Paediatrics (RCH) - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Identifying and responding to family adversity in Australian community and primary health settings: a multi-site cross sectional study
    Hall, T ; Constable, L ; Loveday, S ; Honisett, S ; Schreurs, N ; Goldfeld, S ; Loftus, H ; Jones, R ; Reupert, A ; Yap, MBH ; Woolfenden, S ; Montgomery, A ; Dalziel, K ; Bailey, C ; Pringle, G ; Fisher, J ; Forell, S ; Eapen, V ; Haslam, R ; Sanci, L ; Eastwood, J ; Hiscock, H (Frontiers Media S.A., 2023-09-13)
    BACKGROUND: Unaddressed family adversity has potentially modifiable, negative biopsychosocial impacts across the life course. Little is known about how Australian health and social practitioners identify and respond to family adversity in community and primary health settings. OBJECTIVE: To describe, in two Australian community health services: (1) the number of adversities experienced by caregivers, (2) practitioner identification of caregivers experiencing adversity, (3) practitioner response to caregivers experiencing adversity, and (4) caregiver uptake of referrals. METHODS: Survey of caregivers of children aged 0-8 years attending community health services in Victoria and New South Wales (NSW). Analysis described frequencies of caregiver self-reported: (1) experiences of adversity, (2) practitioner identification of adversity, (3) practitioner response to adversity, and (4) referral uptake. Analyses were sub-grouped by three adversity domains and site. RESULTS: 349 caregivers (Victoria: n = 234; NSW: n = 115) completed the survey of whom 88% reported experiencing one or more family adversities. The median number of adversities was 4 (2-6). Only 43% of participants were directly asked about or discussed an adversity with a practitioner in the previous 6 months (Victoria: 30%; NSW: 68%). Among caregivers experiencing adversity, 30% received direct support (Victoria: 23%; NSW: 43%), and 14% received a referral (Victoria: 10%; NSW: 22%) for at least one adversity. Overall, 74% of caregivers accepted referrals when extended. CONCLUSION: The needs of Australian families experiencing high rates of adversity are not systematically identified nor responded to in community health services. This leaves significant scope for reform and enhancement of service responses to families experiencing adversity.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Emotional work of getting help: a qualitative analysis of caregiver-perceived barriers to responding to childhood adversity
    Loveday, S ; Balgovind, M ; Hall, T ; Goldfeld, S ; Sanci, L ; Hiscock, H (BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2023-10)
    OBJECTIVE: To explore caregivers' experiences and challenges of accessing help for adversity across both health and social care sectors. DESIGN: Qualitative study design using semistructured interviews to explore how caregivers accessed services across health and social care. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. SETTING: Families living in the city of Wyndham, Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 17 caregivers of children aged 0-8 years. RESULTS: Five main themes emerged. (1) Emotional work of getting help. Caregivers described that getting help for life challenges was both emotionally taxing and effortful. (2) Trusting relationships are key. Engagement was related to the degree of relational practice and whether they felt judged or demeaned. (3) Wanting to manage on your own. There was a strong desire by caregivers to be independent and to only seek help when it was absolutely necessary. (4) Importance of knowing help was available and how to access it. (5) Overcoming service access barriers including long waiting times, restricted service criteria, transport issues and out-of-pocket expenses. CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers highlighted a multitude of barriers to getting help for life challenges. Addressing these barriers will require services to become more flexible and codesign best approaches with families in ongoing partnership. Improving community knowledge of available services and building trusting relationships is the first step to overcoming these barriers.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Integrated Child and Family Hub models for detecting and responding to family adversity: protocol for a mixed-methods evaluation in two sites
    Hall, T ; Goldfeld, S ; Loftus, H ; Honisett, S ; Liu, H ; De Souza, D ; Bailey, C ; Reupert, A ; Yap, MBH ; Eapen, V ; Haslam, R ; Sanci, L ; Fisher, J ; Eastwood, J ; Mukumbang, FC ; Loveday, S ; Jones, R ; Constable, L ; Forell, S ; Morris, Z ; Montgomery, A ; Pringle, G ; Dalziel, K ; Hiscock, H (BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2022-05)
    INTRODUCTION: Integrated community healthcare Hubs may offer a 'one stop shop' for service users with complex health and social needs, and more efficiently use service resources. Various policy imperatives exist to implement Hub models of care, however, there is a dearth of research specifically evaluating Hubs targeted at families experiencing adversity. To contribute to building this evidence, we propose to co-design, test and evaluate integrated Hub models of care in two Australian community health services in low socioeconomic areas that serve families experiencing adversity: Wyndham Vale in Victoria and Marrickville in New South Wales. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multisite convergent mixed-methods study will run over three phases to (1) develop the initial Hub programme theory through formative research; (2) test and, then, (3) refine the Hub theory using empirical data. Phase 1 involves co-design of each Hub with caregivers, community members and practitioners. Phase 2 uses caregiver and Hub practitioner surveys at baseline, and 6 and 12 months after Hub implementation, and in-depth interviews at 12 months. Two stakeholder groups will be recruited: caregivers (n=100-200 per site) and Hub practitioners (n=20-30 per site). The intervention is a co-located Hub providing health, social, legal and community services with no comparator. The primary outcomes are caregiver-reported: (i) identification of, (ii) interventions received and/or (iii) referrals received for adversity from Hub practitioners. The study also assesses child, caregiver, practitioner and system outcomes including mental health, parenting, quality of life, care experience and service linkages. Primary and secondary outcomes will be assessed by examining change in proportions/means from baseline to 6 months, from 6 to 12 months and from baseline to 12 months. Service linkages will be analysed using social network analysis. Costs of Hub implementation and a health economics analysis of unmet need will be conducted. Thematic analysis will be employed to analyse qualitative data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Royal Children's Hospital and Sydney Local Health District ethics committees have approved the study (HREC/62866/RCHM-2020). Participants and stakeholders will receive results through meetings, presentations and publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN55495932.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Screening for Adverse Childhood Experiences in Children: A Systematic Review
    Loveday, S ; Hall, T ; Constable, L ; Paton, K ; Sanci, L ; Goldfeld, S ; Hiscock, H (AMER ACAD PEDIATRICS, 2022-02)
    CONTEXT: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are associated with increased risk of poor mental health outcomes. Although there is interest in screening for ACEs for early identification and intervention, it is not known whether screening improves outcomes for children. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review whether screening for ACEs in children leads to an increase in (1) identification of ACEs, (2) referrals to services, (3) increased uptake of services, and (4) improved mental health outcomes for children and parents. DATA SOURCES: Ovid Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Center for Clinical and Translational Research electronic databases were searched between 2009 and 2021. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if researchers screened for current ACEs in children aged 0 to 12 years and they had a control comparison. DATA EXTRACTION: Information was extracted, including study characteristics, sample demographics, screening tool characteristics, referral rates to services, uptake rates, and mental health outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 5816 articles were screened, with 4 articles meeting inclusion criteria. Screening for ACEs increases identification of adversity and may increase referrals to services. There are limited data about whether this leads to an increase in referral uptake by families. There are no reported data addressing mental health outcomes. LIMITATIONS: There are few published control trials of moderate quality. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence that screening for ACEs improves identification of childhood adversity and may improve referrals. If we are to realize the hypothesized benefits of ACEs screening on child and parent mental health, it is essential to understand the barriers for families taking up referrals.