Foster care issues in general pediatrics.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This study highlights recent publications on foster care, focusing on concerns for the general pediatrician, including risk factors for foster care placement, outcomes of foster care, healthcare and screening standards, and developmental and mental health problems. RECENT FINDINGS: Many children and youth in foster care have been exposed to complex trauma prior to foster care placement. As clinicians gain a greater understanding of the life experiences of children in foster care, more preventive and supportive efforts can be implemented in the clinical setting, specifically around health and mental health issues. Enhanced awareness of the issues would enable healthcare professionals to advocate effectively for the needs of children in the child welfare system. To address the complex health and socio-emotional needs of children in foster care, several healthcare models and innovative programs for the care of children in foster care have been developed. This literature review for the past year suggests a lack in program evaluation of these efforts. SUMMARY: Pediatricians have the opportunity to address physical and mental health issues for children in foster care, and can provide anticipatory guidance to foster and biological parents who bring their children for evaluation.

Community pediatrics: gender differences in perspectives of residents.

OBJECTIVE: The Future of Pediatric Education II Report affirmed the importance of providing resident education in community settings. Yet we know little about related experiences of trainees and whether experiences and perspectives regarding community involvement vary by gender. We assessed gender differences in pediatric residents' involvement in and perspectives regarding community activities. METHODS: A national survey of US pediatric residents assessed residents' involvement in 14 activities before medical school and the intensity and perceived importance of involvement in 17 activities during medical school and residency. Expected future involvement 10 years hence was assessed for 11 community settings. chi2 and analysis of variance were used to examine bivariate relations by gender. Multivariate linear regression was used to model the relationship between gender and expected future involvement. RESULTS: Of the 700 respondents, 68% were women. Relative to men, more women reported exposure to child health advocacy and other community activities before and during medical school. Women and men reported similar involvement in residency, although women placed greater importance on inclusion of 16 of 17 community activities in their training. Female residents were more likely to report that current training in the community would influence their future career activities. Women anticipated greater future involvement in 6 of 11 settings. In adjusted analyses, gender remained associated with future involvement in 5 settings. CONCLUSIONS: As women come to comprise an increasing proportion of the pediatric workforce, further efforts are needed to understand the impact of gender on future involvement in community child health activities.

Pediatrician practices regarding referral to early intervention services: is an established diagnosis important?

OBJECTIVE: Early intervention (EI) programs provide services to children with developmental conditions, regardless of whether such children have an underlying medical diagnosis. We aim to (1) Determine the proportion of general pediatricians who believe an established diagnosis is important when considering EI referral; and (2) Determine whether this perception is associated with lower reported likelihood of referral. METHODS: Mailed survey to random sample of pediatricians. We used multivariable logistic regression to study the association between the perception that a medical diagnosis is important when referring to EI, and the reported likelihood of EI referral for children with common developmental conditions. RESULTS: Response rate was 55% (894 of 1617). A total of 64% of respondents considered an established diagnosis important for EI referral. Likelihood of referral for delayed speech was lower among those who considered a diagnosis important than among those who did not (77% vs 87%; P = .02). Similar patterns held for global delay (91% vs 97%; P = .02), loss of developmental milestones (80% vs 88%; P = .03), and parental concern for inappropriate development (45% vs 60%; P = .002). In multivariable models, perception of the importance of an established diagnosis was associated with lower likelihood of referral for children with delayed speech (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-0.87) and for parental concern for inappropriate development (aOR 0.46; 95% CI 0.30-0.72). CONCLUSIONS: A majority of general pediatricians believe that an established diagnosis is important when considering EI referral. This perception is associated with decreased reported referral for children with speech delay and those whose parents express concern for inappropriate development.

Psychopathology as a predictor of medical service utilization for youth in residential treatment.

Rising health care costs have led to an emphasis on identifying factors that contribute to medical service utilization. Previous research has suggested an association between youth psychopathology and service utilization; however, prospective studies among high-risk populations are needed. The current study examined youth psychopathology as a predictor of subsequent medical service utilization among a large sample (N = 536) of youth entering residential treatment. Youth psychopathology and medical status were assessed at intake, and medical service utilization was tracked across the duration of the residential placement. Results indicated that higher levels of psychopathology predicted greater youth medical service utilization, even after controlling for the presence of a diagnosed medical condition. Internalizing problems was a significant independent predictor of utilization, but externalizing problems was not. These findings highlight the association between mental health and medical service utilization and suggest that effective behavioral health services may be helpful in reducing costly medical service needs.

