The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Child Health and Well-Being: Are Children “Slipping through the Net”? A Qualitative Study of Frontline Emergency Care Staff

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-151753/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Child Health and Well-Being: Are Children “Slipping through the Net”? A Qualitative Study of Frontline Emergency Care Staff

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-151753/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 25 Mar, 2021

Read the published version in BMC Health Services Research →

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent public health guidance to reduce the spread of the disease have wide-reaching implications for children’s health and wellbeing. Furthermore, paediatric emergency departments (EDs) have rapidly adapted provision of care in response to the pandemic. This qualitative study utilized insight from multidisciplinary frontline staff to understand 1) the changes in paediatric emergency healthcare utilization during COVID-19 2) the experiences of working within the restructured health system.

Methods

Fifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with frontline staff working in two paediatric EDs and two mixed adult and children EDs. Participants included emergency medicine clinicians (n = 5), nursing managerial staff (n=6), social workers (n=2) and nursing staff (n = 2). Thematic Analysis (TA) was applied to the data to identify key themes.

Results

The pandemic and public health restrictions have had an adverse impact on children’s health and psychosocial wellbeing, compounded by difficulty in accessing primary and community services. The impact may have been more acute for children with disabilities and chronic health conditions and has raised child protection issues for vulnerable children. EDs have shown innovation and agility in the structural and operational changes they have implemented to continue to deliver care to children, however resource limitations and other challenges must be addressed to ensure high quality care delivery and protect the wellbeing of those tasked with delivering this care.

Conclusions

The spread of COVID-19 and subsequent polices to address the pandemic has had wide-reaching implications for children’s health and wellbeing. The interruption to health and social care services is manifesting in myriad ways in the ED, such as a rise in psychosocial presentations. As the pandemic continues to progress, policy makers and service providers must ensure the continued provision of essential health and social services, including targeted responses for those with existing conditions.

Health Economics & Outcomes Research

Health Policy

COVID-19

public health restrictions

paediatric emergency medicine

psychosocial

mental health

The Emergency Department acts as a gateway to the health and social care system for many children, while also providing critical care when other services are overburdened. As the COVID-19 pandemic progressed across the globe, changes in patterns of paediatric attendances at the ED indicated the pandemic was impacting children’s access to healthcare. A substantial reduction in paediatric emergency care utilization followed public health measures aimed at halting the spread of the virus, including school closures and restrictions on movement and social interactions. This has raised concerns regarding potential delays in seeking healthcare (1,2), and increased rates of morbidity and mortality due to delayed presentations have been reported (3–5). In Italy, paediatric presentations were reported to have reduced by 73% -88% compared to the previous two years (5), while in Ireland paediatric attendances fell by 46% between March and May 2020, compared to the same period in 2019 and 2018 (6). Some studies have examined the scale of delayed presentations (7,8), with one study finding that 32% of paediatricians working in EDs and Paediatric Assessment Units in Ireland and the UK observed delayed presentations during the initial phase of the pandemic (8). Lower attendance rates have been attributed to reduced infectious diseases and injuries due to public health measures implemented. Furthermore, parental hesitancy to attend hospitals due to fear of COVID-19 and a misinterpretation of public health messaging (9).

The COVID-19 pandemic has psychosocial implications for children, who may be affected in multifaceted ways on an individual, familial and community level (10), with evidence suggesting that quarantine conditions have adversely impacted children’s mental health (11). The disruption to educational, social and recreational activities removed children from peer networks and social interaction, which may cultivate social isolation (12). The disruption of schools and community services, often a safety net for children, may further leave children vulnerable, particularly those at heightened risk of neglect (1). Furthermore, children with pre-existing behavioural conditions, such as autism, and those who rely on specialist or community delivered health services, may be disproportionally affected by not having their needs met (11,13).

Health care systems have rapidly implemented protocols, redeploy staff and redistribute resources to create adequate capacity to deal with the expected surge in demand (14,15). As children are by and large asymptomatic and mortality rare (16), the pandemic is manifesting as a logistical, rather than clinical, challenge for PEDs (1,14). EDs often act as a point of entry for hospitals, therefore a robust and rapid response is crucial to ensure appropriate management of patients and infection control (2,14). As the pandemic progressed, it was expected to present additional challenges to healthcare systems due to the onset of the winter season, as well as schools remaining open in some jurisdictions. Moreover, in contrast to the first wave of COVID-19, health systems are trying to maintain facilitation of routine non-COVID-19 care. Documenting the response of PEDs to the pandemic can provide learning for health systems and policymakers for future healthcare planning and policy (14).

