Feasibility, Acceptability, and Health Outcomes Associated With Telehealth for Children in Families With Limited English Proficiency.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth use in pediatrics increased during the COVID-19 pandemic and may improve health care access. It may also exacerbate health care disparities among families with limited English proficiency (LEP). OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the feasibility, acceptability, and/or associations between telehealth delivery and health outcomes for interventions delivered synchronously in the United States. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, and Scopus. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Original research exploring pediatric health outcomes after telehealth delivery and studies that explored the feasibility and acceptability including surveys and qualitative studies. PARTICIPANTS: Patients 0 to 18 years with LEP and/or pediatric caregivers with LEP. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Two authors independently screened abstracts, conducted full-text review, extracted information using a standardized form, and assessed study quality. A third author resolved disagreements. RESULTS: Of 1831 articles identified, 9 were included in the review. Half of the studies explored videoconferencing and the other half studied health care delivered by telephone. Feasibility studies explored telehealth for children with anxiety disorders and mobile phone support for substance abuse treatment among adolescents. Acceptability studies assessed parental medical advice-seeking behaviors and caregivers' general interest in telehealth. Health outcomes studied included follow-up of home parenteral nutrition, developmental screening, and cognitive behavioral therapy. LIMITATIONS: The articles were heterogeneous in approach and quality. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Telehealth appears acceptable and feasible among children in families with LEP, with a limited evidence base for specific health outcomes. We provide recommendations both for the implementation of pediatric telehealth and future research. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42020204541.

Exploring Prenatal Care Quality and Access During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Pregnant Immigrants in Philadelphia Through the Lens of Community-Based Organizations.

Background: The peak of the COVID-19 pandemic led to decreased maternal and child health care engagement, especially among marginalized populations. Existing disparities in prenatal care access and quality faced by pregnant immigrant people are likely to be amplified by the pandemic. Materials and Methods: We conducted a study with direct service providers (DSPs) at community-based organizations (CBOs) serving pregnant immigrant families in the Philadelphia region. Semistructured interviews addressed barriers and facilitators to prenatal health care access and engagement among immigrant families both before and then after the onset of the pandemic in March 2020. Additional questions elicited context about the demographics of service populations, organizational connectedness to health care providers, and pandemic-related operational changes. Results: Between June and November 2021, 10 interviews were conducted in English and Spanish with DSPs at 5 CBOs. Primary themes included diminished access and quality of care received due to decreased language accessibility, increased restrictions around support persons, shifts to telemedicine, and changes to appointment scheduling. Additional themes included heightened hesitancy engaging with services due to documentation status, confusion around legal rights, financial strain, and health insurance status. Interviewees provided suggestions for improving service access during and postpandemic for immigrant pregnant people, including implementation of culturally responsive group prenatal care, institutional policies to improve understanding of legal rights, and increased financial supports. Conclusions: Understanding emergent and exacerbated barriers to prenatal care access and quality during the COVID-19 pandemic provides context for how to improve health equity for immigrant pregnant people through public health and health care policies as the pandemic continues, and once it has subsided.

Antiracism in the Field of Neonatology: A Foundation and Concrete Approaches.

Neonatal patients and families from historically marginalized and discriminated communities have long been documented to have differential access to health care, disparate health care, and as a result, inequitable health outcomes. Fundamental to these processes is an understanding of what race and ethnicity represent for patients and how different levels of racism act as social determinants of health. The NICU presents a unique opportunity to intervene with regard to the detrimental ways in which structural, institutional, interpersonal, and internalized racism affect the health of newborn infants. The aim of this article is to provide neonatal clinicians with a foundational understanding of race, racism, and antiracism within medicine, as well as concrete ways in which health care professionals in the field of neonatology can contribute to antiracism and health equity in their professional careers.

A Content Analysis Of US Sanctuary Immigration Policies: Implications For Research In Social Determinants Of Health.

