Advertisement

Spanish-Speaking Caregivers’ Experience with an Emergency Department Pediatric Asthma-Care Bundle Quality Initiative

  • Claritsa Santos MalavéEmail author
  • Dominique Diggs
  • Esther M. Sampayo
Article

Abstract

Most pediatric emergency departments’ (ED) quality improvement (QI) initiatives for asthma aim to standardize care based on the priorities of healthcare providers. Perceptions and priorities of the caregiver rarely are addressed, especially in families with limited English-language proficiency. We explored Spanish-speaking caregivers’ perceptions, understandings, and barriers with the care they received for asthma, after exposure to an ED asthma-care bundle. This qualitative study was part of a larger QI initiative on Spanish-speaking caregivers of patients presenting to a children’s hospital ED with an asthma exacerbation. Patients were exposed to an asthma-care bundle, which included timely administration of medication, home dose of medications, an educational intervention, asthma action plans (AAPs), and discharge instructions. Through semi-structured interviews and qualitative analyses, we assessed the perceptions, understandings, and barriers caregivers reported during their ED experience. From January 2015 to October 2016, 492 patients received AAPs in the ED. Of 128 families that preferred Spanish, 88 (69%) received a Spanish AAP, 41 (32%) received Spanish discharge instructions, and 34 (27%) received discharge materials in both languages. Thirteen families were interviewed. Three themes emerged regarding the caregivers’ perceived barriers: (1) need for improved accessibility to medication, primary care, and insurance; (2) communication barriers, such as timeliness, availability of interpreters, and need for resources in their preferred language; and (3) uncertainty about the child’s diagnosis and acuity. Incorporating the caregivers’ perspectives into QI projects may yield valuable information when developing new interventions. In the ED, improving accessibility to interpreters and providing discharge materials in their preferred language, as well as addressing misconceptions about asthma, may enhance caregivers’ satisfaction.

Keywords

Asthma Limited English proficiency Education Quality initiative Qualitative analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Dr. Lee Ligon of the Center for Research, Innovation, and Scholarship (CRIS), Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, for editorial assistance.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

This manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under submission elsewhere.

There are no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Each author participated in the development of this manuscript, including development and implementation of methods, analysis of data, and preparation of the manuscript. All authors have reviewed the submitted manuscript and approve the manuscript for submission.

Supplementary material

40615_2019_564_MOESM1_ESM.docx (9 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 8 kb)
40615_2019_564_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (281 kb)
ESM 2 (PDF 280 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Riera A, Ocasio A, Tiyyagura G, Krumeich L, Ragins K, Thomas A, et al. Latino caregiver experiences with asthma health communication. Qual Health Res. 2015;25(1):16–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Flores G, Tomany-Korman S. The language spoken at home and disparities in medical and dental health, access to care, and use of services in US children. Pediatrics. 2008;121(6):e1703–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ryan C. Language use in the United States: 2015: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Asthma prevalence, health care use, and mortality, United States 2005–2009. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2011. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/asthma/nchs.html. Accessed March 23, 2016.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wisnivesky JP, Kattan M, Evans D, Leventhal H, Musumeci-Szabó TJ, McGinn T, et al. Assessing the relationship between language proficiency and asthma morbidity among inner-city asthmatics. Med Care. 2009;47(2):243–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Riera A, Navas-Nazario A, Shabanova V, Vaca FE. The impact of limited English proficiency on asthma action plan use. J Asthma. 2014;51(2):178–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chan KS, Keeler E, Schonlau M, Rosen M, Mangione-Smith R. How do ethnicity and primary language spoken at home affect management practices and outcomes in children and adolescents with asthma? Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2005;159(3):283–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Archibald MM, Caine V, Ali S, Hartling L, Scott SD. What is left unsaid: an interpretive description of the information needs of parents of children with asthma. Res Nurs Health. 2015;38(1):19–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    US Census Bureau, 2012 Population estimation program. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/. Accessed March 27, 2016.
  10. 10.
    Levy JI, Brugge D, Peters JL, Clougherty JE, Saddler SS. A community-based participatory research study of multifaceted in-home environmental interventions for pediatric asthmatics in public housing. Soc Sci Med. 2006;63(8):2191–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shin HB, Kominsky RA. Language use in the United States: 2007. American Community Survey Reports, ACS-12. 2010; Retrieved from www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/acs-12.pdf. Accessed 1 Nov 2015.
  12. 12.
    NVivo qualitative data analysis software; QSR International Pty Ltd.. Version 10, 2012.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brikci N, Green J. A guide to using qualitative research methodology. Pg. 1–36. http://www.alnap.org/resource/13024. Accessed 1 Nov 2015.
  14. 14.
    Marshall C and Rossman GB. Designing qualitative research. 5th Edition. Sage Publications. 2011; Pg. 220–221.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ezzy D. Qualitative Analysis: Practice and innovation. London: Routledge; 2002. p. 86–9.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Samuels-Kalow ME, Stack AM, Porter SC. Effective discharge communication in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 2012;60(2):152–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Poureslami I, Rootman I, Doyle-Waters MM, Nimmon L, FitzGerald JM. Health literacy, language, and ethnicity-related factors in newcomer asthma patients to Canada: a qualitative study. J Immigr Minor Health. 2011;13(2):315–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Friend M, Morrison A. Interventions to improve asthma management of the school-age child. Clin Pediatr. 2015;54(6):534–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bloch SA, Bloch AJ. Using video discharge instructions as an adjunct to standard written instructions improved caregivers’ understanding of their child’s emergency department visit, plan, and follow-up: a randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2013;29(6):699–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McKee M, Paasche-Orlow M. Health literacy and the disenfranchised: the importance of collaboration between limited English proficiency and health literacy researchers. J Health Commun. 2012;17(Suppl 3):7–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chenail RJ. Interviewing the investigator: strategies for addressing instrumentation and researcher bias concerns in qualitative research. Qual Rep. 2011;16(1):255–62.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© W. Montague Cobb-NMA Health Institute 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claritsa Santos Malavé
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dominique Diggs
    • 1
  • Esther M. Sampayo
    • 1
  1. 1.Baylor College of MedicineTexas Children’s HospitalHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations