Inequalities in children's mental health care: Analysis of routinely collected data on prescribing and referrals to secondary care

Background: One in eight children in the United Kingdom are estimated to have a mental health condition, and many do not receive support or treatment. The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted mental health and disrupted the delivery of care. Prevalence of poor mental health is not evenly distributed across age groups, by sex or socioeconomic groups. Equity in access to mental health care is a policy priority but detailed socio-demographic trends are relatively under-researched. Methods: We analysed records for all mental health prescriptions and referrals to specialist mental health outpatient care between the years of 2015 and 2021 for children aged 2 to 17 years in a single NHS Scotland health board region. We analysed trends in prescribing, referrals, and acceptance to out-patient treatment over time, and measured differences in treatment and service use rates by age, sex, and area deprivation. Results: We identified 18,732 children with 178,657 mental health prescriptions and 21,874 referrals to specialist outpatient care. Prescriptions increased by 59% over the study period. Boys received double the prescriptions of girls and the rate of prescribing in the most deprived areas was double that in the least deprived. Mean age at first mental health prescription was almost 1 year younger in the most deprived areas than in the least. Referrals increased 9% overall. Initially, boys and girls both had an annual referral rate of 2.7 per 1000, but this fell 6% for boys and rose 25% for girls. Referral rate for the youngest decreased 67% but increased 21% for the oldest. The proportion of rejected referrals increased steeply since 2020 from 17 to 30%. The proportion of accepted referrals that were for girls rose to 62% and the mean age increased 1.5 years. Conclusions: The large increase in mental health prescribing and changes in referrals to specialist outpatient care aligns with emerging evidence of increasing poor mental health, particularly since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The static size of the population accepted for specialist treatment amid greater demand, and the changing demographics of those accepted, indicate clinical prioritisation and unmet need. Persistent inequities in mental health prescribing and referrals require urgent action. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Study protocol: examining the impacts of COVID-19 mitigation measures on pregnancy and birth outcomes in Scotland-a linked administrative data study.

INTRODUCTION: This protocol outlines aims to test the wider impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on pregnancy and birth outcomes and inequalities in Scotland. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: We will analyse Scottish linked administrative data for pregnancies and births before (March 2010 to March 2020) and during (April 2020 to October 2020) the pandemic. The Community Health Index database will be used to link the National Records of Scotland Births and the Scottish Morbidity Record 02. The data will include about 500 000 mother-child pairs. We will investigate population-level changes in maternal behaviour (smoking at antenatal care booking, infant feeding on discharge), pregnancy and birth outcomes (birth weight, preterm birth, Apgar score, stillbirth, neonatal death, pre-eclampsia) and service use (mode of delivery, mode of anaesthesia, neonatal unit admission) during the COVID-19 pandemic using two analytical approaches. First, we will estimate interrupted times series regression models to describe changes in outcomes comparing prepandemic with pandemic periods. Second, we will analyse the effect of COVID-19 mitigation measures on our outcomes in more detail by creating cumulative exposure variables for each mother-child pair using the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker. Thus, estimating a potential dose-response relationship between exposure to mitigation measures and our outcomes of interest as well as assessing if timing of exposure during pregnancy matters. Finally, we will assess inequalities in the effect of cumulative exposure to lockdown measures on outcomes using several axes of inequality: ethnicity/mother's country of birth, area deprivation (Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation), urban-rural classification of residence, number of previous children, maternal social position (National Statistics Socioeconomic Classification) and parental relationship status. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: NHS Scotland Public Benefit and Privacy Panel for Health and Social Care scrutinised and approved the use of these data (1920-0097). Results of this study will be disseminated to the research community, practitioners, policy makers and the wider public.

Inequalities in children's mental health care: analysis of routinely collected data on prescribing and referrals to secondary care.

BACKGROUND: One in eight children in the United Kingdom are estimated to have a mental health condition, and many do not receive support or treatment. The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted mental health and disrupted the delivery of care. Prevalence of poor mental health is not evenly distributed across age groups, by sex or socioeconomic groups. Equity in access to mental health care is a policy priority but detailed socio-demographic trends are relatively under-researched. METHODS: We analysed records for all mental health prescriptions and referrals to specialist mental health outpatient care between the years of 2015 and 2021 for children aged 2 to 17 years in a single NHS Scotland health board region. We analysed trends in prescribing, referrals, and acceptance to out-patient treatment over time, and measured differences in treatment and service use rates by age, sex, and area deprivation. RESULTS: We identified 18,732 children with 178,657 mental health prescriptions and 21,874 referrals to specialist outpatient care. Prescriptions increased by 59% over the study period. Boys received double the prescriptions of girls and the rate of prescribing in the most deprived areas was double that in the least deprived. Mean age at first mental health prescription was almost 1 year younger in the most deprived areas than in the least. Referrals increased 9% overall. Initially, boys and girls both had an annual referral rate of 2.7 per 1000, but this fell 6% for boys and rose 25% for girls. Referral rate for the youngest decreased 67% but increased 21% for the oldest. The proportion of rejected referrals increased steeply since 2020 from 17 to 30%. The proportion of accepted referrals that were for girls rose to 62% and the mean age increased 1.5 years. CONCLUSIONS: The large increase in mental health prescribing and changes in referrals to specialist outpatient care aligns with emerging evidence of increasing poor mental health, particularly since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The static size of the population accepted for specialist treatment amid greater demand, and the changing demographics of those accepted, indicate clinical prioritisation and unmet need. Persistent inequities in mental health prescribing and referrals require urgent action.

