[Screening for child abuse: what does it achieve?] / Screening op kindermishandeling: wat levert het op?

In the Netherlands, child abuse is a national problem and often not recognized in medical settings. As a consequence, it has become mandatory to use a screening instrument for child abuse at emergency departments and out-of-hours primary care services. Since the revised Reporting Code has come into force, there is renewed interest for a national approach on screening for child abuse. The question is how valid existing screening instruments are and how they help the medical professional to suspect child abuse. In this article, we elaborate on the value of available screening instruments and their consequences for daily practice. Because of the limited validity of available screening instruments, we recommend replacing them with a simple reminder to increase awareness of child abuse. A nationwide approach to child abuse in the medical setting should be implemented, with mandatory training on child abuse as its cornerstone.

Value of systematic detection of physical child abuse at emergency rooms: a cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of our diagnostic accuracy study Child Abuse Inventory at Emergency Rooms (CHAIN-ER) was to establish whether a widely used checklist accurately detects or excludes physical abuse among children presenting to ERs with physical injury. DESIGN: A large multicentre study with a 6-month follow-up. SETTING: 4 ERs in The Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 4290 children aged 0-7 years attending the ER because of physical injury. All children were systematically tested with an easy-to-use child abuse checklist (index test). A national expert panel (reference standard) retrospectively assessed all children with positive screens and a 15% random sample of the children with negative screens for physical abuse, using additional information, namely, an injury history taken by a paediatrician, information provided by the general practitioner, youth doctor and social services by structured questionnaires, and 6-month follow-up information. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Physical child abuse. SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Injury due to neglect and need for help. RESULTS: 4253/4290 (99%) parents agreed to follow-up. At a prevalence of 0.07% (3/4253) for inflicted injury by expert panel decision, the positive predictive value of the checklist was 0.03 (95% CI 0.006 to 0.085), and the negative predictive value 1.0 (0.994 to 1.0). There was 100% (93 to 100) agreement about inflicted injury in children, with positive screens between the expert panel and child abuse experts. CONCLUSIONS: Rare cases of inflicted injury among preschool children presenting at ERs for injury are very likely captured by easy-to-use checklists, but at very high false-positive rates. Subsequent assessment by child abuse experts can be safely restricted to children with positive screens at very low risk of missing cases of inflicted injury. Because of the high false positive rate, we do advise careful prior consideration of cost-effectiveness and clinical and societal implications before de novo implementation.

Evaluation of suspected child abuse at the ED; implementation of American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines in the Netherlands.

Emergency departments (EDs) are important to detect child physical abuse. A structured approach will contribute to an adequate detection of abused children at the ED. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) provided guidance in the clinical approach to the evaluation of suspected physical abuse in children. In the Netherlands, these American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines have been adopted for the clinical process of child abuse detection. Here, we describe the outcome of the clinical process in the year 2010 with 65 cases of suspected child abuse out of 3660 children presenting at an ED, and we discuss the strengths and pitfalls of this current clinical approach.

Child abuse inventory at emergency rooms: CHAIN-ER rationale and design.

BACKGROUND: Child abuse and neglect is an important international health problem with unacceptable levels of morbidity and mortality. Although maltreatment as a cause of injury is estimated to be only 1% or less of the injured children attending the emergency room, the consequences of both missed child abuse cases and wrong suspicions are substantial. Therefore, the accuracy of ongoing detection at emergency rooms by health care professionals is highly important. Internationally, several diagnostic instruments or strategies for child abuse detection are used at emergency rooms, but their diagnostic value is still unknown. The aim of the study 'Child Abuse Inventory at Emergency Rooms' (CHAIN-ER) is to assess if active structured inquiry by emergency room staff can accurately detect physical maltreatment in children presenting at emergency rooms with physical injury. METHODS/DESIGN: CHAIN-ER is a multi-centre, cross-sectional study with 6 months diagnostic follow-up. Five thousand children aged 0-7 presenting with injury at an emergency room will be included. The index test - the SPUTOVAMO-R questionnaire- is to be tested for its diagnostic value against the decision of an expert panel. All SPUTOVAMO-R positives and a 15% random sample of the SPUTOVAMO-R negatives will undergo the same systematic diagnostic work up, which consists of an adequate history being taken by a pediatrician, inquiry with other health care providers by structured questionnaires in order to obtain child abuse predictors, and by additional follow-up information. Eventually, an expert panel (reference test) determines the true presence or absence of child abuse. DISCUSSION: CHAIN-ER will determine both positive and negative predictive value of a child abuse detection instrument used in the emergency room. We mention a benefit of the use of an expert panel and of the use of complete data. Conducting a diagnostic accuracy study on a child abuse detection instrument is also accompanied by scientific hurdles, such as the lack of an accepted reference standard and potential (non-) response. Notwithstanding these scientific challenges, CHAIN-ER will provide accurate data on the predictive value of SPUTOVAMO-R.

Starreveld scoring method in diagnosing childhood constipation.

BACKGROUND: Four scoring methods exist to assess severity of fecal loading on plain abdominal radiographs in constipated patients (Barr-, Starreveld-, Blethyn- and Leech). So far, the Starreveld score was used only in adult patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine accuracy and intra- and inter-observer agreement of the Starreveld scoring method in the diagnosis of functional constipation among pediatric patients. In addition, we compared the Starreveld with the Barr scoring method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-four constipated and 34 non-constipated children were included. Abdominal radiographs, obtained before treatment, were rated (Starreveld- and Barr) by 4 observers. A second observation after 4 weeks was done by 3 observers. Cut-off level for the Starreveld score, accuracy as measured by the area under the receiver operator characteristics curve, and inter- and intra-observer agreement were calculated. RESULTS: Cut-off value for the Starreveld score was 10. AUC for Starreveld score was 0.54 and for Barr score 0.38, indicating poor discriminating power. Inter-observer agreement was 0.49-0.52 4 (Starreveld) and 0.44 (Barr), which is considered moderate. Intra-observer agreement was 0.52-0.71 (Starreveld) and 0.62- 0.76 (Barr). CONCLUSION: The Starreveld scoring method to assess fecal loading on a plain abdominal radiograph is of limited value in the diagnosis of childhood constipation.