A number of studies have documented the changes to paediatric emergency healthcare, however to the best of our knowledge, no qualitative study has been undertaken to examine and contextualise these changes further. Furthermore, there is limited understanding as to how PEDs and the staff working there have adapted the provision of care during COVID-19. This qualitative study will provide rich data from the perspective of multidisciplinary frontline staff delivering care to paediatric patients in the ED in order to apprehend the already documented changes in presentations, as well as to understand the experience of working under the restructured health system in paediatric ED’s in Ireland.

This study is part of a wider project looking at paediatric emergency healthcare utilization during COVID-19 in Ireland (McDonnell et al., 2020b). The main aim of this qualitative study was to utilize the perspective of ED staff to 1) understand changes to paediatric emergency healthcare utilization 2) understand the experiences of working within the restructured health system from the perspective of frontline staff. Qualitative methodology was chosen as it elicits rich data and detailed insights of the phenomenon at hand (18).

Recruitment

Frontline emergency medicine staff working in two paediatric EDs and two mixed adult/paediatric EDs were recruited through convenience sampling. Their contact information was provided to the researcher, who in turn provided them with further information on the study and obtained written consent.

Data Collection & Analysis

Interviews were carried out by one researcher (CC) remotely through phone or video call between August and October 2020. 18 potential participants were identified, three of whom were ineligible as they did not work in an ED during COVID-19. The interviews were semi-structured, conducted in line with an interview schedule developed with input from research collaborators working in clinical settings (see supplementary material). Interviews were recorded and transcribed into Microsoft Word.

Thematic Analysis (TA) was utilized, which is a widely used, flexible method and provides researchers with a systematic process to identify and analyse themes to create an analytical narrative of the data collected using NVivo ™ software (19). This began with familiarisation, followed by a recursive coding process as outlined by Braun and Clarke (2012). One researcher (CC) carried out the analysis, with 40% (6) of interviews double coded (GO’D) to ensure consistency and methodological rigor in the interpretation of the data. Initial codes were generated, followed by clustering and collapsing codes to create theoretical themes. A reviewing process, involving discussion with the wider research team, was then carried out to ensure the themes represented patterned and shared meaning with relevance to the research question at hand (19).

Ethics

Ethical approval was obtained from the COVID-19 National Research Ethics Committee (NREC) in Ireland (ref: 20-NREC-COV-034).

Participants (N = 15) included emergency medicine clinicians (n = 5), nursing managerial staff (n = 6), social workers (n = 2) and nursing staff (n = 2). 10 participants worked in paediatric only hospitals, while five were based in joint adult/paediatric hospitals. The majority (n = 13) of participants were female. Seven main themes were identified, as outlined in Fig. 1.

ATTENDANCE PATTERNS

1. Declines, Delays and Avoidance: Changing Paediatric Presentations

1.1 Decline & Changing Nature of Presentations

Clinicians noted attendances “absolutely dropped” following the announcement of restrictions on movements on 12 March 2020, however attendance began to steadily increase over the summer months. The “bread and butter” of paediatric presentations such as infectious diseases, viral illnesses and gastroenteritis cases notably decreased, while presentations relating to injuries and accidents, such as household injuries and accidental ingestions, decreased. A rise in mental health presentations was widely noted, which will be expanded on below. The implementation of remote consultations in primary care was highlighted as changing the nature and quality of some referrals. GPs consultations were largely conducted remotely, therefore the absence of a physical assessment led to some patients who would typically be treated in general practice being referred to the ED, having a “ripple” effect on EDs:

“we ended up seeing them in the A&E department which was something we probably wouldn’t have had to if they had done a full assessment in the GP surgery” [1]

1.2 Delaying Attendance

Delayed presentations to the ED were observed by all clinicians, particularly in the early stages of the pandemic. These delays occurred due to parental concerns and perceptions of the effect of the pandemic on the health system. Clinicians relayed incidents whereby children were presenting with more progressed or critical illnesses, such as diabetes ketoacidosis, malignancies, pneumonia, and meningitis: “there was definitely a sense that we were seeing sicker children” [10]. In a small number of instances, this led to prolonged treatment or worsened outcomes for children, which clinicians stressed that while this was uncommon, nonetheless it was a concerning phenomenon. In one instance, a child who had displayed concerning symptoms for a number of days before attending the ED, was diagnosed as having suffered a stroke, which the clinician thought could have been managed better if treated earlier:

“that was delayed presentation as in the management of his care you know, could have been less severe had he presented earlier” [14].

The child’s parent had outlined their concerns in presenting due to the risk of contracting COVID-19 and passing it to a high-risk elderly grandparent living in the same household. In another case, a clinician described a patient who had been unwell for two weeks before presenting, leading to an ICU transfer, which was again due to parental fears of the risk of contracting COVID-19.

