Opening Pandora's box - key facilitators of practice change in detecting and responding to childhood adversity - a practitioner perspective.

BACKGROUND: Childhood adversities worsen physical and mental health across the lifespan. Health and social care practitioners play a key role in identifying and responding to childhood adversity, however, may be reluctant to do so due to a perceived lack of services to refer to, time pressures and a deficit of training and confidence. We aimed to (1) quantify changes in practitioner comfort and confidence to identify and respond to childhood adversity following a multimodal intervention within an integrated child and family health and social care hub and (2) to understand barriers and facilitators of practice change. METHODS: Hub practitioners were surveyed about their competence and comfort to directly ask about and confidence to respond to adversity at baseline and then at six and twelve months post training. Interviews were undertaken to explore practitioner barriers and enablers of practice change. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. The theoretical domains framework was used to identify the key drivers of practice change. RESULTS: Fifteen of 18 practitioners completed all three surveys and 70% reported increased competence and comfort to directly ask, and confidence to respond across a range of adversities over the 12-month intervention. Twenty-one practitioners completed interviews. Six themes were identified as either facilitators or barriers to practice change. Facilitator themes included (1) connection matters, (2) knowledge provides assurance, (3) confidence in ability and (4) choosing change. Barrier themes were (1) never enough time and (2) opening Pandora's box. Following analysis, key drivers of practice change were 'social influence', 'belief in capability', 'knowledge' and 'behaviour regulation' while barriers to practice change were 'environmental context and resources' and 'emotion'. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners reported improved confidence in identifying and responding to adversity through a multimodal intervention delivered in an integrated Child and Family Hub. Changing practice requires more than just education and training. Opportunities for social connection and coaching to improve self-confidence and perceived competence are needed to overcome the fear of opening Pandora's box.

Identifying and responding to family adversity in Australian community and primary health settings: a multi-site cross sectional study.

Background: Unaddressed family adversity has potentially modifiable, negative biopsychosocial impacts across the life course. Little is known about how Australian health and social practitioners identify and respond to family adversity in community and primary health settings. Objective: To describe, in two Australian community health services: (1) the number of adversities experienced by caregivers, (2) practitioner identification of caregivers experiencing adversity, (3) practitioner response to caregivers experiencing adversity, and (4) caregiver uptake of referrals. Methods: Survey of caregivers of children aged 0-8 years attending community health services in Victoria and New South Wales (NSW). Analysis described frequencies of caregiver self-reported: (1) experiences of adversity, (2) practitioner identification of adversity, (3) practitioner response to adversity, and (4) referral uptake. Analyses were sub-grouped by three adversity domains and site. Results: 349 caregivers (Victoria: n = 234; NSW: n = 115) completed the survey of whom 88% reported experiencing one or more family adversities. The median number of adversities was 4 (2-6). Only 43% of participants were directly asked about or discussed an adversity with a practitioner in the previous 6 months (Victoria: 30%; NSW: 68%). Among caregivers experiencing adversity, 30% received direct support (Victoria: 23%; NSW: 43%), and 14% received a referral (Victoria: 10%; NSW: 22%) for at least one adversity. Overall, 74% of caregivers accepted referrals when extended. Conclusion: The needs of Australian families experiencing high rates of adversity are not systematically identified nor responded to in community health services. This leaves significant scope for reform and enhancement of service responses to families experiencing adversity.

Emotional work of getting help: a qualitative analysis of caregiver-perceived barriers to responding to childhood adversity.

OBJECTIVE: To explore caregivers' experiences and challenges of accessing help for adversity across both health and social care sectors. DESIGN: Qualitative study design using semistructured interviews to explore how caregivers accessed services across health and social care. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. SETTING: Families living in the city of Wyndham, Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 17 caregivers of children aged 0-8 years. RESULTS: Five main themes emerged. (1) Emotional work of getting help. Caregivers described that getting help for life challenges was both emotionally taxing and effortful. (2) Trusting relationships are key. Engagement was related to the degree of relational practice and whether they felt judged or demeaned. (3) Wanting to manage on your own. There was a strong desire by caregivers to be independent and to only seek help when it was absolutely necessary. (4) Importance of knowing help was available and how to access it. (5) Overcoming service access barriers including long waiting times, restricted service criteria, transport issues and out-of-pocket expenses. CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers highlighted a multitude of barriers to getting help for life challenges. Addressing these barriers will require services to become more flexible and codesign best approaches with families in ongoing partnership. Improving community knowledge of available services and building trusting relationships is the first step to overcoming these barriers.

Co-designing an Integrated Health and Social Care Hub With and for Families Experiencing Adversity.

