Description:
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Objectives</jats:title><jats:p>Children sometimes require minor procedures in the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ED</jats:styled-content> for which sedation is needed. Information from <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">V</jats:styled-content>ictorian <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">EDs</jats:styled-content> indicated that processes for paediatric procedural sedation were variable, both within and between health services. The aims of this project were to improve safety and reduce variation in practice with respect to paediatric procedural sedation in <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">EDs</jats:styled-content> by rolling out a standardised paediatric sedation programme in <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">V</jats:styled-content>ictorian <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">EDs</jats:styled-content>.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods</jats:title><jats:p>The project was managed by a clinical network with support of an expert reference group; however, implementation was conducted at the local <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ED</jats:styled-content> level. The approach was multi‐modal and grounded in quality and safety theory. It included revision of evidence‐based training materials, information sheets and risk assessment/procedure documentation forms, information on a child and family‐centred approach, a before‐and‐after clinical governance assessment, and train‐the‐trainer activities. The project was evaluated by clinical audit of cases, analysis of before‐and‐after clinical governance assessments, numbers of staff completing training and credentialing, and qualitative feedback on the programme from <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ED</jats:styled-content> staff.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>Fourteen <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">EDs</jats:styled-content> completed the project; 10 metropolitan and four regional/rural. Significant shifts in nine key clinical governance items were found, including structured training and credentialing, provision of parent information sheet, and monitoring of adverse events. The clinical audit showed >75% compliance, with seven indicators including recording of weight, fasting time and baseline observations, composition of sedation team, and documentation that discharge criteria were met. Nine hundred and seventy‐one staff were trained within the project period.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title><jats:p>This multi‐modal implementation strategy has achieved clinical practice improvement across organisational boundaries.</jats:p></jats:sec>