Dataset Information

Adherence to Car Seat Tolerance Screening Differs by Indication and Patient Characteristics.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To assess whether adherence to institutional car seat tolerance screening (CSTS) guidelines differed for infants born preterm (PTM), term low birth weight (T-LBW), or both preterm and low birth weight (P-LBW), and to examine the association between CSTS adherence and patient characteristics.

Study design

Within two large academic and community hospitals, we retrospectively reviewed all infants meeting institutional criteria (< 37 weeks' gestation and/or < 2.27 kg) for CSTS from 2014 to 2018. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the association of patient characteristics with institutional CSTS guideline adherence.

Results

4374 eligible infants were born PTM (50.9%), T-LBW (6.5%), or P-LBW (42.6%). Adherence rates were 92.7% in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and 95.2% in the well-baby nursery with initial CSTS failure rates of 6.1% and 9.9%, respectively. Adherence was lowest among T-LBW (80.7%) compared to PTM (95.1%) or P-LBW (92.2%) infants in the NICU (p < 0.001) and well-baby nursery (81.6%, 96.7% and 97.1%, respectively, p < 0.001). In bivariate analyses, gestational age, birth weight, insurance, race, hospital type, discharge year, and preferred language were associated with adherence. In fully-adjusted models, adherence was positively associated with lower gestational age, higher birth weight, non-Medicaid insurance, and later discharge year (NICU) and lower gestational age and later discharge year (well-baby nursery).

Conclusions

Adherence was lower for T-LBW than PTM or P-LBW infants, despite similar CSTS failure rates. Disparities in adherence among Medicaid-insured patients in the NICU warrant further study. Future studies are needed to clarify the benefit of CSTS and increase adherence in high-risk populations.

SUBMITTER: McLaurin-Jiang S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8369874 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn Germany, all women aged 50-69 have been invited to biennial mammography screening since 2009. We aimed to assess longitudinal adherence over ten years in women aged 50 in 2009 and characterize the different adherence groups.MethodsUsing the German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database (GePaRD, ~ 20% of the German population), we included women aged 50 in 2009 (baseline) with continuous health insurance coverage and without breast cancer or in-situ-carcinoma. We followed them until age 59 and categorized them according to mammography screening participation into the following groups: never, 1-2, 3-4, 5-6 times. We characterized these groups, inter alia, regarding the use of other preventive measures, non-screening mammography (i.e., mammography outside the organized screening program) and menopausal hormone therapy.ResultsOverall, 82,666 women were included. Of these, 27.6% never participated in the screening program, 15.1% participated 1-2 times, 31.7% participated 3-4 times and 25.6% participated regularly (5-6 times). Among regular participants, 91% utilized other preventive measures (e.g., cervical cancer screening, general health checkup) before baseline as compared to 66% among non-participants. Menopausal hormone therapy was least common among non-participants (11% vs. 18% among regular participants). Among non-participants, the proportions using ≥ 1, ≥ 2, and ≥ 3 non-screening mammographies between age 50-59 were 25%, 18%, and 15%, respectively.ConclusionsUsing a large cohort based on claims data, this study provides novel insights into longitudinal adherence to the mammography screening program and the use of mammography outside of the program in Germany. Between age 50-59, 57% of eligible women participated at least three times in the German mammography screening program and 28% (~ 3 in 10 women) never participated. Among non-participants, 15% had at least three non-screening mammographies during this period, indicating potential gray screening. Participants more often utilized other preventive measures as compared to non-participants.

Project description:The study was conducted to determine the association between vehicle-, crash-, and demographic-related factors and injuries to front seat far-side occupants in modern environments.Field data were obtained from the NASS-CDS database for the years 2009-2012. Inclusion factors included the following: adult restrained front outboard-seated occupants, no ejection or rollovers, and vehicle model years less than 10 years old at the time of crash. Far-side crashes were determined by using collision deformation classification. Injuries were scored using the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). Injuries (MAIS 2+, MAIS 3+, M denotes maximum score) were examined based on demographics, change in velocity, vehicle type, direction of force, extent zone, collision partner, and presence of another occupant in the front seat. Only weighted data were used in the analysis. Injuries to the head and face, thorax, abdomen, pelvis, and upper and lower extremity regions were studied. Odds ratios and upper and lower confidence intervals were estimated from multivariate analysis.Out of 519,195 far-side occupants, 17,715 were MAIS 2+ and 4,387 were MAIS 3+ level injured occupants. The mean age, stature, total body mass, and body mass index (BMI) were 40.7 years, 1.7 m, 77.2 kg, and 26.8 kg/m2, respectively. Of occupants with MAIS 2+ injuries, 51% had head and 19% had thorax injuries. Of occupants with MAIS 3+ injuries, 50% had head and 69% had thorax injuries. The cumulative distribution of changes in velocities at the 50th percentile for the struck vehicle for all occupants and occupants with MAIS 2+ and MAIS 3+ injuries were 19, 34, and 42 km/h, respectively. Furthermore, 73% of MAIS 2+ injuries and 86% of MAIS 3+ injuries occurred at a change in velocity of 24 km/h or greater. Odds of sustaining MAIS 2+ and MAIS 3+ injuries increased with each unit increase in change in velocity, stature, and age, with one exception. Odds of sustaining injuries were higher with the presence of an occupant in the front seat at the MAIS 3+ level, although it was reversed at the lower level. The extent zone of 3+ increased the odds compared to the extent zones of 1 to 2 at both MAIS 2+ and MAIS 3+ injuries. Odds ratios and confidence intervals are given.The findings are as follows: head and thorax are the more frequently injured body regions, and the prevalence of cranium injuries is similar at both injury severities; thoracic injuries are more prevalent at the MAIS 3+ level; the presence of another front seat occupant plays a role in MAIS 3+ trauma; injuries continue to occur at changes in velocity representative of side impact environments; and mean demographic factors are close to mid-size automotive anthropometry, indicating the need to pursue this line of study. Because data were gathered from only 4 years, it would be important to include additional NASS-CDS database years, rescore injuries from previous years, and analyze other international databases to reinforce these findings for advancing safety for far-side occupants.