Restrictive immigration policies are important social determinants of health, but less is known about the health implications and health-related content of protective immigration policies, which may also represent critical determinants of health. We conducted a content analysis of types, themes, and health-related language in 328 "sanctuary" policies enacted between 2009 and 2017 in the United States. Sanctuary policies were introduced in thirty-two states and Washington, D.C., most frequently in 2014 and 2017. More than two-thirds of policies (67.6 percent) contained language related to health, including direct references to access to services. Health-related themes commonly co-occurred with language related to supporting immigrants in communities, including themes of antidiscrimination, inclusion, trust, and privacy. Our work provides foundational, nuanced data about the scope and nature of sanctuary policies that can inform future research exploring the impacts of these policies on health and health care.

Academic careers and the COVID-19 pandemic: Reversing the tide.

The COVID-19 pandemic halted research operations at academic medical centers. This shutdown has adversely affected research infrastructure, the current research workforce, and the research pipeline. We discuss the impact of the pandemic on overall research operations, examine its disproportionate effect on underrepresented minority researchers, and provide concrete strategies to reverse these losses.

Using rising tides to lift all boats: Equity-focused quality improvement as a tool to reduce neonatal health disparities.

Evidence of health disparities affecting newborns abounds. Although quality improvement (QI) methodology is often suggested as a tool to advance health equity, the impact of QI initiatives on disparities is variable. QI work may mitigate, worsen, or perpetuate existing disparities. QI projects designed without an intentional focus on equity promotion may foster intervention-generated inequalities that further disadvantage vulnerable groups. This article reviews disparities in perinatal and neonatal care, the impact of QI on health disparities, and the concept of "Equity-Focused Quality Improvement" (EF-QI). EF-QI differs from QI with an equity lens in that it is action-oriented and centered around equity. EF-QI initiatives purposely integrate equity throughout the fabric of the project and are inclusive, collaborative efforts that foreground and address the needs of disadvantaged populations. EF-QI principles are applicable at every stage of project conception, execution, analysis, and dissemination, and may provide opportunities for reducing disparities in neonatal care.

The Health of Children in Immigrant Families: Key Drivers and Research Gaps Through an Equity Lens.

OBJECTIVE: The United States benefits economically and socially from the diverse skill-set and innovative contributions of immigrants. By applying a socioecological framework with an equity lens, we aim to provide an overview of the health of children in immigrant families (CIF) in the United States, identify gaps in related research, and suggest future areas of focus to advance health equity. METHODS: The literature review consisted of identifying academic and gray literature using a MeSH Database, Clinical Queries, and relevant keywords in 3 electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and BrowZine). Search terms were selected with goals of: 1) conceptualizing a model of key drivers of health for CIF; 2) describing and classifying key drivers of health for CIF; and 3) identifying knowledge gaps. RESULTS: The initial search produced 1120 results which were screened for relevance using a meta-narrative approach. Of these, 224 papers were selected, categorized by topic, and reviewed in collaboration with the authors. Key topic areas included patient and family outcomes, institutional and community environments, the impact of public policy, and opportunities for research. Key inequities were identified in health outcomes; access to quality health care, housing, education, employment opportunities; immigration policies; and inclusion in and funding for research. Important resiliency factors for CIF included strong family connections and social networks. CONCLUSIONS: Broad structural inequities contribute to poor health outcomes among immigrant families. While resiliency factors exist, research on the impact of certain important drivers of health, such as structural and cultural racism, is missing regarding this population. More work is needed to inform the development and optimization of programs and policies aimed at improving outcomes for CIF. However, research should incorporate expertise from within immigrant communities. Finally, interventions to improve outcomes for CIF should be considered in the context of the socioecological model which informs the upstream and downstream drivers of health outcomes.

Epidemiology and management of appendicular fractures occurring in neonatal intensive care patients.

