Erratum in West J Emerg Med. 2019 May;20(3):537. Pediatric BETA Consensus Guideline Working Group members should not be included in full author list. The author list has now been corrected on this erratum.

Introduction Agitation in children and adolescents in the emergency department (ED) can be dangerous and distressing for patients, family and staff. We present consensus guidelines for management of agitation among pediatric patients in the ED, including non-pharmacologic methods and the use of immediate and as-needed medications. Methods Using the Delphi method of consensus, a workgroup comprised of 17 experts in emergency child and adolescent psychiatry and psychopharmacology from the the American Association for Emergency Psychiatry and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Emergency Child Psychiatry Committee sought to create consensus guidelines for the management of acute agitation in children and adolescents in the ED. Results Consensus found that there should be a multimodal approach to managing agitation in the ED, and that etiology of agitation should drive choice of treatment. We describe general and specific recommendations for medication use. Conclusion These guidelines describing child and adolescent psychiatry expert consensus for the management of agitation in the ED may be of use to pediatricians and emergency physicians who are without immediate access to psychiatry consultation.

Objective: A consortium of 8 academic child and adolescent psychiatry programs in the United States and Canada examined their pivot from inperson, clinic-based services to home-based telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aims were to document the transition across diverse sites and to present recommendations for future telehealth service planning. Method: Consortium sites completed a Qualtrics survey assessing site characteristics, telehealth practices, service use, and barriers to and facilitators of telehealth service delivery prior to (pre) and during the early stages of (post) the COVID-19 pandemic. The design is descriptive. Results: All sites pivoted from in-person services to home-based telehealth within 2 weeks. Some sites experienced delays in conducting new intakes, and most experienced delays establishing teleÀgroup therapy. No-show rates and use of telephony versus videoconferencing varied by site. Changes in telehealth practices (eg, documentation requirements, safety protocols) and perceived barriers to telehealth service delivery (eg, regulatory limitations, inability to bill) occurred preÀ/postÀCOVID-19. Conclusion: A rapid pivot from in-person services to home-based telehealth occurred at 8 diverse academic programs in the context of a global health crisis. To promote ongoing use of home-based telehealth during future crises and usual care, academic programs should continue documenting the successes and barriers to telehealth practice to promote equitable and sustainable telehealth service delivery in the future.

There was a dosing error in Table 2 regarding haloperidol dosing in pediatric agitation. The dose is listed as 0.55 mg/kg/dose and should be corrected to 0.05-0.1 mk/kg/dose.

No abstract