Cargando…

Variation in health visiting contacts for children in England: cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review using administrative data (Community Services Dataset, CSDS)

OBJECTIVE: The 2–2½ year universal health visiting review in England is a key time point for assessing child development and promoting school readiness. We aimed to ascertain which children were least likely to receive their 2–2½ year review and whether there were additional non-mandated contacts fo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fraser, Caroline, Harron, Katie, Barlow, Jane, Bennett, Samantha, Woods, Geoffrey, Shand, Jenny, Kendall, Sally, Woodman, Jenny
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8867374/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35193912
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053884
_version_ 1784656041961586688
author Fraser, Caroline
Harron, Katie
Barlow, Jane
Bennett, Samantha
Woods, Geoffrey
Shand, Jenny
Kendall, Sally
Woodman, Jenny
author_facet Fraser, Caroline
Harron, Katie
Barlow, Jane
Bennett, Samantha
Woods, Geoffrey
Shand, Jenny
Kendall, Sally
Woodman, Jenny
author_sort Fraser, Caroline
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The 2–2½ year universal health visiting review in England is a key time point for assessing child development and promoting school readiness. We aimed to ascertain which children were least likely to receive their 2–2½ year review and whether there were additional non-mandated contacts for children who missed this review. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review and additional health visiting contacts for 181 130 children aged 2 in England 2018/2019, stratified by ethnicity, deprivation, safeguarding vulnerability indicator and Looked After Child status. ANALYSIS: We used data from 33 local authorities submitting highly complete data on health visiting contacts to the Community Services Dataset. We calculated the percentage of children with a recorded 2–2½ year review and/or any additional health visiting contacts and average number of contacts, by child characteristic. RESULTS: The most deprived children were slightly less likely to receive a 2–2½ year review than the least deprived children (72% vs 78%) and Looked After Children much less likely, compared with other children (44% vs 69%). When all additional contacts were included, the pattern was reversed (deprivation) or disappeared (Looked After children). A substantial proportion of all children (24%), children with a ‘safeguarding vulnerability’ (22%) and Looked After children (29%) did not have a record of either a 2–2½ year review or any other face-to-face contact in the year. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial minority of children aged 2 with known vulnerabilities did not see the health visiting team at all in the year. Some higher need children (eg, deprived and Looked After) appeared to be seeing the health visiting team but not receiving their mandated health review. Further work is needed to establish the reasons for this, and potential solutions. There is an urgent need to improve the quality of national health visiting data.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8867374
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88673742022-03-15 Variation in health visiting contacts for children in England: cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review using administrative data (Community Services Dataset, CSDS) Fraser, Caroline Harron, Katie Barlow, Jane Bennett, Samantha Woods, Geoffrey Shand, Jenny Kendall, Sally Woodman, Jenny BMJ Open Public Health OBJECTIVE: The 2–2½ year universal health visiting review in England is a key time point for assessing child development and promoting school readiness. We aimed to ascertain which children were least likely to receive their 2–2½ year review and whether there were additional non-mandated contacts for children who missed this review. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review and additional health visiting contacts for 181 130 children aged 2 in England 2018/2019, stratified by ethnicity, deprivation, safeguarding vulnerability indicator and Looked After Child status. ANALYSIS: We used data from 33 local authorities submitting highly complete data on health visiting contacts to the Community Services Dataset. We calculated the percentage of children with a recorded 2–2½ year review and/or any additional health visiting contacts and average number of contacts, by child characteristic. RESULTS: The most deprived children were slightly less likely to receive a 2–2½ year review than the least deprived children (72% vs 78%) and Looked After Children much less likely, compared with other children (44% vs 69%). When all additional contacts were included, the pattern was reversed (deprivation) or disappeared (Looked After children). A substantial proportion of all children (24%), children with a ‘safeguarding vulnerability’ (22%) and Looked After children (29%) did not have a record of either a 2–2½ year review or any other face-to-face contact in the year. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial minority of children aged 2 with known vulnerabilities did not see the health visiting team at all in the year. Some higher need children (eg, deprived and Looked After) appeared to be seeing the health visiting team but not receiving their mandated health review. Further work is needed to establish the reasons for this, and potential solutions. There is an urgent need to improve the quality of national health visiting data. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-02-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8867374/ /pubmed/35193912 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053884 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Public Health
Fraser, Caroline
Harron, Katie
Barlow, Jane
Bennett, Samantha
Woods, Geoffrey
Shand, Jenny
Kendall, Sally
Woodman, Jenny
Variation in health visiting contacts for children in England: cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review using administrative data (Community Services Dataset, CSDS)
title Variation in health visiting contacts for children in England: cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review using administrative data (Community Services Dataset, CSDS)
title_full Variation in health visiting contacts for children in England: cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review using administrative data (Community Services Dataset, CSDS)
title_fullStr Variation in health visiting contacts for children in England: cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review using administrative data (Community Services Dataset, CSDS)
title_full_unstemmed Variation in health visiting contacts for children in England: cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review using administrative data (Community Services Dataset, CSDS)
title_short Variation in health visiting contacts for children in England: cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review using administrative data (Community Services Dataset, CSDS)
title_sort variation in health visiting contacts for children in england: cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review using administrative data (community services dataset, csds)
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8867374/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35193912
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053884
work_keys_str_mv AT frasercaroline variationinhealthvisitingcontactsforchildreninenglandcrosssectionalanalysisofthe221⁄2yearreviewusingadministrativedatacommunityservicesdatasetcsds
AT harronkatie variationinhealthvisitingcontactsforchildreninenglandcrosssectionalanalysisofthe221⁄2yearreviewusingadministrativedatacommunityservicesdatasetcsds
AT barlowjane variationinhealthvisitingcontactsforchildreninenglandcrosssectionalanalysisofthe221⁄2yearreviewusingadministrativedatacommunityservicesdatasetcsds
AT bennettsamantha variationinhealthvisitingcontactsforchildreninenglandcrosssectionalanalysisofthe221⁄2yearreviewusingadministrativedatacommunityservicesdatasetcsds
AT woodsgeoffrey variationinhealthvisitingcontactsforchildreninenglandcrosssectionalanalysisofthe221⁄2yearreviewusingadministrativedatacommunityservicesdatasetcsds
AT shandjenny variationinhealthvisitingcontactsforchildreninenglandcrosssectionalanalysisofthe221⁄2yearreviewusingadministrativedatacommunityservicesdatasetcsds
AT kendallsally variationinhealthvisitingcontactsforchildreninenglandcrosssectionalanalysisofthe221⁄2yearreviewusingadministrativedatacommunityservicesdatasetcsds
AT woodmanjenny variationinhealthvisitingcontactsforchildreninenglandcrosssectionalanalysisofthe221⁄2yearreviewusingadministrativedatacommunityservicesdatasetcsds