Twenty years of research shows UK child development team provision still varies widely for children with disability

Requirements for and Barriers to Rehabilitation Services for Children With Disabilities in Middle- and High-Income Countries: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

The rehabilitation of children with disabilities has received considerable attention from the United Nations. However, the state of rehabilitation services for children with disabilities worldwide remains far from optimistic, even in economically affluent middle- and high-income countries.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aimed to identify the rehabilitation needs of children with disabilities and their barriers to rehabilitation services in middle- and high-income countries.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE and Web of Science for papers published from January 2013 to December 2023. Studies were included if they were peer-reviewed, full-text articles related to children with disabilities, reporting on their access to rehabilitation services, and conducted in countries classified by the World Bank 2023 as middle- and high-income economies. Exclusion criteria included duplicates, unavailable full texts, and studies without distinct outcomes. A total of 27 studies were selected following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, focusing on children, their families, or service providers.

RESULTS

The suitability, availability, and affordability of rehabilitation services were identified as the major needs and barriers for children with disabilities in middle- and high-income countries. This included communication barriers, a need for more personnel and facilities, and the stagnation and inadequacy of economic subsidies.

CONCLUSIONS

Middle- and high-income countries have relatively well-established rehabilitation infrastructure and support systems. They are nevertheless insufficient for meeting the needs of children with disabilities. More attention should be paid to these issues to improve the well-being of children with disabilities. The data provided by this review can help raise awareness of rehabilitation needs and barriers at the policy level.

A national research survey of childhood autism assessment services in the UK: empirical evidence of diagnostic practice, challenges and improvement opportunities

BACKGROUND

The UK National Health Service (NHS) Long Term Plan aims to reduce waiting times for childhood autism diagnostic assessment and improve parent and child satisfaction. This empirical research investigated current childhood diagnostic practice provision, and changes made by teams to address challenges faced.

METHODS

Data were collected using an online semi-structured research questionnaire. UK childhood autism diagnostic assessment services (for children aged 1-18 years) were invited to participate through multidisciplinary clinical networks, special interest groups and professionals mailing lists. The study was on the National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network portfolio.

RESULTS

128 clinicians from diverse NHS services responded including: 10 (8%) integrated services, 46 (36%) Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) and 72 (56%) paediatric services. A minority of services (23, 17.9%) reported always meeting the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance for assessment. Referrals rose 115% between 2015 and 2019. Clinicians described increased child and family complexity compared with previously; children had more co-occurring physical, mental health and neurodevelopmental conditions and there were more frequent family health problems and safeguarding concerns. Most services (97, 75.8%) reported recent funding stayed constant/decreased. Incomplete multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) were frequently reported; a minority of services reported increased availability of professionals, and some experienced reductions in key professionals. Many teams were unable to undertake assessments or make recommendations for associated neurodevelopmental and co-existing conditions. Teams described improvement strategies implemented (eg, adapting professionals' roles, supporting parents).

CONCLUSIONS

Most UK autism paediatric and CAMHS diagnostic teams experience significant challenges affecting the assessment of children with possible autism, and recommendations regarding treatment/intervention. Where CAMHS or paediatric services work in isolation, there are often competency gaps in MDTs and ability to deliver full neurodevelopmental and mental health assessments. Teams identified service improvement strategies; however, investment in MDT expertise is required to enable services to implement changes to meet the needs of children and families.

Parent-delivered interventions used at home to improve eating, drinking and swallowing in children with neurodisability: the FEEDS mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Eating, drinking and swallowing difficulties are common in young children with neurodisability. These difficulties may lead to inadequate calorie intake, which affects a child's nutrition, growth and general physical health.

OBJECTIVE

To examine which interventions are available that can be delivered at home by parents to improve eating, drinking and swallowing in young children with neurodisability and are suitable for investigation in pragmatic trials.

DESIGN

This was a mixed-methods study that included focus groups, surveys, an update of published systematic reviews of interventions, a systematic review of measurement properties of existing tools, evidence mapping, evidence synthesis, a Delphi survey and stakeholder workshops.

