEN on waiting times for critically ill children post real world implementation in Cape Town, South Africa. Methods and findings: This is a prospective, observational implementation-effectiveness hybrid study that sought to determine: (1) the impact of SCREEN implementation on waiting times as a primary outcome measure, and (2) the effectiveness of the SCREEN tool in accurately identifying critically ill children when utilised by the QM and adherence by the QM to the SCREEN algorithm as secondary outcome measures. The study was conducted in two phases, Phase I control (pre-SCREEN implementation- three months in 2014) and Phase II (post-SCREEN implementation—two distinct three month periods in 2016). In Phase I, 1600 (92.38%) of 1732 children presenting to 4 clinics, had sufficient data for analysis and comprised the control sample. In Phase II, all 3383 of the children presenting to the 26 clinics during the sampling time frame had sufficient data for analysis. The proportion of critically ill children who saw a professional nurse within 10 minutes increased tenfold from 6.4% to 64% (Phase I to Phase II) with the median time to seeing a professional nurse reduced from 100.3 minutes to 4.9 minutes, (p < .001, respectively). Overall layperson screening compared to Integrated Management of Childhood Illnesses (IMCI) designation by a nurse had a sensitivity of 94.2% and a specificity of 88.1%, despite large variance in adherence to the SCREEN algorithm across clinics. Conclusions: The SCREEN program when implemented in a real-world setting can significantly reduce waiting times for critically ill children in PHCs, however further work is required to improve the implementation of this innovative program.
AB - Background: In low resource settings, an inadequate number of trained healthcare workers and high volumes of children presenting to Primary Healthcare Centers (PHC) result in prolonged waiting times and significant delays in identifying and evaluating critically ill children. The Sick Children Require Emergency Evaluation Now (SCREEN) program, a simple six-question screening algorithm administered by lay healthcare workers, was developed in 2014 to rapidly identify critically ill children and to expedite their care at the point of entry into a clinic. We sought to determine the impact of SCREEN on waiting times for critically ill children post real world implementation in Cape Town, South Africa. Methods and findings: This is a prospective, observational implementation-effectiveness hybrid study that sought to determine: (1) the impact of SCREEN implementation on waiting times as a primary outcome measure, and (2) the effectiveness of the SCREEN tool in accurately identifying critically ill children when utilised by the QM and adherence by the QM to the SCREEN algorithm as secondary outcome measures. The study was conducted in two phases, Phase I control (pre-SCREEN implementation- three months in 2014) and Phase II (post-SCREEN implementation—two distinct three month periods in 2016). In Phase I, 1600 (92.38%) of 1732 children presenting to 4 clinics, had sufficient data for analysis and comprised the control sample. In Phase II, all 3383 of the children presenting to the 26 clinics during the sampling time frame had sufficient data for analysis. The proportion of critically ill children who saw a professional nurse within 10 minutes increased tenfold from 6.4% to 64% (Phase I to Phase II) with the median time to seeing a professional nurse reduced from 100.3 minutes to 4.9 minutes, (p < .001, respectively). Overall layperson screening compared to Integrated Management of Childhood Illnesses (IMCI) designation by a nurse had a sensitivity of 94.2% and a specificity of 88.1%, despite large variance in adherence to the SCREEN algorithm across clinics. Conclusions: The SCREEN program when implemented in a real-world setting can significantly reduce waiting times for critically ill children in PHCs, however further work is required to improve the implementation of this innovative program.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85029226054&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85029226054&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0183520
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0183520
M3 - Article
C2 - 28850617
AN - SCOPUS:85029226054
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 12
JO - PloS one
JF - PloS one
IS - 8
M1 - e0183520
ER -