Pediatric Care Provided at Urgent Care Centers in the United States

2016 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Wilkinson ◽  
Robert P. Olympia ◽  
Jennifer Dunnick ◽  
Jodi Brady
2020 ◽  
Vol 272 (4) ◽  
pp. 548-553
Author(s):  
Walter R. Hsiang ◽  
Daniel Wiznia ◽  
Laurie Yousman ◽  
Michael Najem ◽  
Alison Mosier-Mills ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 298-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Dunnick ◽  
Robert P. Olympia ◽  
Robert Wilkinson ◽  
Jodi Brady

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1981 ◽  
Vol 68 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-368
Author(s):  
Pat Azarnoff ◽  
Patricia D. Woody

To study the prevalence and nature of psychological preparation for pediatric care, children's hospitals and acute care general hospitals were surveyed, and 24 hospitals were visited. Of 1,427 hospitals responding, 468 (33%) provided regular, planned preparation services. Prior to hospitalization, group tours and group discussion were the two most frequently used methods. During hospitalization, children learned informally as events occurred, usually through conversations.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1959 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 369-370

A STUDY of the general practitioners' opinions about that portion of their practice devoted to pediatrics is the subject of a recent report. In view of the fact that the great majority of pediatric care in the United States is provided by general practitioners, this report is of interest to pediatricians as well as general practitioners. In this study, approximately 125 general practitioners living in the state of Washington were interviewed. All of them had graduated from medical school after 1950. The data obtained showed that the proportion of general practice devoted to pediatrics in 1957 was virtually identical to that reported in the survey made by the Academy of Pediatrics in 1948. In 1948, one-third of the general practitioners' patients were children; the figure obtained in 1957 was 34%.


2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 599-603 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colton Margus ◽  
Ritu R. Sarin ◽  
Michael Molloy ◽  
Gregory R. Ciottone

AbstractIntroduction:In 2009, the Institute of Medicine published guidelines for implementation of Crisis Standards of Care (CSC) at the state level in the United States (US). Based in part on the then concern for H1N1 pandemic, there was a recognized need for additional planning at the state level to maintain health system preparedness and conventional care standards when available resources become scarce. Despite the availability of this framework, in the years since and despite repeated large-scale domestic events, implementation remains mixed.Problem:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) rejuvenates concern for how health systems can maintain quality care when faced with unrelenting burden. This study seeks to outline which states in the US have developed CSC and which areas of care have thus far been addressed.Methods:An online search was conducted for all 50 states in 2015 and again in 2020. For states without CSC plans online, state officials were contacted by email and phone. Public protocols were reviewed to assess for operational implementation capabilities, specifically highlighting guidance on ventilator use, burn management, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, pediatric standards, and reliance on influenza planning.Results:Thirty-six states in the US were actively developing (17) or had already developed (19) official CSC guidance. Fourteen states had no publicly acknowledged effort. Eleven of the 17 public plans had updated within five years, with a majority addressing ventilator usage (16/17), influenza planning (14/17), and pediatric care (15/17), but substantially fewer addressing care for burn patients (9/17).Conclusion:Many states lacked publicly available guidance on maintaining standards of care during disasters, and many states with specific care guidelines had not sufficiently addressed the full spectrum of hazard to which their health care systems remain vulnerable.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document