MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149227673 · doi:10.1542/peds.113.3.e197

Prevalence and Correlates of Successful Transfer From Pediatric to Adult Health Care Among a Cohort of Young Adults With Complex Congenital Heart Defects

2004· article· en· W2149227673 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Graham J. Reid, M. Jane Irvine, Brian W. McCrindle, Renée Sananes, Paul G. Ritvo, Samuel C. Siu, Gary D. Webb

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenYork UniversitySickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkWestern University
FundersHospital for Sick Children
KeywordsMedicineCohortAttendancePediatricsYoung adultCohort studyConfidence intervalHealth careGerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: More than 85% of children born today with chronic medical conditions will live to adulthood, and many should transfer from pediatric to adult health care. The numbers of adults with congenital heart defects (CHDs) are increasing rapidly. Current guidelines recommend that just over half of adult CHD patients should be seen every 12 to 24 months by a cardiologist with specific CHD expertise at a regional CHD center, because they are at risk for serious complications (eg, reoperation and/or arrhythmias) and premature mortality. The present study aimed to determine the percent of young adults with CHDs who successfully transferred from pediatric to adult care and examine correlates of successful transfer. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study with prevalence data from an entire cohort. SETTING AND PATIENTS: All patients (n = 360) aged 19 to 21 years with complex CHDs who, according to current practice guidelines, should be seen annually at a specialized adult CHD center were identified from the database of the cardiology program at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, Canada, a pediatric tertiary care center. Of these patients, 234 completed measures about health beliefs, health behaviors, and medical care since age 18 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: All 15 specialized adult CHD centers in Canada formed the Canadian Adult Congenital Heart (CACH) Network. Attendance for at least 1 follow-up appointment at a CACH center before the age of 22 years was ascertained for all eligible patients. Attendance at a CACH center provides a clear criterion for successful transfer. RESULTS: In the total cohort, 47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 42-52) had transferred successfully to adult care. There was no difference in rates of successful transfer between patients consenting to complete questionnaires (48%) and those who declined (47%). More than one quarter (27%) of the patients reported having had no cardiac appointments since 18 years. In multivariate analyses of the entire cohort, successful transfer was significantly associated with more pediatric cardiovascular surgeries (odds ratio [OR]: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.40-4.37), older age at last visit to the Hospital for Sick Children (OR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.10-1.51), and documented recommendations in the medical chart for follow-up at a CACH center. In multivariate analyses of the patients completing questionnaires, successful transfer was significantly related to documented recommendations and patient beliefs that adult CHD care should be at a CACH center (OR: 3.64; 95% CI: 1.34-9.90). Comorbid conditions (OR: 3.13; 95% CI: 1.13-8.67), not using substances (eg, binge drinking; OR: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.07-0.50), using dental antibiotic prophylaxis (OR: 4.23; 95% CI: 1.48-12.06), and attending cardiac appointments without parents or siblings (OR: 6.59; 95% CI: 1.61-27.00) also correlated with successful transfer. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to document the percent of young adults with a chronic illness who successfully transfer to adult care in a timely manner. Patients were from an entire birth cohort from the largest pediatric cardiac center in Canada, and outcome data were obtained on all eligible patients. Similar data should be obtained for other chronic illnesses. There is need for considerable improvement in the numbers of young adults with CHDs who successfully transfer to adult care. At-risk adolescents with CHDs should begin the transition process before their teens, should be educated in the importance of antibiotic prophylaxis, should be contacted if a follow-up appointment is missed, and should be directed to a specific CHD cardiologist or program, with the planned timing being stated explicitly. Adult care needs to be discussed in the pediatric setting, and patients must acquire appropriate beliefs about adult care well before transfer. Developmentally appropriate, staged discussions involving the patient, with and without parents, throughout adolescence may help patients acquire these beliefs and an understanding of the need for ongoing care. Improved continuity of pediatric care and provision of clear details for adult follow-up might be sufficient to cause substantive improvements in successful transfer. An understanding of why patients drop out of pediatric care may be needed to improve the continuity of care throughout adolescence. Almost one quarter of the patients believed adult care should be somewhere other than at a CACH center despite opposite recommendations. For these patients, a single discussion of adult care during the final pediatric visit may be too little, too late. In addition to earlier discussions, multiple mechanisms such as referral letters and transition clinics are needed. Similarly, patients engaging in multiple risky or poor health behaviors such as substance use may need more intensive programs to make substantial changes in these behaviors, which hopefully would lead to successful transfer. Overall, these data support the view that transition to adult care (a planned process of discussing and preparing for transfer to an adult health center) is important and should begin well before patients are transferred. The future health of adults with chronic conditions may depend on our ability to make these changes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations492
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207