Special Schooling in Children with Congenital Heart Disease: A Risk Factor for Being Disadvantaged in the World of Employment

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate type of schooling in children with congenital heart disease (CHD) who were inpatients at a tertiary pediatric cardiology center. This retrospective cohort study included 227 consecutive children with CHD (male, 125; female, 102) who had been inpatients from 1996 to 2005. Data on type of schooling had been documented by the in-hospital teacher at the time of admission. Medical data were obtained by reviewing medical charts. The primary endpoint was the percentage of children requiring special schooling, which was related to the respective percentage in the Austrian pediatric background population. Furthermore, the influence of clinical and demographic covariables was assessed. Fifteen percent (vs. 3.6% in the background population) of the study cohort required special schooling; 86% of them had a history of cardiac surgery. Cardiopulmonary bypass surgery in the first year of life showed a trend for an association with an increased frequency of special schooling. There were no significant associations with the Aristotle Basic Score (a measure for procedure complexity in CHD), gender, or first language. In conclusion, the need for special schooling is increased in children with CHD.

Educational and rehabilitation service utilization in adolescents born preterm or with a congenital heart defect and at high risk for disability

“…From a sample of children with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, Mahle et al reported that 32.1% required special education supports with 3.5% in special schools. In a second study, 15% of children were in special schools; however this was documented in those 6 to 19 years who were hospitalized . We report that 29.0% were receiving educational resources (35.9% failed a grade) and 6.6% were in special schools.…”

“…In a second study, 15% of children were in special schools; however this was documented in those 6 to 19 years who were hospitalized. 22 We report that 29.0% were receiving educational resources (35.9% failed a grade) and 6.6% were in special schools. Maternal education and developmental profile of young people were found to be associated with educational service use.…”

“…Few studies have described ongoing educational and rehabilitation service use, particularly in adolescence when new challenges in life roles emerge before transition to adulthood . Although evidence to date highlights that many children born preterm or with a CHD require educational resources, few studies have examined factors that influence service utilization.…”

“…Few studies have described ongoing educational and rehabilitation service use, particularly in adolescence when new challenges in life roles emerge before transition to adulthood. [19][20][21][22][23] Although evidence to date highlights that many children born preterm or with a CHD require educational resources, few studies have examined factors that influence service utilization. The existing literature would suggest that access to rehabilitation services is low, but evidence is lacking on use of services or factors associated with use.…”

Academic achievement and needs of school‐aged children born with selected congenital anomalies: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…SEN rates in children with CHDs were significantly higher compared to the reference population/controls in all large studies reporting SEN data; in three small studies, the difference was not statistically significant (Sarrechia et al, 2016;Wright & Nolan, 1994) or not reported (Hiraiwa et al, 2020) (Figure 4a). Overall, SEN rates were higher in the USA (Mahle et al, 2000;Mulkey et al, 2016;Oster et al, 2017) compared with Europe (Mlczoch et al, 2009) or Australia (Lawley et al, 2019) for both cases and controls (Table S5). Children with severe CHD from five studies included in the metaanalysis (n = 4,026) (Mulkey et al, 2016;Oster et al, 2017;Riehle-Colarusso et al, 2015;Sarrechia et al, 2016;Wright & Nolan, 1994) had significantly higher SEN rates than controls (odds ratio, OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.90, 2.82; I 2 = 44.39%) (Figure 5).…”