Contribution of avoidable mortality to life expectancy inequalities in Wales: a decomposition by age and by cause between 2002 and 2020.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the contribution of avoidable mortality to life expectancy inequalities in Wales during 2002-2020. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Wales, 2002-20, including early data from the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We used routine statistics for 2002-2020 on population and deaths in Wales stratified by age, sex, deprivation quintile and cause of death. We estimated the contribution of avoidable causes of death and specific age-categories using the Arriaga decomposition method to highlight priorities for action. RESULTS: Life expectancy inequalities rose 2002-20 amongst both sexes, driven by serial decreases in life expectancy amongst the most deprived quintiles. The contributions of amenable and preventable mortality to life expectancy inequalities changed relatively little between 2002 and 2020, with larger rises in non-avoidable causes. Key avoidable mortality conditions driving the life expectancy gap in the most recent period of 2018-2020 for females were circulatory disease, cancers, respiratory disease and alcohol- and drug-related deaths, and also injuries for males. CONCLUSIONS: Life expectancy inequalities widened during 2002-20, driven by deteriorating life expectancy in the most deprived quintiles. Sustained investment in prevention post-COVID-19 is needed to address growing health inequity in Wales; there remains a role for the National Health Service in ensuring equitable healthcare access to alongside wider policies that promote equity.

Population birth outcomes in 2020 and experiences of expectant mothers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A 'born in Wales' mixed methods study using routine data.

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy can be a stressful time and the COVID-19 pandemic has affected all aspects of life. This study aims to investigate the pandemic impact on pregnancy experience, rates of primary childhood immunisations and the differences in birth outcomes in during 2020 to those of previous years. METHODS: Self-reported pregnancy experience: 215 expectant mothers (aged 16+) in Wales completed an online survey about their experiences of pregnancy during the pandemic. The qualitative survey data was analysed using codebook thematic analysis. Population-level birth outcomes in Wales: Stillbirths, prematurity, birth weight and Caesarean section births before (2016-2019) and during (2020) the pandemic were compared using anonymised individual-level, population-scale routine data held in the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. Uptake of the first three scheduled primary childhood immunisations were compared between 2019 and 2020. FINDINGS: The pandemic had a negative impact on the mental health of 71% of survey respondents, who reported anxiety, stress and loneliness; this was associated with attending scans without their partner, giving birth alone, and minimal contact with midwives. There was no significant difference in annual outcomes including gestation and birth weight, stillbirths, and Caesarean sections for infants born in 2020 compared to 2016-2019. There was an increase in late term births (≥42 weeks gestation) during the first lockdown (OR: 1.28, p = 0.019) and a decrease in moderate to late preterm births (32-36 weeks gestation) during the second lockdown (OR: 0.74, p = 0.001). Fewer babies were born in 2020 (N = 29,031) compared to 2016-2019 (average N = 32,582). All babies received their immunisations in 2020, but there were minor delays in the timings of immunisations. Those due at 8-weeks were 8% less likely to be on time (within 28-days) and at 16-weeks, they were 19% less likely to be on time. INTERPRETATION: Whilst the pandemic had a negative impact on mothers' experiences of pregnancy. Population-level data suggests that this did not translate to adverse birth outcomes for babies born during the pandemic.

Public acceptability of non-pharmaceutical interventions to control a pandemic in the UK: a discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVE: To understand how individuals trade off between features of non-pharmaceutical interventions (eg, lockdowns) to control a pandemic across the four nations of the UK. DESIGN: A survey that included a discrete choice experiment. The survey design was informed using policy documents, social media analysis and input from remote think-aloud interviews with members of the public (n=23). SETTING: A nationwide survey across the four nations of the UK using an online panel between 29 October and 12 December 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals who are over 18 years old. A total of 4120 adults completed the survey (1112 in England, 848 in Northern Ireland, 1143 in Scotland and 1098 in Wales). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Adult's preferences for, and trade-offs between, type of lockdown restrictions, length of lockdown, postponement of routine healthcare, excess deaths, impact on the ability to buy things and unemployment. RESULTS: The majority of adults are willing to accept higher excess deaths if this means lockdowns that are less strict, shorter and do not postpone routine healthcare. On average, respondents in England were willing to accept a higher increase in excess deaths to have less strict lockdown restrictions introduced compared with Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, respectively. In all four countries, one out of five respondents were willing to reduce excess deaths at all costs. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the UK population is willing to accept the increase in excess deaths associated with introducing less strict lockdown restrictions. The acceptability of different restriction scenarios varies according to the features of the lockdown and across countries. Governments can use information about trade-off preferences to inform the introduction of different lockdown restriction levels and design compensation policies that maximise societal welfare.

