Place of birth and postnatal transfers in infants with congenital diaphragmatic hernia in England and Wales: a descriptive observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical pathways for infants with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) and short-term outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study using the UK National Neonatal Research Database (NNRD). PATIENTS: Babies with a diagnosis of CDH admitted to a neonatal unit in England and Wales between 2012 and 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical pathways defined by place of birth (with or without colocated neonatal and surgical facilities), transfers, clinical interventions, length of hospital stay and discharge outcome. RESULTS: There were 1319 babies with a diagnosis of CDH cared for in four clinical pathways: born in maternity units with (1) colocated tertiary neonatal and surgical units ('neonatal surgical units'), 50% (660/1319); (2) designated tertiary neonatal unit and transfer to stand-alone surgical centre ('tertiary designated'), 25% (337/1319); (3) non-designated tertiary neonatal unit ('tertiary non-designated'), 7% (89/1319); or (4) non-tertiary unit ('non-tertiary'), 18% (233/1319)-the latter three needing postnatal transfers. Infant characteristics were similar for infants born in neonatal surgical and tertiary designated units. Excluding 149 infants with minimal data due to early transfer (median (IQR) 2.2 (0.4-4.5) days) to other settings, survival to neonatal discharge was 73% (851/1170), with a median (IQR) stay of 26 (16-44) days. CONCLUSIONS: We found that half of the babies with CDH were born in hospitals that did not have on-site surgical services and required postnatal transfer. Similar characteristics between infants born in neonatal surgical units and tertiary designated units suggest that organisation rather than infant factors influence place of birth. Future work linking the NNRD to other datasets will enable comparisons between care pathways.

Association between birth location and short-term outcomes for babies with gastroschisis, congenital diaphragmatic hernia and oesophageal fistula: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Neonatal care is commonly regionalised, meaning specialist services are only available at certain units. Consequently, infants with surgical conditions needing specialist care who are born in non-surgical centres require postnatal transfer. Best practice models advocate for colocated maternity and surgical services as the place of birth for infants with antenatally diagnosed congenital conditions to avoid postnatal transfers. We conducted a systematic review to explore the association between location of birth and short-term outcomes of babies with gastroschisis, congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) and oesophageal atresia with or without tracheo-oesophageal fistula (TOF/OA). METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science and SCOPUS databases for studies from high income countries comparing outcomes for infants with gastroschisis, CDH or TOF/OA based on their place of delivery. Outcomes of interest included mortality, length of stay, age at first feed, comorbidities and duration of parenteral nutrition. We assessed study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We present a narrative synthesis of our findings. RESULTS: Nineteen cohort studies compared outcomes of babies with one of gastroschisis, CDH or TOF/OA. Heterogeneity across the studies precluded meta-analysis. Eight studies carried out case-mix adjustments. Overall, we found conflicting evidence. There is limited evidence to suggest that birth in a maternity unit with a colocated surgical centre was associated with a reduction in mortality for CDH and decreased length of stay for gastroschisis. CONCLUSIONS: There is little evidence to suggest that delivery in colocated maternity-surgical services may be associated with shortened length of stay and reduced mortality. Our findings are limited by significant heterogeneity, potential for bias and paucity of strong evidence. This supports the need for further research to investigate the impact of birth location on outcomes for babies with congenital surgical conditions and inform future design of neonatal care systems. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022329090.

Variation in initial health assessment of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children: a cross-sectional survey across England.

OBJECTIVE: To assess variation in current practice of initial health assessments (IHAs) for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children (UASC) across England. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Type of routine assessment carried out, threshold to specialist referrals and facilities available to complete IHA. RESULTS: Eighty-six health professionals responded across England; 47% had received training in UASC IHA and 33% in UASC mental health issues. The majority (80%) of IHAs were conducted with translator support and 7% of participants reported Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) input. Around half of clinicians (53%) performed tuberculosis and bloodborne virus screening for all UASC, while other infectious diseases (IDs) screening was symptom and risk factor dependent. Overall, 14% of clinicians routinely comment on age assessment and 76% share the IHA report and health plan with UASC. The time allocated for assessment range between 30 and 90 min. CONCLUSION: There is significant variation in practice around UASC IHAs across England, notably around CAMHS input, time allocated, translation facilities and ID screening. The results suggest that, an increase in resources available for UASC teams, improved access to specialist services and further training on UASC health are all needed. Guidance that aims to set a best practice framework for UASC IHA delivery such as a 'one-stop shop' model would help to standardise UASC IHA across the country.

Social and ethnic group differences in healthcare use by children aged 0-14 years: a population-based cohort study in England from 2007 to 2017.

