Peer Article Review

Name

Professor

Course

Date

Outline

I Introduction

II Body

(i)                 Details of the program

A challenge of transporting sick children in hospitals  

B operation and activities of the program  

C reducing accidents during transportation and updating the patients

(ii)               Benefits of the program

A importance of the program and parent’s choice of specialist

B details and importance of PCTN

C advantages and challenges of the initiative

(iii)             Feedback on the program

A feedback by colleagues and clients

B References availability

(iv)              Weaknesses of the article

A It is inclined towards a commercial approach

B feedback was not inclusive of other stakeholders

C Disjointed flow of ideas in the articles

(v)               Strengths of the article

A It strongly highlights an area that not many people would ordinarily explore

B highlights the importance to take charge of children who are hospitalized

III Conclusion

IV Works Cited

Peer Article Review

Introduction

            The transportation of sick children from one hospital to another is a process that has been surrounded by much little information and controversy. It has been noted that in United Kingdom around 75 percent of children being transported by teams, which were not qualified, were involved in road accidents. The article to be reviewed is about an innovative program that offers safe mode of transport for sick children from neighboring hospitals to other hospitals. The review analyzes how the main points in the article were presented with a consideration of the real life examples cited in it. The review will also consider the methodology of the research and how effective the article.

Body

Details of the program

            The article begins by describing the program as well as the transportation changes experienced over the years. Transporting sick children from ICU to another hospital or the same hospital was an enormous challenge in UK. This problem was the responsibility of the pediatric intensive care units (PICU) who had failed in preventing accidents of children in transit. The article also talks about the operations and activities of the initiative, the Pediatric Clinical Transport Nurse (PCTN) (Solomon and Clarke 123). PCTN offers multiple ways that define the activities of the pediatric intensive care units in transporting children safely. The service aims at making sure no accidents or injuries are recorded during the transfer, informing the patient on the happenings. It is necessary for hospitals to understand that patients are aware of what is happening as well as keeping a record of the dates and times of transfer.

Benefits of the program

            The article highlights the benefits that pediatric clinical transport nurse (PCTN) to the child and family. Parents are assured that if they access PCTN, their child is more likely to receive preferential treatment than if they were given normal services elsewhere. PCTN also maintains an effective communication with the family. The-planned approach, as well as the transfer, is significant in the vital activities of PCTN. In the year 2007, around 266 children were taken back to their referral hospitals. The youngest baby was four days old as the oldest one was 16 years old. The average age of most children was three (Woodward & Pearson-Shaver 38-43). Apart from the benefits, the article also highlights problems like lateness and the difficulty in obtaining ambulances.

Feedback on the program

            Soloman and Clarke give the feedback on the PCTN programme by using the regular response by former clients as well as colleagues. In general, the PCTN program has been received positive comments that show the professionalism and hospitality offered by PCTN employees is very effective in handling emergencies. The article also shows the references used which were easy to locate and read extensively.

Weaknesses of the article

Overall, the article was adequately written. However, there are a few issues in the paper. It is easy to read and understand as the meaning of acronyms used has been explained. The article seems to be written for individuals who have limited knowledge on UK medical program. The author of the article did a splendid job in breaking down the points with subheadings at the beginning. The article starts with the summary and then goes to the introduction part, service, and the child as well as family (Doyle and FE 176).The whole article however, took a commercial approach in describing what PCTN is and what the benefits are. This brought out the article more as a marketing strategy than an academic publication. The feedback section of the article did not consider other professional stakeholders that would have given a more objective feedback.

Despite this factor, I have some issues with the mechanism used in writing of the article. This article has disjointed flow of ideas. The advantages as well as disadvantages should have followed each other. They are separated by elements that have nothing to do with the advantages as well as disadvantages of the initiative. If I were to write the article, I would have started with the summary, then the introduction. This would be followed by description of how the sector was prior to the implementation of the service. The description of service and the definition of service and its operations need to be stated. The service has transformed the medical industry together with the advantages as well as disadvantages. These pros and cons for the child and family should be indicated as well.

