Search

Context: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are associated with increased risk of poor mental health outcomes. Although there is interest in screening for ACEs for early identification and intervention, it is not known whether screening improves outcomes for children., Objective: To systematically review whether screening for ACEs in children leads to an increase in (1) identification of ACEs, (2) referrals to services, (3) increased uptake of services, and (4) improved mental health outcomes for children and parents., Data Sources: Ovid Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Center for Clinical and Translational Research electronic databases were searched between 2009 and 2021., Study Selection: Studies were included if researchers screened for current ACEs in children aged 0 to 12 years and they had a control comparison., Data Extraction: Information was extracted, including study characteristics, sample demographics, screening tool characteristics, referral rates to services, uptake rates, and mental health outcomes., Results: A total of 5816 articles were screened, with 4 articles meeting inclusion criteria. Screening for ACEs increases identification of adversity and may increase referrals to services. There are limited data about whether this leads to an increase in referral uptake by families. There are no reported data addressing mental health outcomes., Limitations: There are few published control trials of moderate quality., Conclusions: There is limited evidence that screening for ACEs improves identification of childhood adversity and may improve referrals. If we are to realize the hypothesized benefits of ACEs screening on child and parent mental health, it is essential to understand the barriers for families taking up referrals., Competing Interests: FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: The authors have indicated they have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Objectives: Policy makers in developed countries have long considered the education system an avenue for supporting mental health care for children. Whilst educators have identified many challenges to providing this support (e.g. non-core role, stigma, overcrowded curriculum), understanding clinicians' views on the role of educators and schools and how clinicians and schools could work together to achieve good mental health outcomes are important questions. However, clinician voices in how schools and health should work together for children's mental health care are frequently missing from the debate. We aimed to report clinicians' views about how the education system could support student's mental health and improve access to mental health care for children and adolescents., Methods: 143 clinicians (approximately 35 each of child and adolescent psychiatrists, pediatricians, child psychologists and general practitioners (GPs)) from the states of Victoria and South Australia participated in semi-structured phone interviews between March 2018 and February 2019. Inductive content analysis was applied to address the broad study aims., Findings: Key themes emerged: (1) The role of schools in supporting individual children; (2) School based programs to support children and families; and (3) Challenges of implementing these suggestions. Clinicians across all professional groups suggested the education system could play an important role in improving access to mental health services through harnessing existing staff or co-locating mental health clinicians. They also suggested schools could identify at risk children and implement coping and social skills programs., Conclusions: Schools and educators could play a key role in prevention and early intervention of children's mental health problems. However, before recommending exactly how to do this, key evidence gaps need to be addressed., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: Professor Coghill reports grants and personal fees from Shire, personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees from Medice, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Oxford University Press, grants from Vifor, personal fees from Servier, all outside the submitted work. All other authors have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose.

Background: Despite the well-established link between childhood adversity and mental health problems, there is a dearth of evidence to inform decision making about the most acceptable and feasible interventions for preventing mental health problems for children experiencing adversity. Expert consensus is an important input into evidence-informed policy and practice but is often employed at the national level which misses important local contextual factors shaping decision making. This study aimed to: (1) reach consensus on local priority interventions for preventing mental health problems for children living with adversity in Wyndham, Victoria; and (2) understand the enabling factors and barriers to implementing these interventions., Methods: This study employed six online modified nominal group technique (NGT) workshops with 19 stakeholders; intersectoral service providers from health, social and education sectors and caregivers of children aged 0-8 years., Results: Three interventions reached consensus among the mixed stakeholder groups as being a high or very high priority for implementation in Wyndham: nurse home visiting, parenting programs and community-wide programs. Key rationales were the ability for these interventions to act as a gateway for families to increase their knowledge about topics immediately relevant to them (i.e. parenting), increase their knowledge about available supports and build relationships with service providers., Conclusions: Local priorities for preventing mental health problems for children living with adversity emphasized relational approaches to service provision and were shaped by the availability of existing interventions and supports in the locality. The NGT was found to be an effective method for prioritising evidence-based practice interventions in health settings, engaging local stakeholders, and identifying enablers and barriers to implementation., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objectives: Despite substantial investment by governments, the prevalence of mental health disorders in developed countries remains unchanged over the past 20 years. As 50% of mental health conditions present before 14 years of age, access to high-quality mental health care for children is crucial. Barriers to access identified by parents include high costs and long wait times, difficulty navigating the health system, and a lack of recognition of the existence and/or severity of the child's mental health disorder. Often neglected, but equally important, are clinician views about the barriers to and enablers of access to high-quality mental health care. We aimed to determine perspectives of Australian clinicians including child and adolescent psychiatrists, paediatricians, psychologists and general practitioners, on barriers and enablers within the current system and components of an optimal system. Methods: A total of 143 clinicians (approximately 35 each of child and adolescent psychiatrists, paediatricians, child psychologists and general practitioners) from Victoria and South Australia participated in semi-structured phone interviews between March 2018 and February 2019. Inductive content analysis was applied to address the broad study aims. Findings: Clinician-identified barriers included multi-dimensional family factors, service fragmentation, long wait times and inadequate training for paediatricians and general practitioners. Rural and regional locations provided additional challenges but a greater sense of collaboration resulting from the proximity of clinicians in rural areas, creating an opportunity to develop support networks. Suggestions for an optimal system included novel ways to improve access to child psychiatry expertise, training for paediatricians and general practitioners, and co-located multidisciplinary services. Conclusion: Within the current mental health system for children, structural, training and workforce barriers prevent optimal access to care. Clinicians identified many practical and systemic ideas to improve the system. Implementation and evaluation of effectiveness and cost effectiveness of these ideas is the next challenge for Australia's children's mental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Improving mental health outcomes for children and young people has become a priority for policy makers in the developed world. In Australia, up to half of all children and adolescents meeting criteria for mental health disorders receive suboptimal levels of treatment (or no treatment at all) despite the availability of effective treatments. Children with complex mental health conditions are particularly at risk of inadequate treatment as optimal care requires coordination from medical, educational and social services. In Australia, clinicians including pediatricians, psychologists and child and adolescent psychiatrists deliver the bulk of mental health care for children with complex mental health conditions. We aimed to determine perspectives of these Australian clinicians on barriers and enablers within the current system and components of an optimal model of care. Methods: Inductive content analysis was used to analyse 30 semi-structured interviews with key clinicians managing the care of children with complex mental health conditions across Australia. Interviews were conducted using vignettes with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Autism as exemplars. Findings: Multiple barriers to optimal care exist at a systemic, clinician and family level. However, regional health systems provide an enabling environment from which metropolitan models could learn. Transitioning to adult services was highlighted as the most compromised area of care. Clinicians identified short (e.g. empowering parents to advocate for and deliver their child’s care, case conferencing with schools) and long term (e.g. co-locating disciplines to deliver care, workforce training) solutions. Conclusions: Whilst multiple barriers to optimal care for children with complex mental health conditions exist, clinicians identify several enablers including developing networks with other disciplines and empowering parents to advocate for and co-ordinate care. Systemic changes based on multidisciplinary, co-located and integrated care services should be developed as longer term solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]