An Intervention to Improve Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Testing Among Adolescents in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Rates of chlamydia and gonorrhea among adolescents continue to rise. We aimed to evaluate if a universal testing program for chlamydia and gonorrhea improved testing rates in an urban general pediatric clinic and an urban family medicine clinic within a system of federally qualified health care centers and evaluated the feasibility, cost, and logistic challenges of expanding implementation across 28 primary care clinics within a federally qualified health care centers system. METHODS: A universal testing quality improvement program for male and female patient 14 to 18 years old was implemented in a general pediatrics and family medicine clinic in Denver, Colorado. The intervention was evaluated by using a controlled pre-post quasi-experimental design. The difference in testing rates due to the intervention was assessed by using a difference-in-differences regression model weighted with the inverse probability of treatment. RESULTS: In total, 15 541 pediatric encounters and 5420 family medicine encounters were included in the analyses. In pediatrics, the unadjusted testing rates increased from 32.0% to 66.7% in the intervention group and from 20.9% to 28.9% in the comparison group. For family medicine, the rates increased from 38.5% to 49.9% in the intervention group and decreased from 26.3% to 24.8% in the comparison group. The intervention resulted in an adjusted increase in screening rates of 25.2% (P < .01) in pediatrics and 11.8% (P < .01) in family medicine. The intervention was well received and cost neutral to the clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Universal testing for chlamydia and gonorrhea in primary care pediatrics and family medicine is a feasible approach to improving testing rates .

Screening and Referral for Low-Income Families' Social Determinants of Health by US Pediatricians.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the frequency US pediatricians report screening and referring for social needs and identify pediatrician and practice-level predictors for screening and referral. METHODS: Data were from the American Academy of Pediatrics Periodic Survey for October 2014 to March 2015 with a response rate of 46.6% (732/1570). Respondents reported on: 1) routine screening of low-income families for social needs, 2) attitudes toward screening, and 3) referral of low-income families for community resources. Results were analyzed by pediatrician and practice characteristics. RESULTS: Although most pediatricians (61.6%) thought that screening is important, fewer (39.9%) reported that screening is feasible or felt prepared addressing families' social needs (20.2%). The topics that pediatricians reported routinely asking low-income families about at visits (defined as ≥50% visits) were need for childcare (41.5%) and transportation barriers (28.4%). Pediatricians were less likely to report asking about housing (18.7%), food (18.6%), and utilities/heating (14.0%) insecurity. In multivariable analyses, pediatricians were more likely to report both that they screen and refer when they reported having more patients in financial hardship and having someone in the practice with the responsibility to connect low-income families to community services. Pediatricians who endorsed the importance of screening and who reported being prepared were also more likely to screen/refer. CONCLUSIONS: A minority of pediatricians report routinely screening for social needs. Pediatricians were more likely to report that they screen and refer if they had positive attitudes toward the importance of screening, felt prepared, and had support staff to assist families in need.

United States Pediatricians' Attitudes Regarding Public Policies for Low-Income Children and Their Profession's Advocacy Priorities.

OBJECTIVE: To examine pediatricians' attitudes toward public policies for low-income children and the advocacy efforts for the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). METHODS: Data from the AAP Periodic Survey in October 2014 to March 2015 were used. Respondents ranked 1) attitudes toward government programs, and 2) attitudes toward AAP policies on: income support, housing, education, job training, food, and health care. Results were analyzed according to age, gender, practice location, practice region, type of practice setting, and percent of patients with economic hardship. RESULTS: Response rate was 47% (n = 650). Most respondents reported that for children, the government should guarantee health insurance (88.9%), and food and shelter (90.0%). Most also reported that the government should guarantee health insurance (68.9%) and food and shelter (63.9%) for every citizen and to take care of people who cannot take care of themselves. There was variation among the level of support on the basis of practice setting. In multivariable analyses related to supporting the role of government for children and citizens, not being from the Northeast was associated with lower odds of support of children as well as citizens; primary care practices in rural areas were less supportive of government involvement related to all citizens but similar for children; and those younger than 40 and 50 to 59 years of age were more supportive of government guaranteeing enough to eat and a place to sleep for children. More than 55% supported the AAP advocating for income support, housing, education, and access to health care. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatricians strongly support government policies that affect child poverty and the provision of basic needs to families. This support should be used to inform professional organizations, advocates, and policy-makers focused on children and families.

An Essential Role for Pediatricians: Becoming Child Poverty Change Agents for a Lifetime.

Poverty has profound and enduring effects on the health and well-being of children, as well as their subsequent adult health and success. It is essential for pediatricians to work to reduce child poverty and to ameliorate its effects on children. Pediatricians have important and needed tools to do this work: authority/power as physicians, understanding of science and evidence-based approaches, and first-hand, real-life knowledge and love of children and families. These tools need to be applied in partnership with community-based organizations/leaders, educators, human service providers, business leaders, philanthropists, and policymakers. Examples of the effects of pediatricians on the issue of child poverty are seen in Ferguson, Missouri; Denver, Colorado; and Rochester, New York. In addition, national models exist such as the American Academy of Pediatrics Community Pediatrics Training Initiative, which engages numerous pediatric faculty to learn and work together to make changes for children and families who live in poverty and to teach these skills to pediatric trainees. Some key themes/lessons for a pediatrician working to make changes in a community are to bear witness to and recognize injustice for children and families; identify an area of passion; review the evidence and gain expertise on the issue; build relationships and partnerships with community leaders and organizations; and advocate for effective solutions.

