METHODS: We systematically searched three main electronic databases in May 2023 for all English-language qualitative and quantitative publications that suggested or described at least one QI related to pediatric asthma care in the ED. Two reviewers independently selected the included studies and extracted data on study characteristics, all relevant QIs reported, and the rates of compliance with these indicators when available. The identified QIs were classified according to Donabedian healthcare quality framework and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) framework. When feasible, we aggregated the compliance rates for the QIs reported in observational studies using random effects models. The quality assessment of the included studies was performed using various Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tools.
RESULTS: We identified twenty studies, including six expert panels, 13 observational studies, and one trial. Together, these studies presented 129 QIs for use in EDs managing pediatric asthma. Among these QIs, 66 were pinpointed by expert panel studies, whereas 63 were derived from observational studies. Within the Donabedian framework, most indicators (86.8%) concentrated on the process of care. In contrast, within the Institute of Medicine (IOM) domain, the predominant focus was on indicators related to effectiveness and safety. Observational studies reported varying compliance rates for the 36 QIs identified in the expert studies. The included studies showed a wide range of bias risks, suggesting potential methodological variances.
CONCLUSIONS: A significant number of QIs in pediatric asthma care have been proposed or documented in literature. Although most of these indicators prioritize the process of care, there is a conspicuous absence of outcome and structure indicators. This meta-analysis uncovered significant disparities in compliance to the identified QIs, highlighting the urgent necessity for targeted interventions to enhance pediatric asthma care in ED.