Prevalence of physical health problems among youth entering residential treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence of physical health problems among youth entering residential treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The sample included 1744 youth (mean age: 14.6 ± 1.8 years) entering a large residential treatment program between 2000 and 2010. Youth received an intake medical evaluation, including a review of available records, detailed medical history, and physical examination. Medical conditions present at the time of the evaluation were recorded by the examining physician and later coded by the research team. Only diagnoses recognized by the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, were included in the analyses. To maintain the focus on physical health problems, behavioral and emotional disorders listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision were excluded. Obesity, acne, and allergies were also excluded. RESULTS: Approximately one-third (33.7%) of youth had a physical health diagnosis at the time of intake. Asthma was the most prevalent condition diagnosed (15.3% of the sample). Girls were significantly more likely to have a diagnosis than were boys (37.1% vs 31.5%). Age was not associated with diagnostic status. Rates of physical health conditions differed significantly by ethnicity: black (36.4%) and white (35.4%) youth had the highest rates, and Hispanic youth (23.2%) had the lowest. CONCLUSIONS: Youth who enter residential treatment have high rates of physical health conditions. These problems could complicate mental health treatment and should be considered in multidisciplinary treatment planning.

Pediatricians' perspectives regarding community child health: training, involvement, and expectations according to age.

OBJECTIVE: There are increasing opportunities for pediatricians to promote children's health through community involvement during and after residency training. Little is known about whether younger relative to established pediatricians have different experiences regarding community activities. In this study we examined whether pediatricians' training, perspectives, and involvement in community activities vary by age. METHODS: Eight hundred seventy-six pediatricians participated in a national, random-sample, mailed periodic survey of US members of the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2004 (response rate: 58%). Chi2 statistics and median tests were used to measure associations of age (< or = 34, 35-39, 40-50, and > or = 51 years) with training, perspectives, and involvement. RESULTS: Younger pediatricians reported more training in community child health during and before residency but were less likely to be involved currently (37.9% for < or = 34 years, 44.4% for 35-39 years, 46.2% for 40-50 years, 48.3% for > or = 51 years). They were more likely to report that their current involvement was too little versus just right or too much (81.3%, 73.5%, 60.7%, and 47.1%, respectively). Younger pediatricians were more willing to spend > or = 1 hour/month on community child health activities (95.0%, 91.2%, 89.7%, and 85.4%, respectively). Younger versus older pediatricians were more likely to sense moderate or greater responsibility for improving children's health in their community (83.6%, 77.2%, 76.7%, and 70.2%, respectively) and expected their community work to increase during the next 5 years (80.0%, 67.5%, 59.7%, and 40.1%, respectively). Age findings persisted when adjusted for gender. CONCLUSIONS: Although practice constraints may limit community involvement, younger pediatricians anticipated growing participation in community activities. Longitudinal studies are needed to determine whether such expectations are realized.

American Academy of Pediatrics Newborn Screening Task Force recommendations: how far have we come?

The partnership of the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)/Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) for improving health care for all children has long been recognized. In 1998, the establishment of the Newborn Screening Task Force marked a major initiative in addressing the needs of the newborn screening system. At the request of HRSA/MCHB, the AAP convened the task force to ensure that pediatric clinicians assumed a leadership role in examining the totality of the newborn screening system, including the necessary linkage to medical homes. The task force's report, published in 2000, outlined major recommendations for federal, state, and other national partners in addressing the identified barriers and needed enhancements of the care delivery system. Today, manifestations of the task force's recommendations are evident, many of which occurred under the leadership of HRSA/MCHB and the AAP. These activities are detailed in this article, with a discussion of future progression toward a quality, consistent, coordinated system of care for children identified with positive newborn screening results, their families, and the child health professionals who care for them.

Pediatricians' reported practices regarding developmental screening: do guidelines work? Do they help?

BACKGROUND: In 2001, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) adopted a policy that all infants and young children should be screened for developmental delays at regular intervals. The policy statement promoted the use of valid reliable instruments. It is unknown, however, what proportion of pediatricians follow this recommendation and whether such a practice is associated with improved identification of children with developmental difficulties. OBJECTIVES: To describe the use of developmental screening tests among board-certified pediatricians practicing general pediatrics and to determine the association between standardized screening and the self-reported identification of children with developmental difficulties. METHODS: We mailed a survey to a random sample of AAP members. We used multivariate logistic/linearregression analyses to determine the association between standardized screening and the self-reported identification of children with developmental disabilities. RESULTS: Of the 1617 surveys mailed, 894 were returned, for a response rate of 55%. Of the respondents, 646 practiced general pediatrics and were included in the analysis. Seventy-one percent of those pediatricians indicated that they almost always used clinical assessment without an accompanying screening instrument to identify children with developmental delays. Only 23% indicated that they used a standardized screening instrument. The most commonly used instrument was the Denver II. Logistic regression modeling demonstrated odds ratios between 1.71 and 1.90 for a >10% rate of identification of developmental problems among patients of pediatricians reporting standardized screening. Each adjusted odds ratio bordered on statistical significance. Linear-regression models estimating the difference in mean proportions of children identified with developmental problems across screening groups failed to show a statistically or clinically significant difference in physician-reported identification rates. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that, despite the AAP policy and national efforts to improve developmental screening in the primary care setting, few pediatricians use effective means to screen their patients for developmental problems. It is uncertain whether standardized screening, as it is practiced currently, is associated with an increase in the self-reported identification of children with developmental disabilities.