AIM: To describe the epidemiology and management of appendicular fractures occurring in the neonatal ICU in a large series of patients treated a single, quaternary care neonatal intensive care unit. METHODS: Patients <1 years old with appendicular fractures treated from 2012 to 2016 at a quaternary-level NICU were identified. Bivariate testing compared fractures, work-up and management based on designated mechanism (presumed birth-related vs unknown). In patients with unknown mechanism, factors with potential fracture association were analysed in a descriptive fashion. RESULTS: Eighty-five fractures (54 patients) were included. Mechanistic cohorts differed by birthweight (P < .001) and gestational age at birth (P < .001). Presumed birth-related fractures were more commonly upper extremity (P < .001), solitary (P = .001) and radiographically diagnosed in the acute state (<.001). The biochemical profile of the cohorts differed significantly. The prevalence of factors with potential fracture association was high in patients with unknown mechanism. Only one patient required surgery, while all others resolved with minimal orthopaedic intervention. CONCLUSION: Findings indicate these injuries rarely require operative intervention and that two distinct injury profiles appear to exist based on fracture mechanism. Steroid use, ventilation use, diuretic use, nutritional supplementation and recent bedside procedures were common among patients without known fracture mechanism. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-Retrospective Cohort Study.

Racial/ethnic differences in maternal resilience and associations with low birthweight.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate racial/ethnic differences in maternal resilience and its associations with low birthweight (LBW). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of 3244 women surveyed in the Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health. The Add Health Resilience Instrument assessed resilience. Logistic regression models explored associations between women's resilience and risk of LBW. RESULT: Resilience scores were lowest in American Indian women. Women with the lowest resilience scores were more likely to deliver a LBW infant than highly resilient women, after adjusting for demographic and health-related factors (aOR 1.58 95% CI 1.05-2.38). The risk-adjusted rate of LBW among highly resilient Black women (15.6%) was significantly higher than the risk-adjusted rate of LBW among highly resilient white women (9.1%, p = 0.01) and highly resilient Hispanic women (8.6%, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Resilience scores differ significantly among women of different race and ethnicity but do not appear to entirely account for racial/ethnic disparities in LBW.

Resilience During Pregnancy by Race, Ethnicity and Nativity: Evidence of a Hispanic Immigrant Advantage.

The similar socioeconomic position of black and Hispanic women coupled with better birth outcomes among Hispanic women is termed the "Hispanic Paradox." However, birth outcome disparities among Hispanic women exist by maternal nativity. Persistent unequal exposure over time to stressors contributes to these disparities. We hypothesized that variation in maternal resilience to stressors also exists by race, ethnicity, and nativity. We utilized data from the Spontaneous Prematurity and Epigenetics of the Cervix study in Boston, MA (n = 771) where resilience was measured mid-pregnancy using the Connor Davidson Resilience Scale 25. We assessed resilience differences by race/ethnicity, by nativity then by race, ethnicity, and nativity together. We also assessed the risk of low resilience among foreign-born women by region of origin. We used Poisson regression to calculate risk ratios for low resilience, adjusting for maternal age, education, and insurance. Resilience did not differ significantly across race/ethnicity or by foreign-born status in the overall cohort. US-born Hispanic women were more likely to be in the low resilience tertile compared with their foreign-born Hispanic counterparts (adjusted RR 3.52, 95% CI 1.18-10.49). Foreign-born Hispanic women also had the lowest risk of being in the low resilience tertile compared with US-born non-Hispanic white women (aRR 0.33, 95% CI 0.11-0.98). Resilience did not differ significantly among immigrant women by continent of birth. Overall, foreign-born Hispanic women appear to possess a resilience advantage. Given that this group often exhibits the lowest rates of adverse birth outcomes, our findings suggest a deeper exploration of resilience among immigrant Hispanic women.

