Children's and parents' report of asthma education received from physicians.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical practice guidelines recommend that physicians provide asthma education to patients and their families. To characterize parents' and children's perception of physician practice, we examined: (i) proportion of parents and children reporting physician discussion of asthma education topics; (ii) age-group differences in children's report; (iii) site differences in children's and parents' report; (iv) sociodemographic and disease characteristics associated with children's report; and (v) the relation between children's report and adherence to daily controller medications. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 125 children with asthma (mean age = 11.3 years; 62% were male) and their parents. Parents provided demographic and disease data. Children reported whether physicians had ever discussed each of 16 asthma education topics with them. We used logistic regression to examine age-group and site differences in children's report of physician discussion of each topic. Multivariate linear regression was used to determine associations between demographic (e.g., child age, race) and disease (e.g., symptom severity) variables and topics discussed. RESULTS: On average, 34.7% of children reported physician discussion of a topic; 8-10-year-olds reported significantly fewer topics discussed than children aged 11 and older (p < .05). Whereas parents' report differed by practice setting, children's report did not. In multivariate analyses, child age (ß = 0.46 (SE: 0.17); p < .01), persistent symptoms (ß = 1.59 (SE: 0.80); p < .05), and number of outpatient asthma visits (ß = 0.19 (SE: 0.08); p < .05) remained significantly associated with number of topics discussed. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the majority of children either may not receive, or may not recall receiving, information from their physicians about the fundamentals of asthma management. Physicians have an invaluable teaching opportunity in the medical office visit and should consider capitalizing on this opportunity to build children's sense of self-efficacy and competence in their self-care.

Pediatricians' perspectives on the impact of MRSA in primary care: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTIs) has rapidly increased among children in primary care settings since the emergence of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA). Recent treatment recommendations emphasize CA-MRSA as the primary cause, performing incision and drainage (I&D) as the primary therapy, and not prescribing antibiotics for uncomplicated cases. It is unknown how this epidemic has impacted primary care pediatricians in terms of their practice patterns and barriers they face to providing recommended therapies. METHODS: 3 Focus groups among 29 primary care pediatricians in the San Francisco Bay Area were conducted. Transcripts were reviewed and coded into major themes by two investigators using modified grounded theory. RESULTS: Substantial changes in clinical practice have occurred since the emergence of CA-MRSA. These include increased office visits for SSTIs, patients with multiple recurrences and transmission within households. Additionally, our participants reported increased visits for mild skin problems due to media reports contributing to fears about CA-MRSA. Participants routinely prescribed antibiotics for SSTIs, however, few performed I&D. Few were aware of recent SSTI treatment recommendations. Barriers to prescribing antibiotics with CA-MRSA activity included concerns about side-effects and lack of local epidemiologic data showing that it is the primary etiology. Barriers to performing I&D included lack of training, resources and skepticism about its necessity. Important clinical challenges included increased time demands for follow-up visits and patient education along with the lack of evidence-based strategies for preventing recurrent infections and household transmission. CONCLUSION: CA-MRSA has influenced the presentation and treatment of SSTIs especially in terms of case numbers and recurrences. Barriers to providing recommended therapies can be addressed through improved dissemination of treatment guidelines and epidemiologic data. Studies are urgently needed to improve the evidence-base for treatment and prevention strategies.

Increased Medicaid Payment and Participation by Office-Based Primary Care Pediatricians.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Whether the Medicaid primary care payment increase of 2013 to 2014 changed physician participation remains unanswered amid conflicting evidence. In this study, we assess national and state-level changes in Medicaid participation by office-based primary care pediatricians before and after the payment increase. METHODS: Using bivariate statistical analysis, we compared survey data collected from 2011 to 2012 and 2015 to 2016 by the American Academy of Pediatrics from state-stratified random samples of pediatrician members. RESULTS: By 4 of 5 indicators, Medicaid participation increased nationally from 2011 and 2012 to 2015 and 2016 (n = 10 395). Those accepting at least some new patients insured by Medicaid increased 3.0 percentage points (ppts) to 77.4%. Those accepting all new patients insured by Medicaid increased 5.9 ppts to 43.3%, and those accepting these patients at least as often as new privately insured patients increased 5.7 ppts to 55.6%. The average percent of patients insured by Medicaid per provider panel increased 6.0 ppts to 31.3%. Nonparticipants dropped 2.1 ppts to 14.6%. Of the 27 studied states, 16 gained in participation by 1 or more indicators, 11 gained by 2 or more, and 3 gained by all 5. CONCLUSIONS: Office-based primary care pediatricians increased their Medicaid participation after the payment increase, in large part by expanding their Medicaid panel percentage. Continued monitoring of physician participation in Medicaid at the national and state levels is vital for guiding policy to optimize timely access to appropriate health care for >37 million children insured by Medicaid.

Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP): accomplishments, challenges, and policy recommendations.

Sixteen years ago, the 105th Congress, responding to the needs of 10 million children in the United States who lacked health insurance, created the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) as part of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Enacted as Title XXI of the Social Security Act, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP; or SCHIP as it has been known at some points) provided states with federal assistance to create programs specifically designed for children from families with incomes that exceeded Medicaid thresholds but that were insufficient to enable them to afford private health insurance. Congress provided $40 billion in block grants over 10 years for states to expand their existing Medicaid programs to cover the intended populations, to erect new stand-alone SCHIP programs for these children, or to effect some combination of both options. Congress reauthorized CHIP once in 2009 under the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act and extended its life further within provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. The purpose of this statement is to review the features of CHIP as it has evolved over the 16 years of its existence; to summarize what is known about the effects that the program has had on coverage, access, health status, and disparities among participants; to identify challenges that remain with respect to insuring this group of vulnerable children, including the impact that provisions of the new Affordable Care Act will have on the issue of health insurance coverage for near-poor children after 2015; and to offer recommendations on how to expand and strengthen the national commitment to provide health insurance to all children regardless of means.