• Acad Emerg Med · Nov 2018

    Observational Study

    Evaluation of a Screening Tool for Child Sex Trafficking Among Patients With High-Risk Chief Complaints in a Pediatric Emergency Department.

    • Sheri-Ann O Kaltiso, V Jordan Greenbaum, Maneesha Agarwal, Courtney McCracken, April Zmitrovich, Elizabeth Harper, and Harold K Simon.
    • Emory School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.
    • Acad Emerg Med. 2018 Nov 1; 25 (11): 1193-1203.

    ObjectivesThe objective was to apply and evaluate a screening tool to identify victims of child sex trafficking (CST) in a pediatric emergency department (PED) population.MethodsThis prospective, observational study was conducted from July 2017 to November 2017 at the PED of a free-standing, inner-city children's hospital. Patients 10 to 18 years of age presenting with chief complaints related to high-risk social or sexual behaviors were recruited in a representative convenience sampling. A previously developed six-item screening tool was administered verbally to participants. A positive screen was defined as two positive answers from the six items. A patient was considered a "true" CST victim if any information obtained during the visit indicated that their circumstances fulfilled the federal definition of CST. Descriptive statistics were calculated for all variables of interest. CST screening tool analysis included sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV). Those patients identified as positive for CST were referred to social services and received the current standard of care.ResultsA total of 254 patients met chief complaint screening criteria and eligibility; 215 were approached to participate and 203 agreed to participate. Of the 203 participants, 100 screened positive with the tool (49%). The total number of CST victims identified was 11 (5.4%), 10 of whom screened positive. With a cutoff score of two positive answers the tool demonstrated a 90.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 58.7%-99.8%) sensitivity, 53.1% (95% CI = 45.6%-60.4%) specificity, 10.0% (95% CI = 5.0%-17.6%) PPV, and 99.0% (95% CI = 94.7%-99.9%) NPV.ConclusionsApplied to an inner-city PED population of 203 participants with high-risk chief complaints, the screening tool has high sensitivity and high NPV. This makes it appropriate for an initial screening to rule out CST in this high-risk population. Applicability for broader use and additional practice settings are warranted given the significant positivity rate among those presenting with high-risk concerns.© 2018 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…