Collaborative process improvement to enhance injury prevention in child death review

Objective To increase the number and quality of injury prevention recommendations made by Washington State (USA) child death review teams. Design Before and after study design involving four intervention teams and 21 comparison teams. Methods Intervention teams received injury prevention training, collaborative process improvement coaching, and access to web based prevention resources. An equal number of randomly selected child death review case reports filed with the state before the intervention by the intervention and comparison teams were included in the baseline sample. All reports submitted by the intervention and comparison teams after the intervention were included in the follow-up sample. Reports were scored on the completeness of prevention related data elements and on the quality of written prevention recommendations. Results Data completion for prevention relevant items increased in intervention teams from 73% at baseline to 88% at follow-up. In comparison teams, this measure fell from 77% to 56% over the same period. The quality of written recommendations produced by intervention teams increased from 4.3 (95% CI 3.4 to 5.1) to 7.6 (95% CI 6.7 to 8.5), while comparison teams showed no significant change (4.0 (95% CI 2.5 to 5.3) to 3.7 (95% CI 2.2 to 5.2)). Specifically, improvements were noted in the identification of evidence based best practices and the development of clear, actionable written recommendations. Conclusion Injury prevention recommendations are generated in the systematic local review of child deaths. This process can be analysed, measured, supported, and improved.

[1]  T Dowswell,et al.  Updating the evidence. A systematic review of what works in preventing childhood unintentional injuries: Part 1 , 2001, Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention.

[2]  D. Grossman,et al.  Prevention of traumatic deaths to children in the United States: how far have we come and where do we need to go? , 1996, Pediatrics.

[3]  M. Rimsza,et al.  Can child deaths be prevented? The Arizona Child Fatality Review Program experience. , 2002, Pediatrics.

[4]  Erasmus Philips,et al.  The state of the nation , 2013 .

[5]  B. Ewigman,et al.  Child death review. The state of the nation. , 2003, American journal of preventive medicine.

[6]  T. Davenport,et al.  Just-in-time delivery comes to knowledge management. , 2002, Harvard business review.

[7]  C. Conroy,et al.  The Haddon matrix: applying an epidemiologic research tool as a framework for death investigation. , 2000, The American journal of forensic medicine and pathology.

[8]  A. Lavin,et al.  American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect and Committee on Community Health Services. Investigation and review of unexpected infant and child deaths. , 1999, Pediatrics.

[9]  S. Forjuoh,et al.  Child death reviews: a gold mine for injury prevention and control , 1999, Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention.

[10]  K. Glanz,et al.  Health Behavior and Health Education , 1990 .

[11]  E. K. Moll,et al.  Child bicyclist injuries: are we obtaining enough information in the emergency department chart? , 2002, Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention.

[12]  T. Dowswell,et al.  Updating the evidence. A systematic review of what works in preventing childhood unintentional injuries: Part 2 , 2001, Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention.

[13]  G A Gellert,et al.  Origins and clinical relevance of child death review teams. , 1992, JAMA.

[14]  M. Durfee,et al.  Child fatality review: an international movement. , 2002, Child abuse & neglect.

[15]  R L Williams,et al.  A Note on Robust Variance Estimation for Cluster‐Correlated Data , 2000, Biometrics.