Literature Collection

The Strengthening Care for Children (SC4C) is a general practitioner (GP)-paediatrician integrated model of care that consists of co-consulting sessions and case discussions in the general practice setting, with email and telephone support provided by paediatricians to GPs during weekdays. This model was implemented in 21 general practices in Australia (11 Victoria and 10 New South Wales). Our study aimed to identify the factors moderating the implementation of SC4C from the perspectives of GPs, general practice personnel, paediatricians and families. We conducted a qualitative study as part of the mixed-methods implementation evaluation of the SC4C trial. We collected data through virtual and in-person focus groups at the general practices and phone, virtual and in-person interviews. Data was analysed using an iterative hybrid inductive-deductive thematic analysis. Twenty-one focus groups and thirty-seven interviews were conducted. Overall, participants found SC4C acceptable and suitable for general practices, with GPs willing to learn and expand their paediatric care role. GPs cited improved confidence and knowledge due to the model. Paediatricians reported an enhanced understanding of the general practice context and the strain under which GPs work. GPs and paediatricians reported that this model allowed them to build trust-based relationships with a common goal of improving care for children. Additionally, they felt some aspects, including the lack of remuneration and the work and effort required to deliver the model, need to be considered for the long-term success of the model. Families expressed their satisfaction with the shared knowledge and quality of care jointly delivered by GPs and paediatricians and highlighted that this model of care provides easy access to specialty services without out-of-pocket costs. Future research should focus on finding strategies to ensure the long-term Implementation of this model of care with a particular focus on the individual stressors in general practices.

PURPOSE: To examine the associations between adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) scores from routine screenings in pediatric checkups and timing of puberty in a diverse cohort of adolescents. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 52,573 pediatric members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California, an integrated healthcare delivery system. Exposure was the total ACEs score, determined using caregiver- and self-reported scores across all well-child visits, and categorized into 0, 1-3, 4-6, or 7-10 ACEs. Outcomes were age at menarche and pubertal onset, using physician-assessed Sexual Maturity Ratings. RESULTS: Girls with ACEs had a substantially higher risk of earlier menarche and pubertal onset compared to those without ACEs. There were no associations between ACEs and boys' pubertal timing. DISCUSSION: These results highlight the importance of screening for ACEs in a clinical setting to address adolescents' psychological well-being and healthy lifestyle habits, which in turn may prevent adverse health outcomes associated with early puberty.

INTRODUCTION: Take-Home Naloxone programs have been introduced across North America in response to rising opioid overdose deaths. There is currently limited real-world data on bystander naloxone administration, overdose outcomes, and evidence related to adverse events following bystander naloxone administration. METHODS: The research team used descriptive statistics from Take-Home Naloxone administration forms. We explored reported demographic variables and adverse events among people who received by-stander administered naloxone in a suspected opioid overdose event between August 31, 2012 and December 31, 2018 in British Columbia. We examined and contextualized differences across years given policy, program and drug toxicity changes. We used multivariate logistic regression to examine whether an association exists between number of ampoules of naloxone administered and the odds that the recipient will experience withdrawal symptoms. RESULTS: A large majority (98.1%) of individuals who were administered naloxone survived their overdose and 69.2% had no or only mild withdrawal symptoms. Receiving three (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 1.64 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.08-2.48)) or four or more (AOR 2.19 (95% CI: 1.32-3.62)) ampoules of naloxone was significantly associated with odds of moderate or severe withdrawal compared to receiving one ampoule of naloxone. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence from thousands of bystander reversed opioid overdoses using Take-Home Naloxone kits in British Columbia, and suggests bystander-administered naloxone is safe and effective for opioid overdose reversal. Data suggests an emphasis on titration during bystander naloxone training in situations where the person experiencing overdose can be adequately ventilated may help avoid severe withdrawal symptoms. We identified a decreasing trend in the likelihood of moderate or severe withdrawal over the study period.