Jennifer G Andrews1, Maureen K Galindo1, F John Meaney1, Argelia Benavides1, Linnette Mayate1, Deborah Fox2, Sydney Pettygrove3, Leslie O'Leary4, Christopher Cunniff5. 1. Department of Pediatrics, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona. 2. New York State Department of Health, Bureau of Environmental & Occupational Epidemiology, Albany, New York. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona. 4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Atlanta, Georgia. 5. Division of Medical Genetics, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) rests on identification of characteristic facial, growth, and central nervous system (CNS) features. Public health surveillance of FAS depends on documentation of these characteristics. We evaluated if reporting of FAS characteristics is associated with the type of provider examining the child. METHODS: We analyzed cases aged 7-9 years from the Fetal Alcohol Syndrome Surveillance Network II (FASSNetII). We included cases whose surveillance records included the type of provider (qualifying provider: developmental pediatrician, geneticist, neonatologist; other physician; or other provider) who evaluated the child as well as the FAS diagnostic characteristics (facial dysmorphology, CNS impairment, and/or growth deficiency) reported by the provider. RESULTS: A total of 345 cases were eligible for this analysis. Of these, 188 (54.5%) had adequate information on type of provider. Qualifying physicians averaged more than six reported FAS characteristics while other providers averaged less than five. Qualifying physicians reported on facial characteristics and developmental delay more frequently than other providers. Also, qualifying physicians reported on all three domains of characteristics (facial, CNS, and growth) in 97% of cases while others reported all three characteristics on two thirds of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Documentation in medical records during clinical evaluations for FAS is lower than optimal for cross-provider communication and surveillance purposes. Lack of documentation limits the quality and quantity of information in records that serve as a major source of data for public health surveillance systems.
BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) rests on identification of characteristic facial, growth, and central nervous system (CNS) features. Public health surveillance of FAS depends on documentation of these characteristics. We evaluated if reporting of FAS characteristics is associated with the type of provider examining the child. METHODS: We analyzed cases aged 7-9 years from the Fetal Alcohol Syndrome Surveillance Network II (FASSNetII). We included cases whose surveillance records included the type of provider (qualifying provider: developmental pediatrician, geneticist, neonatologist; other physician; or other provider) who evaluated the child as well as the FAS diagnostic characteristics (facial dysmorphology, CNS impairment, and/or growth deficiency) reported by the provider. RESULTS: A total of 345 cases were eligible for this analysis. Of these, 188 (54.5%) had adequate information on type of provider. Qualifying physicians averaged more than six reported FAS characteristics while other providers averaged less than five. Qualifying physicians reported on facial characteristics and developmental delay more frequently than other providers. Also, qualifying physicians reported on all three domains of characteristics (facial, CNS, and growth) in 97% of cases while others reported all three characteristics on two thirds of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Documentation in medical records during clinical evaluations for FAS is lower than optimal for cross-provider communication and surveillance purposes. Lack of documentation limits the quality and quantity of information in records that serve as a major source of data for public health surveillance systems.
Authors: Jan Payne; Elizabeth Elliott; Heather D'Antoine; Colleen O'Leary; Anne Mahony; Eric Haan; Carolyn Bower Journal: Aust N Z J Public Health Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 2.939
Authors: Philip A May; Amy Baete; Jaymi Russo; Amy J Elliott; Jason Blankenship; Wendy O Kalberg; David Buckley; Marita Brooks; Julie Hasken; Omar Abdul-Rahman; Margaret P Adam; Luther K Robinson; Melanie Manning; H Eugene Hoyme Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: F Vagnarelli; I Palmi; O García-Algar; M Falcon; L Memo; L Tarani; R Spoletini; R Pacifici; C Mortali; A Pierantozzi; S Pichini Journal: BMC Pediatr Date: 2011-06-06 Impact factor: 2.125
Authors: Sheila Gahagan; Tanya Telfair Sharpe; Michael Brimacombe; Yvonne Fry-Johnson; Robert Levine; Mark Mengel; Mary O'Connor; Blair Paley; Susan Adubato; George Brenneman Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: H Eugene Hoyme; Philip A May; Wendy O Kalberg; Piyadasa Kodituwakku; J Phillip Gossage; Phyllis M Trujillo; David G Buckley; Joseph H Miller; Alfredo S Aragon; Nathaniel Khaole; Denis L Viljoen; Kenneth Lyons Jones; Luther K Robinson Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: H Eugene Hoyme; Wendy O Kalberg; Amy J Elliott; Jason Blankenship; David Buckley; Anna-Susan Marais; Melanie A Manning; Luther K Robinson; Margaret P Adam; Omar Abdul-Rahman; Tamison Jewett; Claire D Coles; Christina Chambers; Kenneth L Jones; Colleen M Adnams; Prachi E Shah; Edward P Riley; Michael E Charness; Kenneth R Warren; Philip A May Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2016-07-27 Impact factor: 7.124