Hospital outcomes for children with severe sepsis in the USA by race or ethnicity and insurance status: a population-based, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in outcomes of adult sepsis are well described by insurance status and race and ethnicity. There is a paucity of data looking at disparities in sepsis outcomes in children. We aimed to determine whether hospital outcomes in childhood severe sepsis were influenced by race or ethnicity and insurance status, a proxy for socioeconomic position. METHODS: This population-based, retrospective cohort study used data from the 2016 database release from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Kids' Inpatient Database (KID). The 2016 KID included 3 117 413 discharges, accounting for 80% of national paediatric discharges from 4200 US hospitals across 47 states. Using multilevel logistic regression, clustered by hospital, we tested the association between race or ethnicity and insurance status and hospital mortality, adjusting for individual-level and hospital-level characteristics, in children with severe sepsis. The secondary outcome of length of hospital stay was examined through multilevel time to event (hospital discharge) regression, with death as a competing risk. FINDINGS: 12 297 children (aged 0-21 years) with severe sepsis with or without shock were admitted to 1253 hospitals in the 2016 KID dataset. 1265 (10·3%) of 12 297 patients did not have race or ethnicity data recorded, 15 (0·1%) were missing data on insurance, and 1324 (10·8%) were transferred out of hospital, resulting in a final cohort of 9816 children. Black children had higher odds of death than did White children (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·19, 95 % CI 1·02-1·38; p=0·028), driven by higher Black mortality in the south (1·30, 1·04-1·62; p=0·019) and west (1·58, 1·05-2·38; p=0·027) of the USA. We found evidence of longer hospital stays for Hispanic children (adjusted hazard ratio 0·94, 95% CI 0·88-1·00; p=0·049) and Black children (0·88, 0·82-0·94; p=0·0002), particularly Black neonates (0·53, 95% CI 0·36-0·77; p=0·0011). We observed no difference in survival between publicly and privately insured children; however, other insurance status (self-pay, no charge, and other) was associated with increased mortality (adjusted OR 1·30, 95% CI 1·04-1·61; p=0·021). INTERPRETATION: In this large, representative analysis of paediatric severe sepsis in the USA, we found evidence of outcome disparities by race or ethnicity and insurance status. Our findings suggest that there might be differential sepsis recognition, approaches to treatment, access to health-care services, and provider bias that contribute to poorer sepsis outcomes for racial and ethnic minority patients and those of lower socioeconomic position. Studies are warranted to investigate the mechanisms of poorer sepsis outcomes in Black and Hispanic children. FUNDING: None.

Retrospective development of a novel resilience indicator using existing cohort data: The adolescent to adult health resilience instrument.

BACKGROUND: Cohort studies represent rich sources of data that can be used to link components of resilience to a variety of health-related outcomes. The Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health) cohort study represents one of the largest data sets of the health and social context of adolescents transitioning into adulthood. It did not however use validated resilience scales in its data collection process. This study aimed to retrospectively create and validate a resilience indicator using existing data from the cohort to better understand the resilience of its participants. METHODS: Questions asked of participants during one Add Health data collection time period (N = 15,701) were matched to items on a well-known and widely validated resilience scale called the Connor Davidson Resilience Scale. Factor analysis and psychometric analyses were used to refine and validate this novel Adolescent to Adult Health Resilience Instrument. Construct validity utilized participants' answers to the 10 item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, which has been used to validate other resilience scales. RESULTS: Factor analysis yielded an instrument with 13 items that showed appropriate internal consistency statistics. Resilience scores in our study were normally distributed with no ceiling or floor effects. Our instrument had appropriate construct validity, negatively correlating to answers on the depression scale (r = -0.64, p<0.001). We also found demographic differences in mean resilience scores: lower resilience scores were seen among women and those who reported lower levels of education and household income. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to retrospectively construct a resilience indicator from existing cohort data and achieve good psychometric properties. The Adolescent to Adult Health Resilience Instrument can be used to better understand the relationship between resilience, social determinants of health and health outcomes among young adults using existing data, much of which is publicly available.