Background Many children with mental health problems do not receive professional help. Despite the frequent use of digital health interventions (DHIs) such as websites or web-based service navigation platforms, their effects on parents’ mental health literacy, help seeking, or uptake of professional services are unclear. Objective This study aims to provide a systematic review and narrative synthesis to describe whether DHIs improve the aforementioned parental outcomes. Methods Databases, including CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE OVID, PsycINFO, and PubMed (2000-2020), were accessed. Studies were included if they evaluated quantitative changes in mental health literacy, help seeking, or the uptake of services by parents of children with mental health problems. Theoretical frameworks, sample sizes, participant demographics, recruitment, interventions, DHI use, results, and health economic measures were used for data extraction. Results Of the 11,379 search results, 5 (0.04%) studies met the inclusion criteria. One randomized controlled trial found the reduced uptake of services after using a DHI coupled with a telephone coach for a child’s behavioral problem. Of 3 studies, 2 (66.7%) found statistically significant improvement in mental health literacy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder but had no control group. One study found nonsignificant improvement in mental health literacy and help-seeking attitudes toward anxiety and depression compared with those in active controls. All studies were rated as having a high or serious risk of bias. Search results were affected because of a single reviewer screening articles, overall low-quality studies, and a lack of consistent nomenclature. Conclusions There is no high-quality evidence that DHIs can improve parents’ mental health literacy, help seeking, or uptake of services. More research is needed to evaluate DHIs by using rigorous study designs and consistent measures. Trial Registration PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020130074; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020130074

Objective: Early during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Australian EDs experienced an unprecedented surge in patients seeking screening. Understanding what proportion of these patients require testing and who can be safely screened in community-based models of care is critical for workforce and infrastructure planning across the healthcare system, as well as public messaging campaigns. Methods: In this cross-sectional survey, we screened patients presenting to a COVID-19 screening clinic in a tertiary ED. We assessed the proportion of patients who met testing criteria; self-reported symptom severity; reasons why they came to the ED for screening and views on community-based care. Results: We include findings from 1846 patients. Most patients (55.3%) did not meet contemporaneous criteria for testing and most (57.6%) had mild or no (13.4%) symptoms. The main reason for coming to the ED was being referred by a telephone health service (31.3%) and 136 (7.4%) said they tried to contact their general practitioner but could not get an appointment. Only 47 (2.6%) said they thought the disease was too specialised for their general practitioner to manage. Conclusions: While capacity building in acute care facilities is an important part of pandemic planning, it is also important that patients not needing hospital level of care can be assessed and treated elsewhere. We have identified a significant proportion of people at this early stage in the pandemic who have sought healthcare at hospital but who might have been assisted in the community had services been available and public health messaging structured to guide them there.

Introduction: Early during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, Australian emergency departments (EDs) have experienced an unprecedented surge in patients seeking screening for Understanding what proportion of these patients require screening, who can be safely screened in community based models of care, and who requires an emergency departments to care for them is critical for workforce and infrastructure planning across the healthcare system, as well as public messaging campaigns.Methodss: In this cross sectional survey, we screened patients presenting to a SARS-CoV-2 screening clinic in a tertiary hospital Emergency Department in Melbourne, Australia. We assessed the proportion of patients who met screening criteria; self-reported symptom severity; reasons why they came to the ED for screening; views on community-based models of care; and sources of information accessed about COVID-19.Results: We included findings from 1846 patients who presented to the Emergency Department (ED) for COVID-19 screening from 18th to 30th March 2020. Most patients (55.3%) did not meet criteria for screening and most (57.6%) had mild or no (13.4%) symptoms. The main reason for coming to the ED was being referred by a telephone health service (31.3%) and 136 (7.4%) said they tried to contact their GP but could not get an appointment. Only 47 (2.6%) said they thought the disease was too specialized for their GP to manage. Patients accessed numerous information sources, commonly government websites (68.4%) and other websites (51.3%) for COVID-19 information.Conclusions: if we are to ensure that emergency departments can cope with the likely surge in presentations requiring resuscitation or inpatient care COVID-19, we should strengthen access to alternative services to triage patients to prevent unnecessary presentations at health services, and to direct those who are well but require screening away from EDs.