Strengths of the article

            Generally, my view on this article is that it is unique and informative. It focuses on a niche that few people have explored satisfactorily. Most people, I included, are concerned with the care of a child in hospital. This includes the transportation involved to the hospital and after discharge. The article explains the importance of safely transporting the children after they are done with being hospitalized. Through the review of this article, I have summarized on what the article talks about. The article also provides detailed academic information on the technical procedures involved in PCTN (Berkenbosch & Campbell 2012). The examples used are fully discussed, how the research was carried out and its effectiveness. My view on this subject of discussion is that it powerful as it takes care of the child. People should not only read this article but also other related articles (Fortune and Playfor 234). It is a common phenomenon for many individuals to be of immense concern for their own children, when they are hospitalized due to unspecialized hospital attendants given charge of the children.

Conclusion

            The vulnerability of children during the transportation process can be considered as an unattended concern in the United Kingdom. Children are a vital part of the country’s future and care should be taken to provide them with proper healthcare. The efforts by health professionals to create an innovation such as the Pediatric Clinical Transport Nurse will go a long way in reducing child mortality rates in the UK (Ajizian & Nakagawa 2012). Such initiatives should be emulated by other health institutions and public watchdogs that are in a position to support it.

For a medical article addressing child safety, Solomon and Clarke failed to include many real life examples. The examples that are discussed in the box among them are central nervous system, respiratory, genetics, cardiac, and surgical. It could have been more effective having throughout this article, a number of examples than only in one part of the article. It could even be better off with examples on incidents that children got themselves in before implementation of this program. They should be clearer on their statement through more specified and fully discussed examples on the incidents, which have occurred over the past years. The importance of establishing this program should be explained to all persons and make all the concerned individuals understand the benefits of the program.

Works Cited

Ajizian S. J., MD & Nakagawa T. A.  MD. “Interfacility Transport of the Critically Ill Pediatric Patient”. Chest. 141 (6).Web. accessed on 14^th June 2012.

Berkenbosch J. W. and Campbell D. R. “Impact of a Nurse-Directed Rapid Response Team on RRT Acceptability and Out-of-ICU Arrest Frequency in a Tertiary Care Children’s Hospital” Chest. 138 (4).Web. accessed on 14^th June, 2012

Cray, SH, and CM Heard. “Transport for Pediatric Intensive Care. Measuring the Performance     of a Specialist Transport Service.” Pediatric Anaesthesia. 5.5 (1995): 287-92. Print.

Doyle, YG, and FE Orr. “Interhospital Transport to Pediatric Intensive Care by Specialized          Staff: Experience of the South Thames Combined Transport Service, 1998-2000.”      Archives of Disease in Childhood. 87.3 (2002): 245-7. Print.

Fortune, P.M, and S Playfor. “Transporting Critically Ill Children.” Anaesthesia & Intensive         Care Medicine. 10.10 (2009): 510-513. Print.

Perez, A, WW Butt, KJ Millar, D Best, T Thiruchelvam, AD Cochrane, M Bennett, and LS          Shekerdemian. “Long-distance Transport of Critically Ill Children on Extracorporeal Life Support in Australia.” Critical Care and Resuscitation: Journal of the Australasian      Academy of Critical Care Medicine. 10.1 (2008). Print.

Solomon, J, and D Clarke. “Safe Transport from a Specialist Pediatric Intensive Care Unit to a     ReferralHospital the Role of the Pediatric Transport Nurse Is Crucial in Supporting   Critically Ill Children and Their Families.” Pediatric Nursing. 21.10 (2009): 30-34.         Print.

Thiruchelvam, T, KJ Millar, M Bennett, WW Butt, D Best, AD Cochrane, A Perez, and LS          Shekerdemian. “Long Distance Transport of Critically Ill Children on Extracorporeal Life Support in Australia.” Critical Care and Resuscitation. 10.1 (2008): 30-4. Print.

Woodward, GA & Pearson-Shaver, Al, “The state of pediatric interfacility transport: consensus of the Second National Pediatric and Neonatal Interfacility Transport Medicine Leadership Conference”. Pediatr Emerg Care 2002; 18, 38-43. Web. accessed on 14^th June, 2012