Tiffany Riehle-Colarusso1, Andrew Autry2, Hilda Razzaghi2, Coleen A Boyle2, William T Mahle3, Kim Van Naarden Braun2, Adolfo Correa4. 1. Division of Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia; tja4@cdc.gov. 2. Division of Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia; 3. Sibley Heart Center, Children's Health Care of Atlanta, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia; 4. Departments of Medicine and Pediatrics, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, Mississippi.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We investigated the prevalence of receipt of special education services among children with congenital heart defects (CHDs) compared with children without birth defects. METHODS: Children born from 1982 to 2004 in metropolitan Atlanta with CHDs (n = 3744) were identified from a population-based birth defect surveillance program; children without birth defects (n = 860 715) were identified from birth certificates. Cohorts were linked to special education files for the 1992-2012 school years to identify special education services. Children with noncardiac defects or genetic syndromes were excluded; children with CHDs were classified by presence or absence of critical CHDs (ie, CHDs requiring intervention by age one year). We evaluated the prevalence of receipt of special education services and prevalence rate ratios using children without birth defects as a reference. RESULTS: Compared with children without birth defects, children with CHDs were 50% more likely to receive special education services overall (adjusted prevalence rate ratio [aPRR] = 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4-1.7). Specifically, they had higher prevalence of several special education categories including: intellectual disability (aPRR = 3.8; 95% CI: 2.8-5.1), sensory impairment (aPRR = 3.0; 95% CI: 1.8-5.0), other health impairment (aPRR = 2.8; 95% CI: 2.2-3.5), significant developmental delay (aPRR = 1.9; 95% CI: 1.3-2.8), and specific learning disability (aPRR = 1.4; 95% CI: 1.1-1.7). For most special education services, the excess prevalence did not vary by presence of critical CHDs. CONCLUSIONS: Children with CHDs received special education services more often than children without birth defects. These findings highlight the need for special education services and the importance of developmental screening for all children with CHDs.
BACKGROUND: We investigated the prevalence of receipt of special education services among children with congenital heart defects (CHDs) compared with children without birth defects. METHODS:Children born from 1982 to 2004 in metropolitan Atlanta with CHDs (n = 3744) were identified from a population-based birth defect surveillance program; children without birth defects (n = 860 715) were identified from birth certificates. Cohorts were linked to special education files for the 1992-2012 school years to identify special education services. Children with noncardiac defects or genetic syndromes were excluded; children with CHDs were classified by presence or absence of critical CHDs (ie, CHDs requiring intervention by age one year). We evaluated the prevalence of receipt of special education services and prevalence rate ratios using children without birth defects as a reference. RESULTS: Compared with children without birth defects, children with CHDs were 50% more likely to receive special education services overall (adjusted prevalence rate ratio [aPRR] = 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4-1.7). Specifically, they had higher prevalence of several special education categories including: intellectual disability (aPRR = 3.8; 95% CI: 2.8-5.1), sensory impairment (aPRR = 3.0; 95% CI: 1.8-5.0), other health impairment (aPRR = 2.8; 95% CI: 2.2-3.5), significant developmental delay (aPRR = 1.9; 95% CI: 1.3-2.8), and specific learning disability (aPRR = 1.4; 95% CI: 1.1-1.7). For most special education services, the excess prevalence did not vary by presence of critical CHDs. CONCLUSIONS:Children with CHDs received special education services more often than children without birth defects. These findings highlight the need for special education services and the importance of developmental screening for all children with CHDs.
Authors: Eric M Graham; Renee' H Martin; Andrew M Atz; Kasey Hamlin-Smith; Minoo N Kavarana; Scott M Bradley; Bahaaldin Alsoufi; William T Mahle; Allen D Everett Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2019-01-23 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Sherry L Farr; Matthew E Oster; Regina M Simeone; Suzanne M Gilboa; Margaret A Honein Journal: Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol Date: 2016-03-17
Authors: Sara K Pasquali; Jeffrey P Jacobs; Gregory K Farber; David Bertoch; Elizabeth D Blume; Kristin M Burns; Robert Campbell; Anthony C Chang; Wendy K Chung; Tiffany Riehle-Colarusso; Lesley H Curtis; Christopher B Forrest; William J Gaynor; Michael G Gaies; Alan S Go; Paul Henchey; Gerard R Martin; Gail Pearson; Victoria L Pemberton; Steven M Schwartz; Robert Vincent; Jonathan R Kaltman Journal: Circulation Date: 2016-04-05 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Adam R Cassidy; Matthew T White; David R DeMaso; Jane W Newburger; David C Bellinger Journal: Neuropsychology Date: 2016-04-14 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Jacqueline H Sanz; Madison M Berl; Anna C Armour; Jichuan Wang; Yao I Cheng; Mary T Donofrio Journal: Congenit Heart Dis Date: 2016-11-11 Impact factor: 2.007