OBJECTIVE: To examine parent concerns about development, learning, and behavior for young children of Mexican origin, and to identify whether these reports differ by families' citizenship/documentation status.

METHODS: Data come from the 2005 California Health Interview Survey, a population-based random-digit dial telephone survey of California's noninstitutionalized population. California Health Inerview Survey (CHIS) investigators completed interviews of 43 020 households with a total of 5856 children under age 6 years, of whom 1786 were reported being of Mexican origin. Developmental risk was measured by parent concerns elicited by the Parents' Evaluation of Developmental Status. We used bivariate and multivariate analyses to examine associations between developmental risk and family citizenship/documentation status (parents are undocumented, at least one documented noncitizen parent, or both parents are US citizens) among children of Mexican origin and US-born non-Latino white children, after adjusting for age, income, parental education, and predominant household language.

RESULTS: In multivariate analyses, children of Mexican origin did not differ significantly from US-born white children in developmental risk (odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.88-1.42). In subgroup analyses, children of Mexican origin with undocumented parents had higher odds of developmental risk (odds ratio 1.53, 95% confidence interval 1.00-2.33) than non-Latino white children whose parents were citizens, after adjusting for confounders.

CONCLUSIONS: Mexican children with undocumented parents have greater parent-reported developmental risk than Mexican and white children whose parents are US citizens or otherwise legally documented. More research is needed to understand the roles of immigration stress and home environments on the developmental risks of children in households with undocumented parents.

Objectives From 1994 to the year 2000 the government of Puerto Rico implemented a health care reform which included the mandatory enrollment of the entire Medicaid eligible population under Medicaid managed care (MMC) plans. This study assessed the effect of MMC on the use, initiation, utilization, and adequacy of prenatal care services over the reform period.

Methods Using the vital records of all infants born alive in Puerto Rico from the year 1995-2000, a series of bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to assess the effect of insurance status (traditional Medicaid, MMC, private insurance and uninsured) on prenatal care utilization patterns. In order to assess the potential influence of selection bias in generating the health insurance assignments, propensity scores (PS) were estimated and entered into the multivariate regressions.

Results MMC had a generally positive effect on the frequency and adequacy of prenatal care when compared with the experience of women covered by traditional Medicaid. However, the PS analyses suggested that self-selection may have generated part of the observed beneficial effects. Also, MMC reduced but did not eliminate the gap in the amount and adequacy of prenatal care received by pregnant women covered by Medicaid when compared to their counterparts covered by private insurance.

Conclusions The Puerto Rico Health Reform to implement MMC for pregnant women was associated with a general improvement in prenatal care utilization. However, continued progress will be necessary for women covered by Medicaid to reach prenatal care utilization levels experienced by privately insured women.

BACKGROUND: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, the most common childhood behavioral condition, is one that pediatricians think they should identify and treat/manage. OBJECTIVE: Our goals were to explore the relationships between pediatricians' self-reports of their practice behaviors concerning usually inquiring about and treating/managing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and (1) attitudes regarding perceived responsibility for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and (2) personal and practice characteristics. METHODS: We analyzed data from the 59th Periodic Survey of the American Academy of Pediatrics for the 447 respondents who practice exclusively in general pediatrics. Bivariate and logistic regression analyses were used to identify attitudes and personal and practice characteristics associated with usually identifying and treating/managing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. RESULTS: A total of 67% reported that they usually inquire about and 65% reported that they usually treat/manage attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Factors positively associated with usually inquiring about attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adjusted multivariable analyses include perceived high prevalence among current patients, attendance at a lecture/conference on child mental health in the past 2 years, having patients who are assigned or can select a specific pediatrician, practicing in suburban communities, practicing for > or =10 years, and being female. Pediatricians' attitudes about responsibility for identification of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder were not associated with usually inquiring about attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in either unadjusted or adjusted analyses. Attitudes about treating/managing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder were significantly associated with usually treating/managing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Those who perceived that pediatricians should be responsible for treating/managing had almost 12 times the odds of reporting treating/managing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, whereas those who believe physicians should refer had threefold decreased odds of treating/managing. Other physician/practice characteristics significantly associated with the odds of usually treating/managing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder include belief that attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is very prevalent among current patients, seeing patients who are assigned or can select a specific pediatrician, and practice location. CONCLUSIONS: Taking responsibility for treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and practice characteristics seem to be important correlates of pediatrician self-reported behavior toward caring for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