1.3 Avoidance in Children with Chronic Conditions

Children with complex needs and chronic conditions were identified by a number of clinicians as a cohort they were seeing less of, which was understood to be due to families deciding to “cocoon” at home: “They were trying to stay away with their co-morbidities” [5]. One clinician, who works with children with disabilities in a volunteer capacity, stated families were very reluctant to allow support services into the home due to fear of infection. Concerns were expressed for families left with very little support during that period, who would normally rely on services to provide them with care and respite, particularly children requiring a high level of complex care.

“I know everybody was housebound, but these are parents with you know, very high, having children with very high needs that they kind of weren't receiving the supports that they probably needed” [13]

However, clinicians also highlighted alternative pathways to care that were put in place such as telehealth consultations and virtual clinics, with one clinician outlining how multi-disciplinary team meetings were held online with families, providing access to medical support which may have mitigated the need to present to the ED.

2. Parental Concerns: Contagion and Messaging

2.1 Fear of COVID-19

According to clinicians, parents displayed high levels of reluctance to attend the ED, predominantly driven by a fear of contracting COVID-19; as one clinician put it, they “saw the hospital as a place of you know, risk of contracting COVID” [10]. As outlined above, these concerns were cited when explaining the reason for delayed presentations.

“they felt they would have presented a bit sooner that they didn't want to come to a department where they could have had a risk of COVID” [8]

In the beginning of the pandemic, parents rang EDs “non-stop” to enquire about the presence of COVID-19 in the hospital. Many clinicians sensed that parents were weighing up the risk of attending the ED against the severity of the child’s illness, and were more inclined to “wait and see”, managing the illness at home, due to the perceived risk of exposure to COVID-19:

“they were pushing their own boundaries and were allowing themselves a little bit more risk or their perception of risk before seeking medical advice because probably the perceived risk of a well child with a temperature was less than the perceived risk of coming here and being exposed to COVID-19” [10]

Clinicians also reported that parents were anxious to socially distance from other patients, and as spatial limitations often lead to difficulty in implementing social distancing, parents would often wait outside the building. Clinicians explained that parents were unaware of the infection control measures put in place in hospitals, such as streaming and triaging for COVID-19, and reacted positively and felt reassured when observing the measures implemented:

“I think most of them were very reassured when they came in because they were told no, we had a separate COVID streaming area.” [9]

2.2 Stay Home, Stay Safe: Public Health Messaging

As cases of COVID-19 first began to increase in Ireland, authorities introduced restrictions on movement and issued public health advice, instructing people to stay at home. The initial drop in ED attendances coincided with this messaging and a number of clinicians felt it may have led some parents to believe they should not attend hospitals, particularly for issues that parents perceived to be not absolutely urgent:

“it was like everybody was being told do not attend your ED, do not attend your ED, do not attend your ED” [4]

“parents were less inclined to present maybe with the normal bits and pieces because they were told to cocoon and stay at home” [9]

One clinician felt the strength of the message to “stay home, stay safe” was quite effective, and parents may have been unwilling to go against this in case they put their child at risk:

“I think because the governments message was so good initially of stay home stay safe, it really was gosh if we break that, could he really be at risk of picking up COVID and dying” [2].

Another clinician relayed an interaction with a parent who misinterpreted the government message to stay home as including not being allowed to travel to the hospital:

“she fully believed that if she was stopped by the guards [police] on the road that they would tell her to turn back” [11].

Furthermore, it was evident that parents believed hospitals were overwhelmed with COVID-19 patients. One clinician felt this perception was connected to media depictions of “front line staff being to the pin of their collar” [13], which may have impacted parents decision to present. When introducing themselves, parents were extending apologies to staff about their attendance:

“we didn't want to come in, you know we didn't want to, we knew you were busy” [13]

Parents were citing their awareness of health system capacity as a reason for being apprehensive to attend, and this belief contributed to parents holding off on presenting, such as in the case of one child who presented many days after suffering a serious laceration:

“The mum was reluctant because she said she thought we’d be out the doors with sick children, so she didn’t want to be just turning up with a cut – which wasn’t really a cut at all, it was quite a serious injury” [15]

Clinicians pointed to the need for a public communication strategy aimed at reassuring parents of both the infection control measures EDs have put in place, as well as to promote the message that EDs are fully operational and not overwhelmed. Some felt this could alleviating parental concerns and prevent delayed attendance or avoidance:

“I think if we can..[]..present to the public that we’re open..[]..if you need to come to hospital we’re ready to help you but we have these measures in place to keep it as safe as possible” [11]

3. Psychosocial Impact on Children

Children’s mental health and wellbeing appears to have been impacted by the pandemic, which manifested in a reported rise in presentations relating to psychosocial issues, both in those with existing mental health conditions as well as first time presentations. This was particularly evident in the summer months as the pandemic progressed. Children presenting for other reasons were also raising anxiety related issues with staff. Clinicians further recounted an increase in teenagers presenting with alcohol ingestion, incidents of self-harm, eating disorders and general anxiety:

“I think the main group that has been struggling hugely here has been kind of teens really, early teens,” [11]

Cases of younger children presenting with anxiety and panic attacks was also highlighted:

“9, 8-year-olds who shouldn't really be anxious about things like this but come with severe anxiety and panic attacks” [6]

COVID-19 related anxiety, which in some instances exasperated existing conditions such as Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD), was also evident. Children held fears if the potential effect of COVID-19 on their family, voicing concerns about family members dying.