The "every child deserves a medical home" training program: more than a traditional continuing medical education course.

OBJECTIVES: 1) To develop and implement an innovative, interactive, and nontraditional continuing medical education (CME) curriculum to educate primary care physicians, pediatric office staff, child health advocates, allied health care professionals, and parents of children with special health care needs (CSHCN) about the medical home concept of care and 2) to identify key partners in communities to plan the CME program and ultimately plan for fostering medical homes at the community and state levels. METHODS: Participant outcomes for the CME program and planning process include 1) explaining the elements of the medical home concept as applied to their practice environment or child's care; 2) understanding the concepts, skills, and information necessary to care successfully for CSHCN who are enrolled in managed care organizations; 3) accurately describing trends and developments in caring for CSHCN; 4) identifying programs in the community that serve CSHCN; and 5) assessing and, if necessary, improving pediatric office practices to ensure that they are sensitive to families of children and youths with special health care needs. CONCLUSION: A diverse national committee that included physicians, nonphysicians, and family members developed the Medical Home Training Program curriculum. The medical home curriculum was written to meet the needs of the local community. The training program can offer CME credit and use a direct, outcome-based adult learning technique (eg, determine short- and long-term goals). Furthermore, the program parallels and complements the Healthy People 2010 goals and objectives.

Examination of the communication practices between state newborn screening programs and the medical home.

BACKGROUND: As outlined in the Newborn Screening Task Force report published in August 2000, the newborn screening system is more than just testing, but also involves follow-up, diagnosis, treatment, and evaluation. As such, multiple professional and public partners need to be adequately involved in the system to help ensure success. In addition, newborn screening programs are state-based; therefore, policies and procedures vary from state to state. Historically, there has been little uniformity between state newborn screening programs. OBJECTIVE: To examine the communication practices of state newborn screening programs in the United States, particularly in relation to the medical home. METHODS: A facsimile survey of program staff in all US newborn screening programs. Survey data were collected in August 2000. RESULTS: All 51 programs participated. States were questioned about whether or not they had a procedure to identify the infant's medical home before the child's birth. Twelve states (24%) indicated that there was a procedure in place, whereas 39 states (76%) indicated that either no procedure existed or that they were unsure. In contrast, all state programs (except 1) indicated they notified the primary care physician about abnormal results and the need for follow-up. In addition, state programs reported that primary care physicians have responsibilities within the newborn screening system, particularly related to communicating with parents about screen-positive results and coordinating the collection of a second specimen. Thirty states reported that they directly notified parents of screen-positive infants of results and the need for follow-up as well. In regard to informing parents about newborn screening, 45% of states indicated that primary care physicians had some responsibility in informing parents about newborn screening. Most often, parents were informed about newborn screening just before specimen collection, and the most commonly used techniques to educate parents were informational brochures and conversation. Thirty-five states reported that they engaged in long-term tracking of infants after diagnosis confirmation. Only about half of these states provided long-term tracking of all of the conditions included in their state's newborn screening test panel. Of these 35 states that engaged in long-term tracking, 25 reported that they requested patient information from the primary care physician and/or subspecialist about ongoing treatment and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Newborn screening roles and responsibilities vary tremendously between states. Improvements in communication and better-defined protocols are needed, particularly between state newborn screening programs and the medical home. Many states identified the medical home as having significant responsibilities related to the short-term follow-up of screen-positive infants. Identification of the correct medical home before testing would help to reduce unnecessary time and frustration for state newborn screening programs, especially in the follow-up of infants that are difficult to locate. In addition, primary care physicians (ie, the medical home) need to have appropriate and ongoing involvement, including a mechanism to provide feedback to their state newborn screening program. This is particularly important given the adoption of tandem mass spectrometry by an increasing number of states, and the likely expansion of newborn screening in the future. Recommendations include the following: Primary care physicians should have appropriate and ongoing involvement in the newborn screening system and should be appropriately represented on state newborn screening advisory committees. States should develop protocols to identify the medical home before heelstick screening. States should work with families, primary care physicians, and prenatal health care professionals to develop well-defined systems for pretesting education of parents. All newborn screening results (both positive and negative) should be sent to the infant's medical home. If results are not received by the medical home, efforts should be made to obtain results. Medical homes and subspecialists should submit follow-up information on screen-positive infants and infants with confirmed diagnoses to the state newborn screening program, regardless of the existence of state requirements to do so, and efforts to build enhanced direct communication systems, linking state newborn screening programs to community-based medical homes, should continue.