Introduction: Integrated care research often fails to adequately describe co-design methods. This article outlines the process, principles and tools to co-design an integrated health and social care Hub for families experiencing adversity. Research methods: The Child and Family Hub was co-designed in four stages: (1) partnership building and stakeholder engagement, (2) formative research, (3) persona development and (4) co-design workshops and consultations. Local families, community members and intersectoral practitioners were engaged at each stage. The co-design workshops employed a human-centred design process and were evaluated using the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool (PEET). Results: 121 family participants and 80 practitioners were engaged in the Hub's co-design. The PEET highlighted the co-design team's satisfaction achieved by community members working alongside practitioners to generate mutual learning. Resourcing was a key challenge. Discussion: Human-centred design offered a systematic process and tools for integrating formative evidence with lived and professional experience in the Hub's co-design. Applying community engagement principles meant that a diverse range of stakeholders were engaged across all stages of the project which built trust in and local ownership of the Hub model. Conclusion: Co-design research with families experiencing adversity should attend to language, engagement methods, team composition and resourcing decisions.

Multicountry review: developmental surveillance, assessment and care by outpatient paediatricians.

BACKGROUND: Care of young children with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD) is a major component of paediatric outpatient practice. However, cross-country practice reviews to date have been limited, and available data demonstrate missed opportunities for early identification, particularly in vulnerable population subgroups. METHODS: Multicountry review of national paediatric body guidance related to developmental surveillance, early identification and early childhood intervention together with review of outpatient paediatrician practices for developmental assessment of children aged 0-5 years with/at risk of NDDs. Review included five countries with comparable nationalised universal child healthcare systems (ie, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Sweden and the UK). Data were collected using a combination of published and grey literature review, supplemented by additional local sources with descriptive review of relevant data points. RESULTS: Countries had broadly similar systems for early identification of young children with NDDs alongside universal child health surveillance. However, variation existed in national paediatric guidance, paediatric developmental training and practice, including variable roles of paediatricians in developmental surveillance at primary care level. Data on coverage of developmental surveillance, content and quality of paediatric development assessment practices were notably lacking. CONCLUSION: Paediatricians play an important role in ensuring equitable access to early identification and intervention for young children with/at risk of NDDs. However, strengthening paediatric outpatient care of children with NDD requires clearer guidance across contexts; training that is responsive to shifting roles within interdisciplinary models of developmental assessment and improved data to enhance equity and quality of developmental assessment for children with/at risk of NDDs.

Integrated Child and Family Hub models for detecting and responding to family adversity: protocol for a mixed-methods evaluation in two sites.

INTRODUCTION: Integrated community healthcare Hubs may offer a 'one stop shop' for service users with complex health and social needs, and more efficiently use service resources. Various policy imperatives exist to implement Hub models of care, however, there is a dearth of research specifically evaluating Hubs targeted at families experiencing adversity. To contribute to building this evidence, we propose to co-design, test and evaluate integrated Hub models of care in two Australian community health services in low socioeconomic areas that serve families experiencing adversity: Wyndham Vale in Victoria and Marrickville in New South Wales. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multisite convergent mixed-methods study will run over three phases to (1) develop the initial Hub programme theory through formative research; (2) test and, then, (3) refine the Hub theory using empirical data. Phase 1 involves co-design of each Hub with caregivers, community members and practitioners. Phase 2 uses caregiver and Hub practitioner surveys at baseline, and 6 and 12 months after Hub implementation, and in-depth interviews at 12 months. Two stakeholder groups will be recruited: caregivers (n=100-200 per site) and Hub practitioners (n=20-30 per site). The intervention is a co-located Hub providing health, social, legal and community services with no comparator. The primary outcomes are caregiver-reported: (i) identification of, (ii) interventions received and/or (iii) referrals received for adversity from Hub practitioners. The study also assesses child, caregiver, practitioner and system outcomes including mental health, parenting, quality of life, care experience and service linkages. Primary and secondary outcomes will be assessed by examining change in proportions/means from baseline to 6 months, from 6 to 12 months and from baseline to 12 months. Service linkages will be analysed using social network analysis. Costs of Hub implementation and a health economics analysis of unmet need will be conducted. Thematic analysis will be employed to analyse qualitative data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Royal Children's Hospital and Sydney Local Health District ethics committees have approved the study (HREC/62866/RCHM-2020). Participants and stakeholders will receive results through meetings, presentations and publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN55495932.