“We’ve had maybe one or two kids that have let's say presented in the last month with, seem to have an anxiety brought on due to COVID” [7]

A number of clinicians cited the closure of schools, social isolation and lack of routine as compounding children’s anxiety and psychological wellbeing, and the disruption of mental health services in the community leading to families presenting in crisis, having gone beyond their ability to cope.

4. Disrupted Access to Community Healthcare

4.1 Primary Care

It became apparent to some clinicians that parents were having difficulty in accessing GP care during the start of the pandemic, as parents reported being unable to secure an appointment, thus leaving them with little option but to attend the ED.

“So, they [parents] would say like, ‘You know, I really didn’t want to come, I was trying to get a GP appointment but they’re maybe just doing virtual clinics or whatever, so they told me to come along” [11]

With regard to public health, difficulties in maintaining infant’s vaccination schedule was raised by one clinician who triaged patients, which parents explained as due to either an inability to secure an appointment with the GP or fear of attending the service. Those with new-born babies were also impacted by the suspension of public health nurse visits and some presented due to struggles with colic and feeding issues, compounded by not being able to rely on wider family or peer support networks:

“These parents were first time parents, you know, they didn't have the public health nurse they didn't have the support, that they often came in and they were very, you could see they were very vulnerable” [8]

Restrictions on the delivery of primary and community health services left parents without what one clinician described as “normal systems and supports” [13], and the effect of this was manifesting in the ED.

4.2 Loss of A Safety Net

Clinicians pointed to the closure of schools and suspension or restricted access to other community-based services, activities and supports, such as afterschool activities, and crucially, mental health services as impacting children’s health and wellbeing throughout the lockdown. One clinician explained how they treated a number of patients presenting with self-harm who were attending Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) before the pandemic but were no longer in contact with the service:

“It seemed like a lot of girls hadn’t been in contact with them since February, the CAMHS, the mental health services teams or they weren’t getting appointments. And they were falling through the net” [14]

Another clinician expressed concern for children with neurodevelopmental disabilities such as autism, who were no longer attending specialist schools and other community supports:

“so a few children with autism and because the specialist schools provide them with such a routine and provide the family with support there was a number of incidences of children and families actually coming in in crisis with behaviour that had escalated beyond the point they were able to control and beyond the point of them being able to cope” [13]

Clinicians also drew attention to children from more vulnerable backgrounds who they felt were at heightened risk during this period due to the lack of the safety net provided by schools and other community services by picking up on issues and linking families in with a range of supports:

“Some kids that we are getting because the school isn't picking up on certain little things that should be addressed” [6]

One clinician felt some children had “slipped through the net [14]” due to being isolated, out of school and out of sight of teachers who would normally be in a position to recognise signs.

STRUCTURAL AND PROCESS CHANGES

5. Re-configuring the ED to Create Capacity

5.1 Rapid and Continual Adaptation of Protocols and Pathways

“In the space of about maybe four or five days, they had to completely re-jig the whole department, re-design the whole department, re-design rosters, re-design our own way of working” [9]

As evident in the above statement, the operational changes undertaken across all sites in March 2020 were significant and rapid. The implementation of new protocols and measures was portrayed as iterative, with one clinician explaining the process mapping was like “shifting sands”. As EDs act as the front door of hospitals, increasing isolation capacity was crucial to preventing COVID-19 transmission. Infrastructures were re-fashioned to facilitate this, with structures to separate patients constructed. All sites strengthened triage systems to stream suspected COVID–19 cases to zoned areas. This involved acquiring additional space within the hospital, splitting ED footprint over two or three different areas, creating staffing and resource implications. Challenges in managing different sites arose, with management staff describing how they had to ensure all areas were monitored, “juggling” staff to ensure safety and high-quality care delivery:

“two different resuses[sic] in two different areas in the department, so that is a challenge for staff you know trying to get the skill mix to ensure you have staff looking after the patient who has resus experience and paediatric experience” [8]

