Search

Background. Pediatric home health care is one of the fastest growing segments of our health care system. However, our knowledge of the extent and quality of the services provided in this field is generally limited. Despite this shortcoming, pediatric health care providers are increasingly expected to participate in the home health care of their patients. Objective. To describe the agencies and services that constitute pediatric home health care in a large metropolitan setting. Methods. During the summer of 1995, home health care agencies in King County, WA, were surveyed if they had provided any pediatric services within the preceding 6 months. The agencies were queried about their characteristics and services provided, as well as referral and reimbursement sources. Survey data were supplemented by interviews with agency and state health personnel. Results. Fourteen (88%) of the 16 agencies providing pediatric home health care services completed the survey. Agencies were predominantly for-profit, free-standing, and in business fewer than 10 years. Although there were uniform licensing requirements for agencies, no pediatric-specific regulations existed. In addition, many agencies lacked internal methods to ensure the provision of quality pediatric care. Eighty percent of all pediatric home health care services were provided by only 5 agencies. For intermittent (acute) services, agencies served approximately 450 children per month. The average number of visits per child was two, with 40% receiving only one visit. Services included skilled nursing (60%), infusion (27%), and respiratory therapy (9%). Maintenance (chronic) home health care services, for 156 chronically ill children, were provided almost exclusively by skilled nursing for an average of 9 hours per patient per day. The majority of referrals to agencies (75%) originated from health care providers, although a small number came from insurance companies or individual families. Reimbursement for intermittent care services was divided among commercial insurance (35%), captitated contracts (35%), and Medicaid (20%). In contrast, 90% of reimbursement for the chronically ill was from Medicaid. Conclusions. In King County, WA, pediatric home health care is predominantly an unregulated, for-profit industry, with most agencies having little actual experience in pediatric home health care. In addition, the unique features of pediatric home health care necessitate both a greater understanding of this field and the consideration of more specific guidelines.

Background and Objectives. The false-positive rates of previously reported universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) programs range between 2.5% and 8%. Critics of UNHS programs have claimed that this rate is too high and might lead to a number of the negative effects produced by false-positive screening tests, namely emotional trauma, disease labeling, iatrogenesis from unnecessary testing, and increased expense in terms of time and money.We previously reported, based on some preliminary data, that as many as 80% of newborns who failed the initial hearing screen subsequently passed when they were retested the following day, before being discharged from the hospital. We now present the results of this intervention for our entire UNHS program during a 7-month period.Methods.We analyzed data from 3142 non-neonatal intensive care unit infants screened with an automated auditory brainstem response at the Women's Hospital of Greensboro from November 1, 1999 to May 31, 2000. A protocol was developed wherein all infants who failed the initial UNHS were rescreened with another automated auditory brainstem response before hospital discharge. Data collected included pass/fail rates during the inpatient stay as well as follow-up data and risk factors for congenital hearing loss.Results.Confirmed hearing loss occurred in 8 nonneonatal intensive care unit infants, a rate of 2.5/1000. Eighty percent of newborns who failed the initial hearing screen passed on rescreening before hospital discharge. This produced a false-positive rate of 0.8% and a corresponding positive predictive value of 24%. If inhospital rescreening had not occurred, our false-positive rate and positive predictive value would have been 3.9% and 6.1%, respectively.Conclusions.Our simple intervention of rescreening all infants who failed their initial UNHS before hospital discharge reduced the false-positive rate of UNHS to 0.8%. We suggest that this simple, inexpensive intervention should be instituted for all similar UNHS programs.

Objectives.Concern has been raised about the frequency and subsequent emotional effect of a false-positive result during universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS). This study describes: 1) the results of 1 UNHS program and a potential method to significantly reduce the false-positive rate, and 2) the effect a false-positive result has on lasting maternal anxiety toward their children as well as their views toward UNHS in general.Methods.A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from 5010 infants screened with an automated auditory brainstem response (ABR) at the Women's Hospital of Greensboro (WHOG) from July 6, 1998 to June 30, 1999. In addition, a structured telephone survey was given to mothers of infants who had failed the initial hearing screen (stage 1) and who had completed an outpatient rescreen (stage 2).Results.Confirmed hearing loss occurred in non-neonatal intensive care unit infants at a rate of 1.8/1000. A false-positive rate of 1.9% occurred during stage 1 of UNHS (screening before newborn discharge). We attribute this relatively low rate to rescreening of 51% of those newborns who failed the initial screen before hospital discharge. Eighty percent of these rescreened infants passed, thus needing no additional follow-up. If we had rescreened all infants before discharge, the false-positive rate would have approached .5%.Results of the survey were reassuring with regard to lasting emotional effects of false-positive tests. Only 9% of mothers said they “treated their child differently” before outpatient rescreening, and only 14% reported any lasting anxiety after their child passed the outpatient repeat screen. Although none reached statistical significance, potential risk factors for lasting anxiety include more educated mothers, lack of understanding of UNHS, and a false-positive result in both stage 1 and stage 2. Over 90% of all mothers believed that UNHS was a good idea.Conclusions.By rescreening all infants before hospital discharge, the false-positive rate of UNHS performed using automated ABR can be reduced to