Screening for Adverse Childhood Experiences in Children: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are associated with increased risk of poor mental health outcomes. Although there is interest in screening for ACEs for early identification and intervention, it is not known whether screening improves outcomes for children. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review whether screening for ACEs in children leads to an increase in (1) identification of ACEs, (2) referrals to services, (3) increased uptake of services, and (4) improved mental health outcomes for children and parents. DATA SOURCES: Ovid Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Center for Clinical and Translational Research electronic databases were searched between 2009 and 2021. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if researchers screened for current ACEs in children aged 0 to 12 years and they had a control comparison. DATA EXTRACTION: Information was extracted, including study characteristics, sample demographics, screening tool characteristics, referral rates to services, uptake rates, and mental health outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 5816 articles were screened, with 4 articles meeting inclusion criteria. Screening for ACEs increases identification of adversity and may increase referrals to services. There are limited data about whether this leads to an increase in referral uptake by families. There are no reported data addressing mental health outcomes. LIMITATIONS: There are few published control trials of moderate quality. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence that screening for ACEs improves identification of childhood adversity and may improve referrals. If we are to realize the hypothesized benefits of ACEs screening on child and parent mental health, it is essential to understand the barriers for families taking up referrals.

Diagnostic Infectious Diseases Testing Outside Clinics: A Global Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Most people around the world do not have access to facility-based diagnostic testing, and the gap in availability of diagnostic tests is a major public health challenge. Self-testing, self-sampling, and institutional testing outside conventional clinical settings are transforming infectious disease diagnostic testing in a wide range of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We examined the delivery models of infectious disease diagnostic testing outside clinics to assess the impact on test uptake and linkage to care. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching 6 databases and including original research manuscripts comparing testing outside clinics with conventional testing. The main outcomes were test uptake and linkage to care, delivery models, and adverse outcomes. Data from studies with similar interventions and outcomes within thematic areas of interest were pooled, and the quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019140828).We identified 10 386 de-duplicated citations, and 76 studies were included. Data from 18 studies were pooled in meta-analyses. Studies focused on HIV (48 studies), chlamydia (8 studies), and multiple diseases (20 studies). HIV self-testing increased test uptake compared with facility-based testing (9 studies: pooled odds ratio [OR], 2.59; 95% CI, 1.06-6.29; moderate quality). Self-sampling for sexually transmitted infections increased test uptake compared with facility-based testing (7 studies: pooled OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 0.97-3.12; moderate quality). Conclusions. Testing outside of clinics increased test uptake without significant adverse outcomes. These testing approaches provide an opportunity to expand access and empower patients. Further implementation research, scale-up of effective service delivery models, and policies in LMIC settings are needed.

Does the addition of RDW improve current ICU scoring systems?

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the addition of red blood cell distribution width (RDW) improves the prognostic value of current intensive care unit (ICU) scoring systems, namely APACHE III. DESIGN AND METHODS: All patients admitted to a mixed ICU in Brisbane between June 2013 and July 2014 for whom RDW was available were included in the study. Analyses included descriptive statistics, linear regression correlation, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: The study included 708 patients for whom both ICU mortality prediction and RDW were available. In univariate analysis higher RDW values were associated with increased hospital mortality. Adding RDW to APACHE III increased the area under the ROC marginally (from 0.9586 to 0.9613). RDW was not correlated with C-reactive protein, white cell count, or patient's length of stay in ICU. CONCLUSION: RDW was an independent predictor of mortality. The addition of RDW to APACHE III improved its mortality prediction marginally. The underlying mechanism of RDW elevation warrants further investigation.

Bioelectrical impedance for measuring percentage body fat in young persons with Down syndrome: validation with dual-energy absorptiometry.

AIM: Children with Down syndrome have an increased prevalence of obesity, although there is little work describing body composition in this population. The aims of this study were to accurately measure body fat in children with Down syndrome and to identify which existing algorithm best predicts percentage body fat in this population. METHODS: Seventy children with Down syndrome had anthropometric, bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) data collected to calculate percentage body fat (PBF). Pearson correlations were carried out to assess the relationships of various methods for measuring body fat and Bland-Altman plots to assess systematic error. RESULTS: Mean PBF was 30.5% for girls and 22.5% for boys. A total of 38% of girls and 23% of boys were obese according to international criteria. PBF as determined by DXA correlated well with PBF by BIA in both girls and boys (r = 0.91 and 0.89, respectively, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There are high rates of obesity in children with Down syndrome. BIA can be used to accurately determine adiposity in this population. We recommend the use of the Schaeffer algorithm for calculation of PBF in children with Down syndrome.

Getting tangled in red tape: the challenges of doing clinical research in New Zealand.

Regulations and the number of forms that require completion remain a major frustration for researchers attempting to establish a clinical research project. It is essential that clinical research is of the highest standard and abides by ethical principles. However, the duplication of information required and lack of co-ordination between national and local ethics and research committees is a hindrance to conducting clinical research. This publication highlights the pitfalls in our current system with a case study, and suggests changes to the ethical review process that may aid researchers in establishing clinical research.