Child Health Needs and the Adolescent Medicine Workforce Supply: 2020-2040.

Adolescent medicine (AM) subspecialists provide primary, subspecialty, and consultative care to adolescents and young adults (AYAs). Given insufficient numbers of AM subspecialists to care for all AYAs, the workforce supports AYAs health care capacity through education, research, advocacy, and the development of policies and programs sensitive to their unique needs. A modeling project funded by the American Board of Pediatrics Foundation was developed to forecast the pediatric subspecialty workforce in the United States from 2020 to 2040 on the basis of current trends in each subspecialty. The model predicts workforce supply at baseline and across alternative scenarios, and reports results in headcount and headcount adjusted for percentage of time spent in clinical care, termed "clinical workforce equivalent." For the AM subspecialty, several scenarios were considered that modified the number of fellows and/or clinical time. The baseline model predicted low growth nationally (27% and 13% increase in total AM subspecialists and AM subspecialists per 100 000 children, respectively) and declines in AM workforce relative to population growth in census divisions with existing geographic workforce disparities. In the alternative scenarios, fellow number and clinical time changes did not significantly change predictions relative to the baseline model, but a 12.5% decrease in fellows predicted a 40% reduction in the workforce from baseline with a widening of geographic workforce disparities. On the basis of the expansive clinical and nonclinical roles of AM subspecialists and these forecasted workforce challenges, significant educational, practice, and policy changes will be necessary to bolster the supply of well-trained clinicians addressing the dynamic health care needs of AYAs.

Menstrual management and reproductive concerns in adolescent and young adult women with underlying hematologic or oncologic disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Heavy menstrual bleeding is common among adolescent and young adult women, and can affect health-related quality of life. The cause of heavy menstrual bleeding is not uncommonly because of an underlying hematologic or oncologic disease process, which substantially influences the way patients are counseled and treated. RECENT FINDINGS: Options for menstrual management are more numerous today than ever before and range from minimizing monthly blood loss to suppressing the cycle altogether. However, an underlying bleeding disorder or malignancy can introduce many nuances and limits in individual patient care, which this review highlights. Additionally, because survival rates for adolescent and young adult cancers are improving, more of these patients are planning for lives after their disease, which may include starting or adding to a family. Options for fertility preservation during cancer therapy regimens are solidifying and both primary practitioners and subspecialists should be aware of the possibilities. SUMMARY: Patients with underlying hematologic or oncologic disease require management of menstrual bleeding, but also deserve a comprehensive evaluation and counseling regarding their individualized contraceptive needs and fertility preservation options during their reproductive years. This review employs the latest evidence from current literature to help guide clinicians caring for this unique demographic.

Screening and brief intervention for alcohol and other abuse.