SETTING

The study was carried out in NHS hospitals, community services, family homes and schools.

PARTICIPANTS

Parents of children who had neurodisability and eating, drinking and swallowing difficulties. Professionals from health and education. Young people with eating, drinking and swallowing difficulties or young people who had previously experienced eating, drinking and swallowing difficulties.

DATA SOURCES

Literature reviews; national surveys of parents and professionals; focus groups with parents, young people and professionals; and stakeholder consultation workshops.

REVIEW METHODS

An update of published systematic reviews of interventions (searched July-August 2017), a mapping review (searched October 2017) and a systematic review of measurement properties using COnsensus-based Standards for the Selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology (searched May 2018).

RESULTS

Significant limitations of the available research evidence regarding interventions and tools to measure outcomes were identified. A total of 947 people participated: 400 parents, 475 health professionals, 62 education professionals and 10 young people. The survey showed the wide range of interventions recommended by NHS health professionals, with parents and professionals reporting variability in the provision of these interventions. Parents and professionals considered 19 interventions as relevant because they modified eating, drinking and swallowing difficulties. Parents and professionals considered 10 outcomes as important to measure (including Nutrition, Growth and Health/safety); young people agreed that these were important outcomes. Stakeholder consultation workshops identified that project conclusions and recommendations made sense, were meaningful and were valued by parents and professionals. Parents and health professionals were positive about a proposed Focus on Early Eating, Drinking and Swallowing (FEEDS) toolkit of interventions that, through shared decision-making, could be recommended by health professionals and delivered by families.

LIMITATIONS

The national surveys included large numbers of parents and professionals but, as expected, these were not representative of the UK population of parents of children with eating, drinking and swallowing difficulties. Owing to the limitations of research evidence, pragmatic decisions were made about interventions that might be included in future research and outcomes that might be measured. For instance, the reviews of research found only weak or poor evidence to support the effectiveness of interventions. The review of outcome measures found only limited low-level evidence about their psychometric properties.

CONCLUSIONS

Opportunities and challenges for conducting clinical trials of the effectiveness of the FEEDS toolkit of interventions are described. Parents and professionals thought that implementation of the toolkit as part of usual NHS practice was appropriate. However, this would first require the toolkit to be operationalised through development as a complex intervention, taking account of constituent interventions, delivery strategies, implementation and manualisation. Subsequently, an evaluation of its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness could be undertaken using appropriate research methods.

FUTURE WORK

Initial steps include FEEDS toolkit development and evaluation of its use in clinical practice, and identification of the most robust methods to measure valued outcomes, such as Nutrition and Growth.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10454425.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 22. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Drooling Reduction Intervention randomised trial (DRI): comparing the efficacy and acceptability of hyoscine patches and glycopyrronium liquid on drooling in children with neurodisability

OBJECTIVE

Investigate whether hyoscine patch or glycopyrronium liquid is more effective and acceptable to treat drooling in children with neurodisability.

DESIGN

Multicentre, single-blind, randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Recruitment through neurodisability teams; treatment by parents.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety children with neurodisability who had never received medication for drooling (55 boys, 35 girls; median age 4 years).

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

medication contraindicated; in a trial that could affect drooling or management.

INTERVENTION

Children were randomised to receive a hyoscine skin patch or glycopyrronium liquid. Dose was increased over 4 weeks to achieve optimum symptom control with minimal side-effects; steady dose then continued to 12 weeks.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Primary outcome: Drooling Impact Scale (DIS) score at week-4.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

change in DIS scores over 12 weeks, Drooling Severity and Frequency Scale and Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication; adverse events; children's perception about treatment.

RESULTS

Both medications yielded clinically and statistically significant reductions in mean DIS at week-4 (25.0 (SD 22.2) for hyoscine and 26.6 (SD 16) for glycopyrronium). There was no significant difference in change in DIS scores between treatment groups. By week-12, 26/47 (55%) children starting treatment were receiving hyoscine compared with 31/38 (82%) on glycopyrronium. There was a 42% increased chance of being on treatment at week-12 for children randomised to glycopyrronium relative to hyoscine (1.42, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.95).

