ArticleThe Australian journal of rural health2026
Evaluating the Scale-Up and Sustainability of the Paediatric ESCALATION System in Country Western Australia: A Multi-Methods Study.
Article in The Australian journal of rural health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo identify factors influencing implementation and integration of the paediatric ESCALATION system in country Western Australia. SETTING AND
participantsHealth professionals (nurses and doctors) working in country Western Australia. DESIGN AND
methodsA multi-methods study using an interpretive descriptive approach guided by the Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) and Normalisation Process Theory (NPT). Data collection across six sites included patient chart audit, health professional survey and focus groups/interviews. Data were analysed descriptively (audit and survey) and thematically (focus groups/interviews).
resultsAn audit of 94 patient charts showed 61.7% met escalation of care criteria, while 69.0% of cases were escalated per policy. Among 114 survey responses, findings indicated system integration, with 95.6% reporting ESCALATION was part of their role, 93.5% agreeing it supported early detection of clinical deterioration and 93.8% reporting ease of use. Fewer identified local champions (66.7%), had confidence in others' use of the system (61.1%), reported sufficient training (69.0%), or were aware of reports demonstrating system effectiveness (55.0%). Seventy-eight health professionals participated in focus groups/interviews. Three themes were interpreted through the PRISM and NPT frameworks: (i) Enhanced patient safety (intervention characteristics and participants' perspectives; coherence; cognitive participation), (ii) Strengthening clinical decision-making (implementation and sustainability infrastructure; cognitive participation; collective action), (iii) Monitoring and fidelity (implementation and sustainability infrastructure, external; collective action; reflexive monitoring).
conclusionThe paediatric ESCALATION system is embedded and valued, but sustaining fidelity through scale-up requires ongoing training, teamwork, confident communication and organisational support across regional, rural and remote WA health services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.