Population birth outcomes and experiences of expectant mothers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Wales: a mixed methods study

Background Pregnancy can be a stressful time and the COVID-19 pandemic is thought to have heightened maternal stress. This study aimed to investigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on population birth outcomes, uptake of primary immunisations, and expectant mothers' experiences of pregnancy in Wales. Methods In this mixed methods study we analysed stillbirths, prematurity, birthweight and caesarean section births before (2016–19) and during (2020) the pandemic using national routine anonymised data held in the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank. Uptake of the first three scheduled primary immunisations were compared between 2019 and 2020. Immunisations were extracted from the routinely collected data in the National Community Child Health Database. We compared percentages between years the ran χ2 with Yates correction for the three percentages given. Expectant mothers (aged ≥16 years) in Wales completed an online survey about their experiences of pregnancy during the pandemic. Inclusion criteria was being aged 16 years or older and living in Wales. The qualitative survey data was analysed using codebook thematic analysis. Ethical approval was granted by Swansea University Ethics Committee and each participant provided written consent before answering any survey questions. Findings There was no significant difference between annual outcomes including gestation and birthweight, stillbirths, and caesarean sections for infants born in 2020 compared with 2016–19. Difference in gestation (moderate to late preterm difference –0·26%, 95% CI –0·52% to –0·01%). Difference in low birthweight 0·13% (0·00% to 0·26%). Difference in stillbirths –0·01% (–0·02% to 0·00%). Difference in caesarean sections –0·42% (–1·13% to 0·29%). There was an increase in late-term births (≥42 weeks gestation) during the first lockdown (odds ratio [OR] 1·28, p=0·019) and a decrease in moderate to late preterm births (32–36 weeks gestation) during the second lockdown (OR 0·74, p=0·001). Fewer babies were born in 2020 (n=29 031) compared with 2016–19 (n=32 582;mean [SD 1561]). All babies received their immunisations in 2020, but there were minor delays in the timings of vaccines. Those vaccinations due at 8-weeks were 8% less likely to be on time (within 28 days) and, at 16-weeks, they were 19% less likely to be on time. The pandemic had a negative effect on the mental health of 151 (72%) of 211 survey respondents, who reported feeling anxious, nervous, or depressed;this finding was associated with attending scans without their partner, giving birth alone, and minimal contact with midwives. Interpretation The COVID-19 pandemic had a negative effect on mothers' experiences of pregnancy;however, population data suggests that this did not translate to adverse birth outcomes for babies born during the pandemic. Funding Health Care Research Wales

Understanding public preferences and trade-offs for government responses during a pandemic: a protocol for a discrete choice experiment in the UK.

INTRODUCTION: Social distancing and lockdown measures are among the main government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. These measures aim to limit the COVID-19 infection rate and reduce the mortality rate of COVID-19. Given we are likely to see local lockdowns until a treatment or vaccine for COVID-19 is available, and their effectiveness depends on public acceptability, it is important to understand public preference for government responses. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using a discrete choice experiment (DCE), this study will investigate the public's preferences for pandemic responses in the UK. Attributes (and levels) are based on: (1) lockdown measures described in policy documents; (2) literature on preferences for lockdown measures and (3) a social media analysis. Attributes include: lockdown type; lockdown length; postponement of usual non-urgent medical care; number of excess deaths; number of infections; impact on household spending and job losses. We will prepilot the DCE using virtual think aloud interviews with respondents recruited via Facebook. We will collect preference data using an online survey of 4000 individuals from across the four UK countries (1000 per country). We will estimate the relative importance of the attributes, and the trade-offs individuals are willing to make between attributes. We will test if respondents' preferences differ based on moral attitudes (using the Moral Foundation Questionnaire), socioeconomic circumstances (age, education, economic insecurity, health status), country of residence and experience of COVID-19. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Aberdeen's College Ethics Research Board (CERB) has approved the study (reference: CERB/2020/6/1974). We will seek CERB approval for major changes from the developmental and pilot work. Peer-reviewed papers will be submitted, and results will be presented at public health and health economic conferences nationally and internationally. A lay summary will be published on the Health Economics Research Unit blog.