OBJECTIVE: To describe social and ethnic group differences in children's use of healthcare services in England, from 2007 to 2017. DESIGN: Population-based retrospective cohort study. SETTING/PATIENTS: We performed individual-level linkage of electronic health records from general practices and hospitals in England by creating an open cohort linking data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episode Statistics. 1 484 455 children aged 0-14 years were assigned to five composite ethnic groups and five ordered groups based on postcode mapped to index of multiple deprivation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Age-standardised annual general practitioner (GP) consultation, outpatient attendance, emergency department (ED) visit and emergency and elective hospital admission rates per 1000 child-years. RESULTS: In 2016/2017, children from the most deprived group had fewer GP consultations (1765 vs 1854 per 1000 child-years) and outpatient attendances than children in the least deprived group (705 vs 741 per 1000 child-years). At the end of the study period, children from the most deprived group had more ED visits (447 vs 314 per 1000 child-years) and emergency admissions (100 vs 76 per 1000 child-years) than children from the least deprived group.In 2016/2017, children from black and Asian ethnic groups had more GP consultations than children from white ethnic groups (1961 and 2397 vs 1824 per 1000 child-years, respectively). However, outpatient attendances were lower in children from black ethnic groups than in children from white ethnic groups (732 vs 809 per 1000 child-years). By 2016/2017, there were no differences in outpatient, ED and in-patient activity between children from white and Asian ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2007 and 2017, children living in more deprived areas of England made greater use of emergency services and received less scheduled care than children from affluent neighbourhoods. Children from Asian and black ethnic groups continued to consult GPs more frequently than children from white ethnic groups, though black children had significantly lower outpatient attendance rates than white children across the study period. Our findings suggest substantial levels of unmet need among children living in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas. Further work is needed to determine if healthcare utilisation among children from Asian and black ethnic groups is proportionate to need.

Interventions to reduce inequalities in avoidable hospital admissions: explanatory framework and systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Internationally there is pressure to contain costs due to rising numbers of hospital admissions. Alongside age, socioeconomic disadvantage is the strongest risk factor for avoidable hospital admission. This equity-focussed systematic review is required for policymakers to understand what has been shown to work to reduce inequalities in hospital admissions, what does not work and where the current gaps in the evidence-base are. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An initial framework shows how interventions are hypothesised to reduce socioeconomic inequalities in avoidable hospital admissions. Studies will be included if the intervention focusses exclusively on socioeconomically disadvantaged populations or if the study reports differential effects by socioeconomic status (education, income, occupation, social class, deprivation, poverty or an area-based proxy for deprivation derived from place of residence) with respect to hospital admission or readmission (overall or condition-specific for those classified as ambulatory care sensitive). Studies involving individuals of any age, undertaken in OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries, published from 2000 to 29th February 2020 in any language will be included. Electronic searches will include MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL and the Web of Knowledge platform. Electronic searches will be supplemented with full citation searches of included studies, website searches and retrieval of relevant unpublished information. Study inclusion, data extraction and quality appraisal will be conducted by two reviewers. Narrative synthesis will be conducted and also meta-analysis where possible. The main analysis will examine the effectiveness of interventions at reducing socioeconomic inequalities in hospital admissions. Interventions will be characterised by their domain of action and approach to addressing inequalities. For included studies, contextual information on where, for whom and how these interventions are organised, implemented and delivered will be examined where possible. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was not required for this protocol. The research will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication, conferences and an open-access policy-orientated paper. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019153666.

Engaging the vulnerable: A rapid review of public health communication aimed at migrants during the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recommends national risk communications tools targeting migrant communities to contain the spread of COVID-19. Within Europe, migrants are often left behind in healthcare due to structural barriers driven by hostile environment measures. This study aimed to assess inclusion of migrants in COVID-19 prevention measures by evaluating if governmental risk communications are available in common migrant languages across Europe. METHODS: A rapid review was performed in June 2020 to understand the availability of government produced risk communications across Council of Europe member states, namely: COVID-19 health communications, migrant-specific guidelines and COVID-19 helplines. RESULTS: 96% (45/47) of countries sampled had online government COVID-19 advice. 30% (15/47) issued information in their official language(s), whilst 64% (30/47) of countries delivered information in additional languages. 48% (23/47) translated information into at least one migrant language. However, information on testing or healthcare entitlements in common migrant languages was only found in 6% (3/47). Half (53%; 25/47) of the countries with COVID-19 helpline offered information in at least one alternative language.No government produced risk communications on disease prevention targeting people in refugee camps or informal settlements. CONCLUSIONS: There are clear gaps in the availability of translated COVID-19 risk communications across Europe, excluding migrants from the COVID-19 response. Governments must reflect on the inclusion of migrants within their COVID-19 response and seek to engage vulnerable communities. Governments should urgently partner with non-governmental organizations who already play a key role in addressing unmet health needs.