Search

Background: Indigenous infants (infants aged under 12 months) have the highest hospital admission and emergency department presentation risks in Australia. However, there have been no recent reports comparing hospital utilisation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous infants. Methods: Our primary objective was to use a large prospective population-based linked dataset to assess the risk of all-cause hospital admission and emergency department presentation in Indigenous compared to non-Indigenous infants inWestern Australia (WA). Secondary objectives were to assess the effect of socio-economic status (Index of Relative Socio-Economic Disadvantage [IRSD]) on hospital utilisation and to understand the causes of hospital utilisation. Findings: There were 3,382 (5.4%) Indigenous and 59,583 (94.6%) non-Indigenous live births in WA from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2011. Indigenous infants had a greater risk of hospital admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.90, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.77–2.04, p = < 0.001) and emergency department presentation (aOR 2.15, 95% CI 1.98–2.33, p = < 0.001) compared to non-Indigenous infants. Fifty nine percent (59.0%) of admissions in Indigenous children were classified as preventable compared to 31.2% of admissions in non-Indigenous infants (aOR 2.12, 95% CI 1.88–2.39). The risk of hospital admission in the most disadvantaged (IRSD 1) infants in the total cohort (35.7%) was similar to the risk in the least disadvantaged (IRSD 5) infants (30.6%) (aOR 1.04, 95% CI 0.96–1.13, p = 0.356). Interpretation: WA Indigenous infants have much higher hospital utilisation than non Indigenous infants. WA health services should prioritise Indigenous infants regardless of their socio economic status or where they live. more...

Objectives: To compare regional differences in the prevalence of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) detected by echocardiographic screening in high-risk Indigenous Australian children, and to describe the logistical and other practical challenges of RHD screening.Design: Cross-sectional screening survey performed between September 2008 and November 2010.Setting: Thirty-two remote communities in four regions of northern and central Australia.Participants: 3946 Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander children aged 5–15 years.Intervention: Portable echocardiography was performed by cardiac sonographers. Echocardiograms were recorded and reported offsite by a pool of cardiologists.Main outcome measures: RHD was diagnosed according to 2012 World Heart Federation criteria.Results: The prevalence of definite RHD differed between regions, from 4.7/1000 in Far North Queensland to 15.0/1000 in the Top End of the Northern Territory. The prevalence of definite RHD was greater in the Top End than in other regions (odds ratio, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2–4.6, P = 0.01). Fifty-three per cent of detected cases of definite RHD were new cases; the prevalence of new cases of definite RHD was 4.6/1000 for the entire sample and 7.0/1000 in the Top End. Evaluation of socioeconomic data suggests that the Top End group was the most disadvantaged in our study population.Conclusions: The prevalence of definite RHD in remote Indigenous Australian children is significant, with a substantial level of undetected disease. Important differences were noted between regions, with the Top End having the highest prevalence of definite RHD, perhaps explained by socioeconomic factors. Regional differences must be considered when evaluating the potential benefit of widespread echocardiographic screening in Australia. more...

Objectives: To evaluate the utility of auscultatory screening for detecting echocardiographically confirmed rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in high-risk children in the Northern Territory, Australia.Design: Cross-sectional screening survey.Setting: Twelve rural and remote communities in the NT between September 2008 and June 2010.Participants: 1015 predominantly Indigenous schoolchildren aged 5–15 years.Intervention: All children underwent transthoracic echocardiography, using a portable cardiovascular ultrasound machine, and cardiac auscultation by a doctor and a nurse. Sonographers and auscultators were blinded to each others’ findings and the clinical history of the children. Echocardiograms were reported offsite, using a standardised protocol, by cardiologists who were also blinded to the clinical findings.Main outcome measures: Presence of a cardiac murmur as identified by nurses (any murmur) and doctors (any murmur, and “suspicious” or “pathological” murmurs), compared with echocardiogram findings. RHD was defined according to the 2012 World Heart Federation criteria for echocardiographic diagnosis of RHD.Results: Of the 1015 children screened, 34 (3.3%) had abnormalities identified on their echocardiogram; 24 met echocardiographic criteria for definite or borderline RHD, and 10 had isolated congenital anomalies. Detection of any murmur by a nurse had a sensitivity of 47.1%, specificity of 74.8% and positive predictive value (PPV) of 6.1%. Doctor identification of any murmur had 38.2% sensitivity, 75.1% specificity and 5.1% PPV, and the corresponding values for doctor detection of suspicious or pathological murmurs were 20.6%, 92.2% and 8.3%. For all auscultation approaches, negative predictive value was more than 97%, but the majority of participants with cardiac abnormalities were not identified. The results were no different when only definite RHD and congenital abnormalities were considered as true cases.Conclusions: Sensi more...