CONCLUSIONS

Hyoscine and glycopyrronium are clinically effective in treating drooling in children with neurodisability. Hyoscine produced more problematic side effects leading to a greater chance of treatment cessation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

ISRCTN 75287237; EUDRACT: 2013-000863-94; Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency: 17136/0264/001-0003.

Autism spectrum disorder: Consensus guidelines on assessment, treatment and research from the British Association for Psychopharmacology

An expert review of the aetiology, assessment, and treatment of autism spectrum disorder, and recommendations for diagnosis, management and service provision was coordinated by the British Association for Psychopharmacology, and evidence graded. The aetiology of autism spectrum disorder involves genetic and environmental contributions, and implicates a number of brain systems, in particular the gamma-aminobutyric acid, serotonergic and glutamatergic systems. The presentation of autism spectrum disorder varies widely and co-occurring health problems (in particular epilepsy, sleep disorders, anxiety, depression, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and irritability) are common. We did not recommend the routine use of any pharmacological treatment for the core symptoms of autism spectrum disorder. In children, melatonin may be useful to treat sleep problems, dopamine blockers for irritability, and methylphenidate, atomoxetine and guanfacine for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. The evidence for use of medication in adults is limited and recommendations are largely based on extrapolations from studies in children and patients without autism spectrum disorder. We discuss the conditions for considering and evaluating a trial of medication treatment, when non-pharmacological interventions should be considered, and make recommendations on service delivery. Finally, we identify key gaps and limitations in the current evidence base and make recommendations for future research and the design of clinical trials.

Designing and recruiting to UK autism spectrum disorder research databases: do they include representative children with valid ASD diagnoses?

OBJECTIVES

(1) Describe how the Autism Spectrum Database-UK (ASD-UK) was established; (2) investigate the representativeness of the first 1000 children and families who participated, compared to those who chose not to; (3) investigate the reliability of the parent-reported Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) diagnoses, and present evidence about the validity of diagnoses, that is, whether children recruited actually have an ASD; (4) present evidence about the representativeness of the ASD-UK children and families, by comparing their characteristics with the first 1000 children and families from the regional Database of children with ASD living in the North East (Dasl(n)e), and children and families identified from epidemiological studies.

SETTING

Recruitment through a network of 50 UK child health teams and self-referral.

PATIENTS

Parents/carers with a child with ASD, aged 2-16 years, completed questionnaires about ASD and some gave professionals' reports about their children.

RESULTS

1000 families registered with ASD-UK in 30 months. Children of families who participated, and of the 208 who chose not to, were found to be very similar on: gender ratio, year of birth, ASD diagnosis and social deprivation score. The reliability of parent-reported ASD diagnoses of children was very high when compared with clinical reports (over 96%); no database child without ASD was identified. A comparison of gender, ASD diagnosis, age at diagnosis, school placement, learning disability, and deprivation score of children and families from ASD-UK with 1084 children and families from Dasl(n)e, and families from population studies, showed that ASD-UK families are representative of families of children with ASD overall.

CONCLUSIONS

ASD-UK includes families providing parent-reported data about their child and family, who appear to be broadly representative of UK children with ASD. Families continue to join the databases and more than 3000 families can now be contacted by researchers about UK autism research.

Common visual problems in children with disability

Children with disability are at a substantially higher risk of visual impairment (VI) (10.5% compared with 0.16%) but also of ocular disorders of all types, including refractive errors and strabismus. The aetiology of VI in children with disability reflects that of the general population and includes cerebral VI, optic atrophy, as well as primary visual disorders such as retinal dystrophies and structural eye anomalies. VI and other potentially correctable ocular disorders may not be recognised without careful assessment and are frequently unidentified in children with complex needs. Although assessment may be more challenging than in other children, identifying these potential additional barriers to learning and development may be critical. There is a need to develop clearer guidelines, referral pathways and closer working between all professionals involved in the care of children with disability and visual disorders to improve our focus on the assessment of vision and outcomes for children with disability.