A Cluster Randomized Trial to Reduce Missed Abusive Head Trauma in Pediatric Intensive Care Settings.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the impact of the PediBIRN (Pediatric Brain Injury Research Network) 4-variable clinical decision rule (CDR) on abuse evaluations and missed abusive head trauma in pediatric intensive care settings. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cluster randomized trial. Participants included 8 pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) in US academic medical centers; PICU and child abuse physicians; and consecutive patients with acute head injures <3 years (n = 183 and n = 237, intervention vs control). PICUs were stratified by patient volumes, pair-matched, and randomized equally to intervention or control conditions. Randomization was concealed from the biostatistician. Physician-directed, cluster-level interventions included initial and booster training, access to an abusive head trauma probability calculator, and information sessions. Outcomes included "higher risk" patients evaluated thoroughly for abuse (with skeletal survey and retinal examination), potential cases of missed abusive head trauma (patients lacking either evaluation), and estimates of missed abusive head trauma (among potential cases). Group comparisons were performed using generalized linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Intervention physicians evaluated a greater proportion of higher risk patients thoroughly (81% vs 73%, P = .11) and had fewer potential cases of missed abusive head trauma (21% vs 32%, P = .05), although estimated cases of missed abusive head trauma did not differ (7% vs 13%, P = .22). From baseline (in previous studies) to trial, the change in higher risk patients evaluated thoroughly (67%→81% vs 78%→73%, P = .01), and potential cases of missed abusive head trauma (40%→21% vs 29%→32%, P = .003), diverged significantly. We did not identify a significant divergence in the number of estimated cases of missed abusive head trauma (15%→7% vs 11%→13%, P = .22). CONCLUSIONS: PediBIRN-4 CDR application facilitated changes in abuse evaluations that reduced potential cases of missed abusive head trauma in PICU settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03162354.

Predictors of screening and injury in contacts of physically abused children.

OBJECTIVE: To determine rates of screening in contacts of children evaluated for physical abuse, and the relationship of clinical characteristics to screening recommendation and completion and injury identification. STUDY DESIGN: This is a planned secondary analysis of a prospective study of 1918 contacts of 1196 children referred for subspecialty abuse consultation in 20 US centers. We used multivariable logistic models to determine the relationship of index child characteristics, contact child characteristics, and shared characteristics to screening and injury identification. RESULTS: We identified injuries or disclosures of abuse in 180 (9.4%) contacts. Recommended screening was omitted in >20% of subjects for each screening modality. At least 1 screening test was more likely to be completed in contacts of index children of non-White race or Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.13-1.87), with abuse-specific injuries (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.63-2.83), with a confession (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.17-4.07), when the history changed (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.05-2.61), when an occult injury was found by imaging in the index child (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.39-2.43), and when families lacked private insurance (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.15-2.31). CONCLUSION: Completion of screening recommended for contacts of potentially abused children is relatively poor, despite high risk of injury. Several clinical and demographic factors were associated with increased contact screening.

Longitudinal experiences of children remaining at home after a first-time investigation for suspected maltreatment.

OBJECTIVE: To describe longitudinal change in risk for children remaining at home following a first-time investigation for suspected maltreatment. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of children remaining at home following first-time investigation for maltreatment using a nationally representative sample of households involved with Child Protective Services. Outcomes include poverty, social support, caregiver depression, intimate partner violence (IPV), drug/alcohol dependence, corporal punishment, and child behavior problems at baseline, 18, and 36 months following first-time Child Protective Services investigation. We present longitudinal models to (1) estimate prevalence of risk factors at each timepoint; and (2) examine associations between risk-specific service referrals and longitudinal change in risk factor prevalence. RESULTS: Our sample represented 1057056 US children remaining at home following first-time investigation for maltreatment. Almost 100000 (9.2%) children experienced out-of-home placement within 36 months. The prevalence of poverty (44.3%), poor social support (36.3%), caregiver depression (24.4%), IPV (22.1%), and internalizing (30.0%) and externalizing (35.8%) child behavior problems was above general population prevalence at baseline and remained high over the next 36 months. Referral to risk-specific services occurred in a minority of cases, but was associated with significant longitudinal reductions in IPV, drug/alcohol dependence, and externalizing child behavior problems. CONCLUSIONS: Children remaining at home following a first-time investigation for maltreatment live with persistent risk factors for repeat maltreatment. Appropriate service referrals are uncommon, but may be associated with meaningful reduction in risk over time. Pediatricians and policy makers may be able to improve outcomes in these families with appropriate service provision and referrals.