Pediatric provider perspectives and practices regarding health policy discussions with families: a mixed methods study

Background Advocacy regarding child health policy is a core tenet of pediatrics. Previous research has demonstrated that most pediatric providers believe collective advocacy and political involvement are essential aspects of their profession, but less is known about how pediatric providers engage with families about policy issues that impact child health. The objectives of this study were to examine providers’ perceptions and practices with regards to discussing health policy issues with families and to identify provider characteristics associated with having these discussions. Methods In this cross-sectional mixed methods study, pediatric resident physicians, attending physcians, and nurse practitioners at primary care clinics within a large academic health system were surveyed to assess (1) perceived importance of, (2) frequency of, and (3) barriers to and facilitators of health policy discussions with families. Multivariable ordinal regression was used to determine provider characteristics (including demographics, practice location, and extent of civic engagement) associated with frequency of these discussions. A subset of providers participated in subsequent focus groups designed to help interpret quantitative findings. Results The overall survey response rate was 155/394 (39%). The majority of respondents (76%) felt pediatricians should talk to families about health policy issues affecting children, but most providers (69%) reported never or rarely having these discussions. Factors associated with discussing policy issues included being an attending physician/nurse practitioner (OR 8.22, 95% CI 2.04–33.1) and urban practice setting (OR 3.85, 95% CI 1.03–14.3). Barriers included feeling uninformed about relevant issues and time constraints. In provider focus groups, four key themes emerged: (1) providers felt discussing policy issues would help inform and empower families; (2) providers frequently discussed social service programs, but rarely discussed policies governing these programs; (3) time constraints and concerns about partisan bias were a barrier to conversations; and (4) use of support staff and handouts with information about policy changes could help facilitate more frequent conversations. Conclusions Pediatric providers felt it was important to talk to families about child health policy issues, but few providers reported having such conversations in practice. Primary care practices should consider incorporating workflow changes that promote family engagement in relevant health policy discussions

Adolescent Access to Federally Funded Clinics Providing Confidential Family Planning Following Changes to Title X Funding Regulations

Importance: In May 2019, new federal regulations regarding Title X funding were introduced. There has been no formal evaluation of the impact of this regulatory shift as it pertains to minors' access to services. Objective: To explore the geography of federally funded clinics providing confidential reproductive care to adolescents following changes to Title X funding regulations. Design, setting, and participants: This retrospective cross-sectional study used a population-based sample of US Census tracts. All clinics participating in the Title X program in August 2018 and August 2020 were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from January to December 2021. Exposures: Period, defined as before and after the 2019 Title X rule change (August 2018 and August 2020, respectively). Main outcomes and measures: US Census tracts were evaluated for the availability of confidential family planning care within a 30-minute drive, according to the presence of a Title X clinic or a permissive state law. Census tracts in which minors lost access to confidential care after the rule change were characterized in terms of demographic characteristics. Univariate logistic regression evaluated associations between Census tract characteristics and the odds of losing vs maintaining access to legally protected confidential minor services. Results: The study included 72 620 Census tracts, accounting for approximately 324 697 728 US residents (99.96% of the population). After the Title X rule change, 1743 clinics in the Title X program left (39.0%) and minors living in 6299 Census tracts (8.7%) lost access to confidential family planning care, corresponding to an estimated 933 649 youth aged 15 to 17 years. Minors living in rural Census tracts (odds ratio [OR], 1.27; 95% CI, 1.18-1.36) and those in the Midwest (OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 2.24-2.60) had higher odds of losing access to care. Minors living in Census tracts with a higher Social Vulnerability Index (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.47-0.55), a larger proportion of Black individuals (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.31-0.37), and/or a larger proportion of Hispanic individuals (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.42-0.49) were less likely to lose access to care. Conclusions and relevance: These findings suggest that there were losses in access to legally protected confidential reproductive health services for youth after the 2019 Title X rule change. Although evidence-based Title X guidelines have since been reinstated, state laws that ensure adolescent confidentiality in obtaining family planning services may protect youth from future alterations to the Title X program

Follow-up After Pediatric Mental Health Emergency Visits.

