This is the fi rst clinical practice guideline from the American Academy of Pediatrics that specifi cally applies to patients who have experienced an apparent life-threatening event (ALTE). This clinical practice guideline has 3 objectives. First, it recommends the replacement of the term ALTE with a new term, brief resolved unexplained event (BRUE). Second, it provides an approach to patient evaluation that is based on the risk that the infant will have a repeat event or has a serious underlying disorder. Finally, it provides management recommendations, or key action statements, for lower-risk infants. The term BRUE is defi ned as an event occurring in an infant younger than 1 year when the observer reports a sudden, brief, and now resolved episode of ≥1 of the following: (1) cyanosis or pallor; (2) absent, decreased, or irregular breathing; (3) marked change in tone (hyper-or hypotonia); and (4) altered level of responsiveness. A BRUE is diagnosed only when there is no explanation for a qualifying event after conducting an appropriate history and physical examination. By using this defi nition and framework, infants younger than 1 year who present with a BRUE are categorized either as (1) a lower-risk patient on the basis of history and physical examination for whom evidence-based recommendations for evaluation and management are offered or (2) a higher-risk patient whose history and physical examination suggest the need for further investigation and treatment but for whom recommendations are not offered. This clinical practice guideline is intended to foster a patient-and family-centered approach to care, reduce unnecessary and costly medical interventions, improve patient outcomes, support implementation, and provide direction for future research. Each key action statement indicates a level of evidence, the benefi t-harm relationship, and the strength of recommendation.

Hospitalization of children with CP represents a major expenditure for health care systems. Studies to improve the management of conditions associated with CP could result in better outcomes for children and families and potentially decrease costs associated with hospitalization.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Poor adherence to recommended screening for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and pediatricians’ lack of confidence in providing care for children with ASD reflect quality gaps in primary care. This study aimed to increase the proportion of toddlers screened for ASD and improve physicians’ self-efficacy in providing care to children with ASD. METHODS: Twenty-six Utah primary care practices participated in a 3 to 6 month learning collaborative (LC) to improve identification and ongoing care of children with ASD. Monthly chart audits assessed whether an ASD screening tool was administered at 18- and 24-month visits. Physicians completed pre-LC and post-LC surveys to assess changes in self-efficacy in providing care and changes in perceived barriers to implementation of screening and caring for children with ASD. RESULTS: Before the LC, 15% of 18- and 24-month visits had documented ASD screening, compared with 91% during the last month of the LC (P < .001). This rate of ASD screening was sustained 4 years after the LC by most practices. Compared with survey responses before the LC, physicians reported significant improvement in their ability to care for children with ASD and decreases in their perceived barriers to screening and caring for children with ASD. CONCLUSIONS: The LC was effective in increasing and sustaining recommended ASD screening of toddlers and improving physicians’ perceived self-efficacy in caring for children with ASD. Improving primary care screening, skills, and knowledge may improve the timing of diagnosis, initiation of treatment, quality of care, and outcomes for children with ASD.

Parents of children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) (n = 144) and primary care providers (PCPs) (n = 144) completed similar surveys assessing the ability of the PCP to address ASD-specific needs. Parents also rated their PCP's ability to deliver family-centered care. A majority of parents rated their PCP's ability as "not good" in addressing 14 of 17 ASD-specific needs, while a majority of PCPs rated themselves as "good" in addressing 10 of 17 areas. On 7 of 17 items, parents rated their PCPs lower than PCPs rated themselves. Parents who reported receiving family-centered care were more likely to rate the PCP's ability to meet ASD specific needs as "good". Both parents and PCPs identified areas for improvement in caring for children with ASD.

The results support the hypothesis that topic links are more efficient than nonspecific links regarding the time seeking for information. It is unclear whether the statistical difference demonstrated will result in a clinically significant impact. However, the overall results confirm previous evidence that infobuttons are effective at helping clinicians to answer questions at the point of care and demonstrate a modest incremental change in the efficiency of information delivery for routine users of this tool.