Redesigning Health Care Practices to Address Childhood Poverty.

Child poverty in the United States is widespread and has serious negative effects on the health and well-being of children throughout their life course. Child health providers are considering ways to redesign their practices in order to mitigate the negative effects of poverty on children and support the efforts of families to lift themselves out of poverty. To do so, practices need to adopt effective methods to identify poverty-related social determinants of health and provide effective interventions to address them. Identification of needs can be accomplished with a variety of established screening tools. Interventions may include resource directories, best maintained in collaboration with local/regional public health, community, and/or professional organizations; programs embedded in the practice (eg, Reach Out and Read, Healthy Steps for Young Children, Medical-Legal Partnership, Health Leads); and collaboration with home visiting programs. Changes to health care financing are needed to support the delivery of these enhanced services, and active advocacy by child health providers continues to be important in effecting change. We highlight the ongoing work of the Health Care Delivery Subcommittee of the Academic Pediatric Association Task Force on Child Poverty in defining the ways in which child health care practice can be adapted to improve the approach to addressing child poverty.

Addressing adolescent immunization disparities: a retrospective analysis of school-based health center immunization delivery.

OBJECTIVES: We compared completion rates for adolescent immunization series administered at school-based health centers (SBHCs) to completion rates for series administered at community health centers (CHCs) within a single integrated delivery system. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data from an immunization registry for patients aged 12-18 years. Patients were assigned to either an SBHC or a CHC during the study interval based on utilization. We used bivariate analysis to compare immunization series completion rates between the 2 groups and multivariate analysis to compare risk factors for underimmunization. We performed subanalyses by ages 12-15 years versus ages 16-18 years for human papillomavirus (HPV) and for the combination of HPV; tetanus, diptheria, and pertussis (Tdap); and tetravalent meningococcus virus. RESULTS: SBHC users had significantly higher completion rates (P<.001) for hepatitis B, Tdap, inactivated poliovirus, varicella, measles/mumps/rubella, and HPV for ages 16-18 years, and for the combination of HPV, Tdap, and MCV4 for ages 16-18 years. CHC users had higher completion rates for tetanus and diphtheria. CONCLUSIONS: SBHCs had higher completion rates than did CHCs for immunization series among those aged 12-18 years, despite serving a population with limited insurance coverage.

Disruptions in insurance coverage: patterns and relationship to health care access, unmet need, and utilization before enrollment in the State Children's Health Insurance Program.

BACKGROUND: The numbers and types of disruptions in insurance that children experience and the effects of these disruptions on health care measures have not been well characterized. OBJECTIVES: Our goals were to (1) describe the number and patterns of insurance disruptions within a population of children newly enrolling into the State Children's Health Insurance Program and (2) assess the relationship among insurance disruptions and sociodemographic characteristics of these children and their families to specific measures of access to care, unmet need, and health care utilization during the year before enrollment. METHODS: We conducted telephone interviews in families with children newly enrolling in the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Families reported on measures for each of the 12 months preceding enrollment. They were grouped by number of insurance disruptions in the year before enrollment: continuously uninsured, > or = 2 disruptions, 1 disruption, or continuously insured. RESULTS: Of 920 families contacted, 739 (80%) completed the interview and 710 had useable data. Thirty-five percent reported being continuously uninsured, 42% were intermittently insured (> or = 2 disruptions: 28%; 1 disruption: 14%), and 23% were continuously insured during the previous year. The most common patterns of change were between privately insured and uninsured (49%) and Medicaid and uninsured (40%). The continuously uninsured were more likely to be Hispanic and older in age. Multivariate modeling confirmed a gradient between greater insurance disruption and less access to care, less utilization, and greater unmet medical need. Using the continuously uninsured as a reference group, the adjusted odds ratio for having a medical home varied from 2.5 for those with > or = 2 disruptions to 4.5 for the continuously insured and from 1.9 to 3.2, respectively, for using any regular/routine care. The odds ratio for unmet need for a prescription medication was 0.9 for > or = 2 disruptions and 0.5 for those with continuous insurance coverage. CONCLUSIONS: There was significant disruption in insurance coverage in the year before State Children's Health Insurance Program enrollment. Most of these disruptions took the form of children previously enrolled in either Medicaid or private insurance becoming uninsured. Increasing numbers of disruptions were associated with less routine care and greater unmet medical need. These findings suggest that disruptions in insurance coverage for children should be minimized with the adoption of policies regarding continuous eligibility criteria for Medicaid and streamlining transitions between Medicaid, the State Children's Health Insurance Program, and private insurance.