Utilisation of early intervention services in young children with hypoplastic left heart syndrome

Abstract

Objective Children with hypoplastic left heart syndrome are at a risk for neurodevelopmental delays. Current guidelines recommend systematic evaluation and management of neurodevelopmental outcomes with referral for early intervention services. The Single Ventricle Reconstruction Trial represents the largest cohort of children with hypoplastic left heart syndrome ever assembled. Data on life events and resource utilisation have been collected annually. We sought to determine the type and prevalence of early intervention services used from age 1 to 4 years and factors associated with utilisation of services. Methods Data from 14-month neurodevelopmental assessment and annual medical history forms were used. We assessed the impact of social risk and geographic differences. Fisher exact tests and logistic regression were used to evaluate associations. Results Annual medical history forms were available for 302 of 314 children. Greater than half of the children (52–69%) were not receiving services at any age assessed, whereas 20–32% were receiving two or more therapies each year. Utilisation was significantly lower in year 4 (31%) compared with years 1–3 (with a range from 40 to 48%) (p < 0.001). Social risk factors were not associated with the use of services at any age but there were significant geographic differences. Significant delay was reported by parents in 18–43% of children at ages 3 and 4. Conclusion Despite significant neurodevelopmental delays, early intervention service utilisation was low in this cohort. As survival has improved for children with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, attention must shift to strategies to optimise developmental outcomes, including enrolment in early intervention when merited.

Affording autism an early brain development re-definition

“…This general scientific approach to adverse outcomes resulting from inborn or early-life risks is hardly novel in developmental psychopathology (Cicchetti & Toth, 2009), and it has become deeply ingrained in best-practice parameters, policy, and programs in regards to some conditions such as congenital hearing impairment (Korver et al, 2017); congenital heart disease necessitating first-year-of-life surgery(ies) (Marino et al, 2012; Mussatto et al, 2017); extreme prematurity (Greene & Patra, 2016; McManus, Carle, & Poehlmann, 2012); adverse social and family-related conditions collectively captured by the term “social determinants of health” (Alley, Asomugha, Conway, & Sanghavi, 2016; McGinnis, Williams-Russo, & Knickman, 2002); among many other conditions. The connection works in the other direction as well.…”

Transdiagnostic feasibility trial of internet-based parenting intervention to reduce child behavioural difficulties associated with congenital and neonatal neurodevelopmental risk: introducing I-InTERACT-North

“…Further, in addition to their concern for their child's physical health, many parents identify emotional and behavioural challenges as primary concerns for themselves and their children, with shared concerns extending across different congenital and neonatal conditions Williams et al, 2018). Despite calls for such services, psychosocial treatment and support for families have not been integrated into routine care (Marino et al, 2012;Mussatto, et al, 2018;Taylor et al, 2019;Woolf-King et al, 2018).…”

Understanding Early Childhood Resilience Following Neonatal Brain Injury From Parents’ Perspectives Using a Mixed-Method Design

“…Parents who have a strong positive belief in their child and their future are likely to adapt more flexibly and mobilize services, advocacy, and general support for their child. Parents attributed their child's outcome to many of the common monitoring and early intervention efforts provided following neonatal brain injury and other serious neonatal medical risks (Kirton et al, 2007;Mussatto et al, 2017;Spittle, Orton, Anderson, Boyd, & Doyle, 2012). The medical follow-up that is routinely offered was also a contributor to their child's success according to parents, with no issues in terms of frequency of these visits, drawing attention to the importance of ensuring environmental capacity to provide these resources.…”

“…The most common therapies accessed included speech and language (45%), occupational (43%), infant development worker (42%), and physical therapy (33%). Participation in any early intervention was coded dichotomously (0/1) as per other studies on service usage (Mussatto et al, 2017).…”