Substance use is the most common health risk behavior among adolescents and is one of the greatest threats to their current and future health. Universal screening of adolescents in general medical settings can be instrumental in identifying substance use early, before further problems develop and when BIs are more likely to be effective. Screening in and of itself may have some therapeutic effect. Brief screening tools feasible for use by busy medical offices to quickly and reliably assess adolescent risk for a substance use disorder now are available. A recent study found that a physician-conducted CRAFFT screen interview required an average of 74 seconds to complete, whereas a computer self-administered version took an average of 49 seconds. The CRAFFT and AUDIT tools currently have the most evidence for validity among adolescents, whereas the validity of other widely used tools such as DAST-10, NIDA-modified ASSIST (Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test), and ultra-brief screens (AUDIT-C, single-item screens) has yet to be established for adolescents. Studies are needed to identify effective strategies to promote universal adolescent screening and the use of valid screening tools in general medical settings. One statewide (Massachusetts) study found that although most (86%) primary care physicians seeing adolescents reported screening adolescents for substance use annually, only 1 in 3 reported using a validated tool (the CRAFFT). The remaining physicians reporting using informal screening procedures, their own questionnaire, or the CAGE. Computerization of screening and integration into the electronic health record appear to be promising strategies to promote universal screening and standardized use of valid screening tools. Increasing adolescent screening rates necessitates supporting physicians' ability to respond effectively to the screen results. To that end, recent evidence-informed practice guides from the AAP and NIAAA provide a structured algorithm for specific recommended responses based on level of risk. Adolescents who are at low or moderate risk for a substance use disorder, who constitute most of those seen in general medical settings, may be effectively counseled with a few minutes of brief advice, particularly after being primed with screening, feedback, and education before seeing their physician. High-risk patients (screen-positives) should receive a brief follow-up assessment to determine the appropriate level of care needed and a BI, using MI principles, to enhance motivation for behavioral change and help-seeking. Indications of acute danger or addiction may necessitate breaking confidentiality to protect patient safety and begin RT. Our review shows a small but growing body of research on the effectiveness of opportunistic BIs following screening of adolescents in clinical settings. Studies to date have largely tested brief alcohol-focused MI-based interventions with adolescents in the ED or trauma care settings; however, the number of studies conducted in primary health care settings is increasing. The strongest BI effects found in these studies tend to be related to harm reduction, such as reduction of substance-related driving/riding, alcohol-related injuries, unplanned sex, and other negative consequences of use. Effects on substance use have been more modest and tend to be stronger at shorter (< or = 6 months) rather than longer follow-up (> or = 12 months). However, many of these studies compared BI to active control conditions, which often included elements of BI (eg, assessment, brief advice, informational handouts). Significant reductions in substance use and related harms were also seen in these control groups, likely making detection ofa BI effect more difficult. A few studies have shown initial support for a prevention effect of BI among abstinent adolescents. At the opposite end of the spectrum, little is known about the effects of BI for adolescents with dependence and needing RT because of a lack of studies. Other areas needing additional research are the effect of BI on adolescent drug use, particularly on use of drugs other than cannabis; the mediators and moderators of BI effects; ways to reinforce and sustain effects over time; and how best to increase SBI implementation in general medical settings and to effectively train physicians. The effect of efforts such as the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration-funded physician residency SBIRT training programs remain to be determined. There has been increasing investigation into the potential of interactive computer technologies to aid SBIRT delivery to adolescents and young adults. A more detailed review of this area of research is beyond the scope of this article, but computer technology is proving to be an acceptable and effective tool in the delivery of BIs to young people, both as physician "extenders" in clinical settings and in the form of stand-alone self-guided programs. Computer technologies likely will play a critical role in promoting the expansion of SBIRT implementation for youth in general medical settings.

Do risky friends change the efficacy of a primary care brief intervention for adolescent alcohol use?

PURPOSE: To determine if peer risk (having friends who drink or approve of drinking) modifies the effects of a computer-facilitated screening and provider brief advice (cSBA) intervention on adolescent alcohol use. METHODS: We assessed the intervention effect using logistic regression modeling with generalized estimating equations on a sample of 2,092 adolescents. Effect modification by peer risk was analyzed separately for alcohol initiation (drinking at follow-up in baseline nondrinkers) and cessation (no drinking at follow-up in baseline drinkers) by testing an interaction term (treatment condition by peer risk). Interpretation of the interaction effect was further clarified by subsequent stratification by peer risk. RESULTS: The intervention effect on alcohol cessation was significantly greater among those with peer risk (adjusted relative risk ratios; risk 1.44, 1.18-1.76 vs. no risk .98, .41-2.36) at 3 months' follow-up. There was no such finding for alcohol initiation. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol screening and brief provider counseling may differentially benefit adolescent drinkers with drinking friends.

Caring for teens with chronic illness: risky business?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: With advances in medicine, more children with chronic illness are reaching adolescence and young adulthood. Research has shown that this group is not immune to the behavioral risks endorsed by healthy adolescents. Recent literature exploring the etiology of risk behaviors and their impact on chronic illness is presented. RECENT FINDINGS: Risk taking may be the result of differential maturation of two distinct parts of the adolescent brain. Risk taking can be considered normal in adolescents with chronic illness, but there is some evidence that chronic illness affects normal psychosocial development. Moreover, evidence supports that chronic illness can lead to disparities in risk education and assessment because of disease focused management rather than a more comprehensive approach. SUMMARY: Youth living with chronic illnesses face unique challenges in accomplishing the developmental tasks of adolescence. These challenges include risk behaviors, which jeopardize current and future health. The reasons for risk taking are multifactorial and require providers to make the adolescent and not the illness the center of management. More research is needed on how to improve developmentally appropriate and relevant interventions to aid in safe passage into adulthood.