5.2 Permission to Innovate

The re-configuring of the ED both spatially and operationally was depicted in positive terms. Clinicians viewed the changes as innovative and adaptive, with teams pushed to think outside the box, invoking a sense of “comradery”, “collaborative” and “adaptive” leadership. Clinicians welcomed the structural changes that provided additional isolation capacity, as well as the strengthened infection prevention and control measures. As funding was provided and greater support from management given, it was viewed as a window of opportunity to improve and enhance the infrastructural space:

“people are really really trying to think of ways we can improve things which everyone always does but this is an actual, you know we are allowed to do this now” [5]

Nonetheless, difficulties were encountered, particularly early in the pandemic due to changing criteria around personal protective equipment (PPE). This generated stress

among staff and subsequently posed a challenge for those in leadership roles tasked with communicating changes and reassuring their teams:

“The messaging at the start was very mixed and I think the staff found that very frustrating from day to day.” [9]

The introduction of PPE and increased need for infection control changed how care was delivered. Wearing PPE had implications for clinical interaction, with clinicians described the donning and doffing of PPE as an arduous process, increasing non-clinical time: “it makes everything longer, and everything takes more time now” [15]

In an effort to minimize wearing of full PPE, as well as reducing exposure and time spent with patients, clinicians outlined ways they clustered care delivery into one interaction:

“we are trying to put all our care into a little care package [] I'm clustering my care so I'm not going in four or five times” [2]

In one hospital, the Paediatric ED obtained a number of single occupancy rooms which provided isolation capacity in another section of the hospital. In order to facilitate clustered care, staff created “grab bags” that contained all necessary intervention procedural equipment, eliminating the need to collect items from different areas. Furthermore, rather than having a dedicated resuscitation area, they created a portable “resus trolley” which could be easily transported, reducing movement and potential virus transmission. Once again, this highlights the agility with which departments could reconfigure care delivery in response to the pandemic.

5.3.“More Isolation, More Cubicles, More Staff, More Space”: Demands on Resources

Clinicians felt the pandemic magnified the prevalent resource limitations they faced within the health system: “It just laid bare the deficiencies and inefficiencies that were already there” [13]. The expanded footprint of the ED, new streaming processes, and higher infection control measures created greater demand on staffing levels, compounded by the need for staff to self-isolate if they displayed symptoms and being unable to attend work. While funding was provided for additional staff, recruitment was a “struggle”, leaving departments facing shortages of staff, and fears were expressed about the implications on patient safety. Even with the obtained space, capacity was reduced due larger numbers needing isolation, and with attendances increasing, the capacity to operate during winter was questioned:

“We now only have a capacity for 31 patients in our department at any one time...[]..We looked at December last year..[]… 90 something per cent of the time there are more than 30 patients in the department…[]…So you can see where we are going to run into problems with that” [4]

Concerns about winter also extended to infection control, with clinicians indicating that EDs were struggling to implement social distancing, leaving some questioning the ability to maintain infection control standards:

“My concern is we won’t have the staff to facilitate the standards we have at the moment with IP&C [Infection Prevention & Control] and social distancing and isolating patients, I think we are going to have a terrible winter” [12]

6. Quality and Safety in Care Delivery Processes

6.1 Communication Challenges

A number of challenges to the flow of care, particularly in relation to PPE, posed difficulty in communicating both with patients and colleagues. Clinicians explained the importance of engaging with younger children to relax them and gain trust, which was more difficult with PPE. This also extended to staff communication when treating patients, with clinicians stressing the importance of clear communication when administering drugs or other care. Many pointed out the inability to read facial expressions and other visual cues, thus the introduction of PPE demanded clearer communication mechanisms to prevent any risk to patients:

“So now people are behind masks, they're in robes, you can't take it for granted what drugs or what they're asking for, it could potentially lead to errors in care delivery because the communication now is different” [7]

In one hospital, communication between social workers, who are typically present in the ED, and clinicians was affected when social workers were relocated to another area, a change that was thought to impact the care flow of patients in need of social worker support. Concern was expressed that the extra steps required to refer patients to social workers no longer co-located may lead to delayed referrals.

The need to reduce footfall in EDs required staff to work in smaller teams in resuscitation scenarios, which was described by some as “isolating” and required strict management to ensure only necessary staff were present. One clinician highlighted the potential for errors with a reduced team:

“We had a number of drug errors that probably shouldn't have occurred cos normally in a resus scenario you would have, you know, people standing together double checking, cross checking but behind a door it's very very difficult” [13]

7. Psychological Challenges for Staff

For some clinicians, anxiety was a recurrent theme, with concerns voiced about contracting COVID-19 and transmitting it to their families or communities. Clinicians also had to adjust to reduced social interaction with colleagues, with break rooms no longer a place they can congregate, and one clinician described staff taking meals in their cars. Clinicians highlighted that a strong team dynamic is essential when working in an ED, and peer support vital when dealing with adverse outcomes, thus reduced informal social interaction between colleagues was having an impact:

“it was our room where we got to know our work colleagues you know …. or when we have a really traumatic event in resus and a patient dies it’s the place we used to go to kind of take a break and have a chat, a quick chat about it. That’s all gone, we can't congregate at all” [4]

Uncertainty and anxiety were palpable for ED staff at the start of the pandemic, due to the media reports emerging from other European countries and the unknown of what was coming their way: “we didn't know what we were in for” [8]. As mentioned above, winter season brings extra challenges for staff every year, however this year will be even more challenging and concerns for staff wellbeing was voiced, as one clinician put it, as frontline staff, they questioned “physically and emotionally what you can deliver” [5]

This qualitative study aimed to outline the experiences of frontline staff delivering care in order to gain further insight into the trends of paediatric presentations to the ED during COVID-19, and the work practice adaptations introduced in the ED in the response to the pandemic. The findings contextualise the reduced use of emergency care during the initial months of the pandemic, and provide evidence to suggest concerns regarding contracting COVID-19 and misinterpretation of public health messaging promulgated at the start of the pandemic may have contributed to delayed presentations by paediatric presentations at the ED. A rise in attendances for mental health reasons was identified by clinicians, suggesting psychosocial implications for children. Disruptions to healthcare delivered in the community resulted in unmet healthcare needs for some children, and the suspension of schools and community support services removed a safety net for vulnerable children at risk of neglect. This study also identifies a number of structural and operational changes undertaken to increase isolation capacity in EDs, with streaming and zoning crucial to this process. This had staffing and spatial implications, and with attendances rising, concerns were raised about the ability of EDs to maintain current infection control standards, particularly during the winter season. A number of innovative initiatives to deliver care were highlighted, and quality and safety challenges around communication identified. Finally, working on the frontline in the midst of a pandemic created uncertainty and anxiety, significantly impacted staff wellbeing and rapport.

The cases of delayed presentations outlined by clinicians supports the findings of previous studies (5,7,8) and this study provides further insight into this phenomenon, highlighting the impact of parental hesitancy to attend the ED due to COVID-19 (9). Public health messaging clearly impacted parents faced with making decisions around seeking care for children, thus clear and uncomplicated communication is essential (9). The positive reaction to infection control measures displayed by parents suggests that a public communication strategy, clearly outlining the measures in place at the ED, can help to combat fears and reassure parents to continue to present (7). While it is more difficult to adequately assess the extent of avoidance of emergency healthcare, it is vital that children with complex needs can continue to access appropriate healthcare. Future studies should investigate the impact of the pandemic on this particular cohort and their families.

Difficulty in accessing primary and community services, including GPs, public health nurses, mental health and other community health services may be further exasperating parents’ ability to access care for their children. Moreover, the reduction or suspension of educational, social and other community services and activities such as sports and youth outreach programmes, also raised issues around child protection for vulnerable children (8,12), as illustrated by the findings of this study. The pandemic likely exacerbated existing economic and health inequities, further impacting marginalised children (20) and vulnerable children may have been at risk of “slipping through the net”. The impact of lockdown may also have been felt more keenly by children with disabilities and chronic health conditions, whose families rely on support services and specialist schools (13,21). It is imperative that both short- and long-term support measures and contingency plans are implemented to prevent and alleviate the negative effects on these children (22).

Widespread disruption to mental health services, including repurposing of staff and facilities, has been identified at a time when they may be needed more than ever (23). The conditions of imposed “lockdowns” may be having a negative effect on children’s mental health (11), and as identified in this study and elsewhere (24), this is manifesting in rising psychosocial presentations at the ED, which may not be the most appropriate pathway to mental health care. As the pandemic continues to progress, policy makers and service providers must ensure the continued provision of essential health and social services, including targeted responses for those with existing conditions.

The implications of COVID-19 for PEDs were largely logistical. The scale of this pandemic has not been faced before in the western European context. A survey highlighted that planning and simulated responses were not carried out in over a third of PEDs across Europe, and guidelines that may be widely applicable across health systems to prepare and respond rapidly and effectively to the COVID-19 pandemic have been called for by those working in PEDs (14). This study also highlighted the impact of resource poor services, particularly in relation to staffing levels and spatial limitations, which will progressively worsen during the winter season, bringing further logistical and clinical challenges (25), which must be considered in operational planning for further COVID-19 surges (26) and future public health crises. Strategies to lessen the burden on EDs through public health measures, strengthened access to primary care services, and other ways to deliver care must be enacted if children’s healthcare needs are going to be sufficiently met. Finally, those working in paediatric EDs have been somewhat overlooked due to the lesser clinical impact of COVID-19 on children, and this study also provides evidence to suggest the impact on staff is considerable and should be examined further.

