Income and Household Material Hardship in Children With Medical Complexity.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Household economic hardship negatively impacts child health but may not be adequately captured by income. We sought to determine the prevalence of household material hardship (HMH), a measure of household economic hardship, and to examine the relationship between household poverty and material hardship in a population of children with medical complexity. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey study of parents of children with medical complexity receiving primary care at a tertiary children's hospital. Our main predictor was household income as a percentage of the federal poverty limit (FPL): <50% FPL, 51% to 100% FPL, and >100% FPL. Our outcome was HMH measured as food, housing, and energy insecurity. We performed logistic regression models to calculate adjusted odds ratios of having ≥1 HMH, adjusted for patient and clinical characteristics from surveys and the Pediatric Health Information System. RESULTS: At least 1 material hardship was present in 40.9% of participants and 28.2% of the highest FPL group. Families with incomes <50% FPL and 51% to 100% FPL had ∼75% higher odds of having ≥1 material hardship compared with those with >100% FPL (<50% FPL: odds ratio 1.74 [95% confidence interval: 1.11-2.73], P = .02; 51% to 100% FPL: 1.73 [95% confidence interval: 1.09-2.73], P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Poverty underestimated household economic hardship. Although households with incomes <100% FPL had higher odds of having ≥1 material hardship, one-quarter of families in the highest FPL group also had ≥1 material hardship.

Pediatrician perspectives on barriers and facilitators to discharge instruction comprehension and adherence for parents of children with medical complexity.

BACKGROUND: High rates of posthospitalization errors are observed in children with medical complexity (CMC). Poor parent comprehension of and adherence to complex discharge instructions can contribute to errors. Pediatrician views on common barriers and facilitators to parent comprehension and adherence are understudied. OBJECTIVE: To examine pediatrician perspectives on barriers and facilitators experienced by parents in comprehension of and adherence to inpatient discharge instructions for CMC. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a qualitative, descriptive study of attending pediatricians (n = 20) caring for CMC in inpatient settings (United States and Canada) and belonging to listservs for pediatric hospitalists/complex care providers. We used purposive/maximum variation sampling to ensure heterogeneity (e.g., hospital, region). MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: A multidisciplinary team designed and piloted a semistructured interview guide with pediatricians who care for CMC. Team members conducted semistructured interviews via phone or video call. Interviews were audiorecorded and transcribed. We analyzed transcripts using content analysis; codes were derived a priori from a conceptual framework (based on the Pediatric Self-Management Model) and a preliminary transcript analysis. We applied codes and identified emerging themes. RESULTS: Pediatricians identified three themes as barriers and facilitators to discharge instruction comprehension and adherence: (1) regimen complexity, (2) access to the healthcare team (e.g., inpatient team, outpatient pediatrician, home nursing) and resources (e.g., medications, medical equipment), and (3) need for a family centered and health literacy-informed approach to discharge planning and education. Next steps include the assessment of parent perspectives on barriers and facilitators to discharge instruction comprehension and adherence for prents of CMC and the development of intervention strategies.

Changes in hospitalization populations by level of complexity at children's hospitals.

It is important for hospitals to understand how hospitalizations for children are changing to adapt and best accommodate the future needs of all patient populations. This study aims to understand how hospitalizations for children with medical complexity (CMC) and non-CMC have changed over time at children's hospitals, and how hospitalizations for these children will look in the future. Children with 3+ complex chronic conditions (CCC) accounted for 7% of discharges and over one-quarter of days and one-third of costs during the study period (2012-2022). The number of CCCs was associated with increased growth in discharges, hospital days, and costs. Understanding these trends can help hospitals better allocate resources and training to prepare for pediatric patients across the spectrum of complexity.

Accuracy of the Exeter Hospitalizations-Office Visits-Medical Conditions-Extra Care-Social Concerns Index for Identifying Children With Complex Chronic Medical Conditions in the Clinical Setting.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine the accuracy of a point-of-care instrument, the Hospitalizations-Office Visits-Medical Conditions-Extra Care-Social Concerns (HOMES) instrument, in identifying patients with complex chronic conditions (CCCs) compared to an algorithm used to identify patients with CCCs within large administrative data sets. METHODS: We compared the HOMES to Feudtner's CCCs classification system. Using administrative algorithms, we categorized primary care patients at a children's hospital into 3 categories: no chronic conditions, non-complex chronic conditions, and CCCs. We randomly selected 100 patients from each category. HOMES scoring was completed for each patient. We performed an optimal cut-point analysis on 80% of the sample to determine which total HOMES score best identified children with ≥1 CCC and ≥2 CCCs. Using the optimal cut points and the remaining 20% of the study population, we determined the odds and area under the curve (AUC) of having ≥1 CCC and ≥2 CCCs. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 4 (IQR: 0, 8). Using optimal cut points of ≥7 for ≥1 CCC and ≥11 for ≥2 CCCs, the odds of having ≥1 CCC was 19 times higher than lower scores (odds ratio [OR] 19.1 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.75, 37.5]) and of having ≥2 CCCs was 32 times higher (OR 32.3 [95% CI: 12.9, 50.6]). The AUCs were 0.76 for ≥1 CCC (sensitivity 0.82, specificity 0.80) and 0.74 for ≥2 CCCs (sensitivity 0.92, specificity 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: The HOMES accurately identified patients with CCCs.