OBJECTIVES: To examine how outpatient mental health (MH) follow-up after a pediatric MH emergency department (ED) discharge varies by patient characteristics and to evaluate the association between timely follow-up and return encounters. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 28 551 children aged 6 to 17 years with MH ED discharges from January 2018 to June 2019, using the IBM Watson MarketScan Medicaid database. Odds of nonemergent outpatient follow-up, adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, were estimated using logistic regression. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the association between timely follow-up and risk of return MH acute care encounters (ED visits and hospitalizations). RESULTS: Following MH ED discharge, 31.2% and 55.8% of children had an outpatient MH visit within 7 and 30 days, respectively. The return rate was 26.5% within 6 months. Compared with children with no past-year outpatient MH visits, those with ≥14 past-year MH visits had 9.53 odds of accessing follow-up care within 30 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.75-10.38). Timely follow-up within 30 days was associated with a 26% decreased risk of return within 5 days of the index ED discharge (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63-0.91), followed by an increased risk of return thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: Connection to outpatient care within 7 and 30 days of a MH ED discharge remains poor, and children without prior MH outpatient care are at highest risk for poor access to care. Interventions to link to outpatient MH care should prioritize follow-up within 5 days of an MH ED discharge

Follow-up After Pediatric Mental Health Emergency Visits

OBJECTIVES: To examine how outpatient mental health (MH) follow-up after a pediatric MH emergency department (ED) discharge varies by patient characteristics and to evaluate the association between timely follow-up and return encounters. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 28 551 children aged 6 to 17 years with MH ED discharges from January 2018 to June 2019, using the IBM Watson MarketScan Medicaid database. Odds of nonemergent outpatient follow-up, adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, were estimated using logistic regression. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the association between timely follow-up and risk of return MH acute care encounters (ED visits and hospitalizations). RESULTS: Following MH ED discharge, 31.2% and 55.8% of children had an outpatient MH visit within 7 and 30 days, respectively. The return rate was 26.5% within 6 months. Compared with children with no past-year outpatient MH visits, those with ≥14 past-year MH visits had 9.53 odds of accessing follow-up care within 30 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.75-10.38). Timely follow-up within 30 days was associated with a 26% decreased risk of return within 5 days of the index ED discharge (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63-0.91), followed by an increased risk of return thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: Connection to outpatient care within 7 and 30 days of a MH ED discharge remains poor, and children without prior MH outpatient care are at highest risk for poor access to care. Interventions to link to outpatient MH care should prioritize follow-up within 5 days of an MH ED discharge

Comparison of residual cancer burden, American Joint Committee on Cancer staging and pathologic complete response in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657)

PurposeSeveral pathologic staging systems characterize residual tumor in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Pathologic complete response (pCR) is now accepted by the Food and Drug Administration as an endpoint for granting accelerated drug approval. Two other systems of post-neoadjuvant pathologic tumor staging-residual cancer burden (RCB) and the American Joint Committee on Cancer post-neoadjuvant therapy staging system (yAJCC)-have been developed to characterize residual tumors when patients do not achieve pCR. The optimal system and the ways in which these systems complement each other have not been fully determined.MethodsUsing data from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL, we compared pCR, RCB, and yAJCC as predictors of early recurrence-free survival (RFS) to identify ways to improve post-neoadjuvant pathologic evaluation.ResultsAmong 162 patients assessed, pCR identified patients at lowest risk of recurrence, while RCB and yAJCC identified patients at highest risk. Hormone-receptor (HR) and HER2 subtypes further improved risk prediction. Recursive partitioning indicated that triple-negative or HER2+ patients with yAJCC III or RCB 3 have the highest recurrence risk, with an RFS of 27%. Our analysis also highlighted discrepancies between RCB and yAJCC stratification: 31% of patients had discrepant RCB and yAJCC scores. We identified differential treatment of lymph node involvement and tumor cellularity as drivers of these discrepancies.ConclusionsThese data indicate that there is benefit to reporting both RCB and yAJCC for patients in order to identify those at highest risk of relapse