The multidisciplinary nature of the clinicians included in this study reflects a wide range of experiences. The findings are based on frontline staff’s perception of parents’ health seeking behaviour, and future research could further understand in this area. Data collection occurred at one point of time, after the first and most challenging wave when health services were largely unprepared for the pandemic.

The spread of COVID-19 and subsequent polices to address the pandemic has had wide-reaching implications for children’s health and wellbeing. Public health messaging has a role to play in ensuring children continue to receive appropriate healthcare when restrictions are placed on movement. The interruption to healthcare delivered in the community is manifesting in myriad ways in the ED, including in the rise of psychosocial presentations in children. EDs have shown innovation and agility in the structural and operational changes they have implemented to continue to deliver care to children, however resource limitations and other challenges must be addressed to ensure high quality care delivery and protect the wellbeing of those tasked with delivering this care.

ED: emergency department

GP: general practitioner

ICU: Intensive care unit

PED: Paediatric emergency department

PPE: Personal protection equipment

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was granted ethical approval by the COVID-19 National Research Ethics Committee (NREC) in Ireland (ref: 20-NREC-COV-034). All participants provided informed written consent prior to participating in an interview. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

The study was funded by the Health Research Board (HRB) (Grant Number: COV19-2020-076). The funder had no role in the study.

Authors' contributions

EN, TMcD and CC designed the study, and MB, FC, CD, CH and EMcA provided feedback. CC conducted data collection and analysis, assisted by EN and TMcD. CC prepared the manuscript, with substantial input from EN and TMcD. MB, FC, CD, CH and EMcA provided feedback and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge Grace O’Donnell (GO’D) for her contribution to the data analysis process. Many thanks to the participants for generously giving their time to participate in this study

Isba R, Edge R, Jenner R, Broughton E, Francis N, Butler J. Where have all the children gone? Decreases in paediatric emergency department attendances at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020. Archives of disease in childhood. 2020;
Santana R, Sousa JS, Soares P, Lopes S, Boto P, Rocha JV. The demand for hospital emergency services: trends during the first month of COVID-19 response. Portuguese Journal of Public Health. 2020;38(1):30–6.
Ciacchini B, Tonioli F, Marciano C, Faticato MG, Borali E, Prato AP, et al. Reluctance to seek pediatric care during the COVID-19 pandemic and the risks of delayed diagnosis. Italian Journal of Pediatrics. 2020;46(1):1–4.
Dayal D, Gupta S, Raithatha D, Jayashree M. Missing during COVID-19 lockdown: children with new-onset type 1 diabetes. 2020;
Lazzerini M, Barbi E, Apicella A, Marchetti F, Cardinale F, Trobia G. Delayed access or provision of care in Italy resulting from fear of COVID-19. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health. 2020;4(5):e10–1.
McDonnell T, Nicholson E, Conlon C, Barrett M, Cummins F, Hensey C, et al. Assessing the Impact of COVID-19 Public Health Stages on Paediatric Emergency Attendance. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020;17(18):6719.
Roland D, Harwood R, Bishop N, Hargreaves D, Patel S, Sinha I. Children’s emergency presentations during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health. 2020 Aug 1;4(8):e32–3.
Lynn RM, Avis JL, Lenton S, Amin-Chowdhury Z, Ladhani SN. Delayed access to care and late presentations in children during the COVID-19 pandemic: a snapshot survey of 4075 paediatricians in the UK and Ireland. Archives of disease in childhood. 2020;
Nicholson E, McDonnell T, Conlon C, Barrett M, Cummins F, Hensey C, et al. Parental Hesitancy and Concerns around Accessing Paediatric Unscheduled Healthcare during COVID-19: A Cross-Sectional Survey. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020;17(24):9264.
Fegert JM, Vitiello B, Plener PL, Clemens V. Challenges and burden of the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for child and adolescent mental health: a narrative review to highlight clinical and research needs in the acute phase and the long return to normality. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health. 2020 May 12;14(1):20.
Panda PK, Gupta J, Chowdhury SR, Kumar R, Meena AK, Madaan P, et al. Psychological and Behavioral Impact of Lockdown and Quarantine Measures for COVID-19 Pandemic on Children, Adolescents and Caregivers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Tropical Pediatrics [Internet]. 2020 Dec 27 [cited 2021 Jan 7];(fmaa122). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/tropej/fmaa122
Crawley E, Loades M, Feder G, Logan S, Redwood S, Macleod J. Wider collateral damage to children in the UK because of the social distancing measures designed to reduce the impact of COVID-19 in adults. BMJ Paediatr Open [Internet]. 2020 May 4 [cited 2020 May 26];4(1). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7223269/
Caffo E, Scandroglio F, Asta L. Debate: COVID‐19 and psychological well‐being of children and adolescents in Italy. Child Adolesc Ment Health [Internet]. 2020 Jul 12 [cited 2020 Nov 12]; Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7405398/
Bressan S, Buonsenso D, Farrugia R, Parri N, Oostenbrink R, Titomanlio L, et al. Preparedness and Response to Pediatric COVID-19 in European Emergency Departments: A Survey of the REPEM and PERUKI Networks. Annals of Emergency Medicine [Internet]. 2020 May 15 [cited 2020 Oct 13]; Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196064420303668
Brick, Aoife, Walsh, Brendan, Keegan, Conor, Lyons, Seán. COVID-19 and emergency department attendances in Irish public hospitals [Internet]. ESRI; 2020 May [cited 2020 Jun 8]. Available from: https://www.esri.ie/publications/covid-19-and-emergency-department-attendances-in-irish-public-hospitals
Parri N, Lenge M, Buonsenso D, Coronavirus Infection in Pediatric Emergency Departments (CONFIDENCE) Research Group. Children with Covid-19 in Pediatric Emergency Departments in Italy. N Engl J Med. 2020 09;383(2):187–90.
McDonnell T, McAuliffe E, Barrett M, Conlon C, Cummins F, Deasy C, et al. CUPID COVID-19: emergency department attendance by paediatric patients during COVID-19-project protocol. HRB Open Research. 2020;3(37):37.
Castleberry A, Nolen A. Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: Is it as easy as it sounds? Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning. 2018 Jun 1;10(6):807–15.
Braun V, Clarke V. Thematic analysis. In: APA handbooks in psychology® APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol 2 Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. American Psychological Association.; 2012. p. 57–71.
Chanchlani N, Buchanan F, Gill PJ. Addressing the indirect effects of COVID-19 on the health of children and young people. CMAJ. 2020;192(32):E921–7.
Serlachius A, Badawy SM, Thabrew H. Psychosocial Challenges and Opportunities for Youth With Chronic Health Conditions During the COVID-19 Pandemic. JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting. 2020;3(2):e23057.
Golberstein E, Wen H, Miller BF. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and mental health for children and adolescents. JAMA pediatrics. 2020;
World Health Organization. The impact of COVID-19 on mental, neurological and substance use services: results of a rapid assessment. 2020;
Cheek JA, Craig SS, West A, Lewena S, Hiscock H. Emergency department utilisation by vulnerable paediatric populations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Emergency Medicine Australasia. 2020;32(5):870–1.
Buonsenso D, Valentini P, Moscato U, Ricciardi W, Roland D. A Pediatric Strategy for the Next Phase of the SARS–CoV-2 Pandemic. Frontiers in pediatrics. 2020;8.
Walton H, Navaratnam AV, Ormond M, Gandhi V, Mann C. Emergency medicine response to the COVID-19 pandemic in England: a phenomenological study. Emerg Med J [Internet]. 2020 Sep [cited 2020 Dec 10]; Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7523169/