Psychosocial Considerations for the Child with Rare Disease: A Review with Recommendations and Calls to Action.

Rare diseases (RD) affect children, adolescents, and their families infrequently, but with a significant impact. The diagnostic odyssey undertaken as part of having a child with RD is immense and carries with it practical, emotional, relational, and contextual issues that are not well understood. Children with RD often have chronic and complex medical conditions requiring a complicated milieu of care by numerous clinical caregivers. They may feel isolated and may feel stigmas in settings of education, employment, and the workplace, or a lack a social support or understanding. Some parents report facing similar loneliness amidst a veritable medicalization of their homes and family lives. We searched the literature on psychosocial considerations for children with rare diseases in PubMed and Google Scholar in English until 15 April 2022, excluding publications unavailable in full text. The results examine RD and their psychosocial ramifications for children, families, and the healthcare system. The domains of the home, school, community, and medical care are addressed, as are the implications of RD management as children transition to adulthood. Matters of relevant healthcare, public policies, and more sophisticated translational research that addresses the intersectionality of identities among RD are proposed. Recommendations for interventions and supportive care in the aforementioned domains are provided while emphasizing calls to action for families, clinicians, investigators, and advocacy agents as we work toward establishing evidence-based care for children with RD.

Beyond the Gates: Identifying and Managing Offenders with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Community Probation Services.

Research has indicated that, compared with the general population, the prevalence of offenders with ADHD in prison is high. The situation for offenders managed in the community by the Probation Service is unknown. This study aimed to bridge the gap in our knowledge by (1) surveying the awareness of probation staff about ADHD and (2) screening the rate of offenders with ADHD managed within the service. In the first study, a brief survey was circulated to offender managers working in 7 Probation Trusts in England and Wales asking them to estimate the prevalence of offenders with ADHD on their caseload, the presenting problems of these offenders and challenges to their management, and the training received on the treatment and management of offenders with ADHD. The survey had a return rate of 11%. Probation staff perceived that 7.6% of their caseload had ADHD and identified this group to have difficulties associated with neuropsychological dysfunction, lifestyle problems and compliance problems. They perceived that these problems hindered meaningful engagement with the service and rehabilitation. Challenges to their management were perceived to be due to both internal processes (motivation and engagement) and external processes (inadequate or inappropriate interventions). Few respondents had received training in the management of offenders with ADHD and most wanted more support. In the second study, a sub-sample of 88 offenders in one Probation Trust completed questionnaires to screen for DSM-IV ADHD in childhood and current symptoms. The screen found an estimated prevalence of 45.45% and 20.51% for childhood and adulthood ADHD respectively and these were strongly associated with functional impairment. Thus probation staff considerably underestimated the likely rate, suggesting there are high rates of under-detection and/or misdiagnosis among offenders with ADHD in their service. The results indicate that screening provisions are needed in probation settings, together with training for staff.

The effectiveness of police custody assessments in identifying suspects with intellectual disabilities and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

BACKGROUND: Intellectual Disabilities (ID) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) are recognized psychological vulnerabilities in police interviews and court proceedings in England and Wales. The aims of this study were to investigate: (a) the prevalence of ID and/or ADHD among suspects detained at a large London metropolitan police station and their relationship with conduct disorder (CD), (b) the impact of their condition on police staff resources, (c) the effectiveness of current custody assessment tools in identifying psychological vulnerabilities, and (d) the use of 'Appropriate Adults' in interviews. METHOD: A total of 200 individuals in a police custody suite were interviewed and screened for ID, ADHD (current symptoms) and CD. RESULTS: The screening rates for these three disorders were 6.7%, 23.5% and 76.3%, respectively. ADHD contributed significantly to increased requests being made of staff after controlling for CD and duration of time in custody. This is a novel finding. Reading and writing difficulties and mental health problems were often identified from the custody risk assessment tools, but they were not used effectively to inform on the need for the use of an Appropriate Adult. The frequency with which Appropriate Adults were provided to support detainees in police interviews (4.2%) remains almost identical to that found in a similar study conducted 20 years previously. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings suggest that in spite of reforms recently made in custodial settings, procedures may not have had the anticipated impact of improving safeguards for vulnerable suspects. Detainees with ID and ADHD require an Appropriate Adult during police interviews and other formal custody procedures, which they commonly do not currently receive. The findings of the current study suggest this may be due, in large part, to the ineffective use of risk-assessment tools and healthcare professionals, which represent missed opportunities to identify such vulnerabilities.