Any close examination of the epidemiologic trends in childhood suggests 2 fundamental findings. First, pediatrics has been among the most successful specialties in the history of medicine. Second, pediatrics must change. At the heart of this seeming paradox is the recognition that pediatrics has so altered the clinical threats to the well-being ofthe past 50 years that new structures of care will be required. The pride in pediatrics' remarkable record of impact and at the same time defend the status quo. modern children over epidemiology presents a ruthless logic: one cannot take

The challenge to the pediatrics community is to ensure that the changes that will inevitably come are exquisitely focused on meeting the needs of children. We must craft strategies that can protect what remains essential in pediatric practice and yet embrace a historic opportunity to craft requisite reforms. It is in this context that the recent initiatives by the American Board of Pediatrics [Editor's note: also see related supplement titled "Residency Review and Redesign in Pediatrics: New (and Old) Questions" with this issue of Pediatrics.] and the American Academy of Pediatrics to consider new training and practice needs should be welcomed. However, the nature and scale of the challenge will require a new level of direct engagement from pediatricians and a renewed progressive commitment to speak with a stronger and more coherent collective voice.

OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this study were to develop a pediatric-focused tool for adverse drug event detection and describe the incidence and characteristics of adverse drug events in children's hospitals identified by this tool.

METHODS: A pediatric-specific trigger tool for adverse drug event detection was developed and tested. Eighty patients from each site were randomly selected for retrospective chart review. All adverse drug events identified using the trigger tool were evaluated for severity, preventability, ability to mitigate, ability to identify the event earlier, and presence of associated occurrence report. Each trigger and the entire tool were evaluated for positive predictive value.

RESULTS: Review of 960 randomly selected charts from 12 children's hospitals revealed 2388 triggers (2.49 per patient) and 107 unique adverse drug events. Mean adverse drug event rates were 11.1 per 100 patients, 15.7 per 1000 patient-days, and 1.23 per 1000 medication doses. The positive predictive value of the trigger tool was 3.7%. Twenty-two percent of all adverse drug events were deemed preventable, 17.8% could have been identified earlier, and 16.8% could have been mitigated more effectively. Ninety-seven percent of the identified adverse drug events resulted in mild, temporary harm. Only 3.7% of adverse drug events were identified in existing hospital-based occurrence reports. The most common adverse drug events identified were pruritis and nausea, the most common medication classes causing adverse drug events were opioid analgesics and antibiotics, and the most common stages of the medication management process associated with preventable adverse drug events were monitoring and prescribing/ordering.

CONCLUSIONS: Adverse drug event rates in hospitalized children are substantially higher than previously described. Most adverse drug events resulted in temporary harm, and 22% were classified as preventable. Only 3.7% were identified by using traditional voluntary reporting methods. Our pediatric-focused trigger tool is effective at identifying adverse drug events in inpatient pediatric populations.

OBJECTIVES: Narcotic-related adverse drug events are the most common adverse drug events in hospitalized children. Despite multiple published studies describing interventions that decrease adverse drug events from narcotics, large-scale collaborative quality improvement efforts to address narcotic-related adverse drug events in pediatrics have not been described. The purpose of this study was to evaluate collaborative-wide narcotic-related adverse drug event rates after a collection of expert panel-defined best practices was implemented.

METHODS: All 42 children's hospitals in the Child Health Corporation of America were invited to participate in the Institute for Healthcare Improvement-style quality improvement collaborative aimed at reducing narcotic-related adverse drug events. A collection of interventions known or suspected to reduce narcotic-related adverse drug events was recommended by an expert panel, with each site implementing >or=1 of these best practices on the basis of local need. Narcotic-related adverse drug event rates were compared between the baseline (December 1, 2004, to March 31, 2005) and postimplementation periods (January 1, 2006, to March 31, 2006) after an a priori-defined intervention ramp-up time (April 1, 2005, and December 31, 2005). Secondary outcome measures included constipation rates and narcotic-related automated drug-dispensing-device override percentages.

RESULTS: Median narcotic-related adverse drug event rates decreased 67% between the baseline and postimplementation time frames across the 14-site collaborative. Constipation rates decreased 68.9%, and automated drug-dispensing-device overrides decreased from 10.18% to 5.91% of all narcotic doses administered.

CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of >or=1 expert panel-recommended interventions at each participating site resulted in a significant decrease in narcotic-related adverse drug events, constipation, and automated drug-dispensing-device overrides in a 12-month, 14-site children's hospital quality collaborative.