No competing interests reported.

SupplementaryMaterial.docx

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 25 Mar, 2021

Read the published version in BMC Health Services Research →

Editorial decision: Major revision
02 Mar, 2021
Reviews received at journal
09 Feb, 2021
Reviewers agreed at journal
27 Jan, 2021
Reviewers invited by journal
27 Jan, 2021
Editor assigned by journal
27 Jan, 2021
Editor invited by journal
27 Jan, 2021
Submission checks completed at journal
27 Jan, 2021
First submitted to journal
20 Jan, 2021

You are reading this latest preprint version

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Child Health and Well-Being: Are Children “Slipping through the Net”? A Qualitative Study of Frontline Emergency Care Staff

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methods

Recruitment

Data Collection & Analysis

Ethics

Results

ATTENDANCE PATTERNS

1. Declines, Delays and Avoidance: Changing Paediatric Presentations

1.1 Decline & Changing Nature of Presentations

1.2 Delaying Attendance

1.3 Avoidance in Children with Chronic Conditions

2. Parental Concerns: Contagion and Messaging

2.1 Fear of COVID-19

2.2 Stay Home, Stay Safe: Public Health Messaging

3. Psychosocial Impact on Children

4. Disrupted Access to Community Healthcare

4.1 Primary Care

4.2 Loss of A Safety Net

STRUCTURAL AND PROCESS CHANGES

5. Re-configuring the ED to Create Capacity

5.1 Rapid and Continual Adaptation of Protocols and Pathways

5.2 Permission to Innovate

5.3.“More Isolation, More Cubicles, More Staff, More Space”: Demands on Resources

6. Quality and Safety in Care Delivery Processes

6.1 Communication Challenges

7. Psychological Challenges for Staff

Discussion

Strengths And Limitations

Conclusion

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1