Search

Compared with most other Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD) countries, information about the patterns of health service use for children from immigrant families in Australia is currently limited, and internationally, data on unmet healthcare needs are scarce. This study aims to examine the distribution of health service utilisation and unmet healthcare needs for immigrant children aged 10–11 years in Australia. We drew on data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children Birth (B; n = 5,107) and Kindergarten (K; n = 4,983) cohorts. The exposure was family immigration background collected at 0–1 (B‐cohort) and 4–5 (K‐cohort) years. Outcomes were parent‐reported child health service use and unmet healthcare needs (defined as the difference between services needed and services received) at 10–11 years. Logistic regression analyses were used to examine associations between family immigration background and health service use/unmet healthcare needs, adjusting for potential confounders. Results showed that one‐third of Australian children (B‐cohort: 29.0%; K‐cohort: 33.4%) came from immigrant families. There were similar patterns of health service use and unmet healthcare needs between children from English‐speaking immigrant and Australian‐born families. However, children from non‐English‐speaking immigrant families used fewer health services, including paediatric, dental, mental health and emergency ward services. There was a disparity between the services used when considering children's health needs, particularly for paediatric specialist services (B‐cohort: OR = 2.43, 95% CI 1.11–5.31; K‐cohort: OR = 2.72, 95% CI 1.32–5.58). Findings indicate that Australian children from non‐English‐speaking immigrant families experience more unmet healthcare needs and face more barriers in accessing health services. Further effort is needed to ensure that the healthcare system meets the needs of all families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To examine the child and parental outcomes at school age of a randomized controlled trial of a home-based early preventative care program for infants born very preterm and their caregivers. METHODS: At term-equivalent age, 120 infants born at a gestational age of <30 weeks were randomly allocated to intervention (n = 61) or standard care (n = 59) groups. The intervention included 9 home visits over the first year of life focusing on infant development, parental mental health, and the parent--infant relationship. At 8 years' corrected age, children's cognitive, behavioral, and motor functioning and parental mental health were assessed. Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS: One hundred children, including 13 sets of twins, attended follow-up (85% follow-up of survivors). Children in the intervention group were less likely to have mathematics difficulties (odds ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 0.98; P = .045) than children in the standard care group, but there was no evidence of an effect on other developmental outcomes. Parents in the intervention group reported fewer symptoms of depression (mean difference, -2.7; 95% CI, -4.0 to -1.4; P < .001) and had reduced odds for mild to severe depression (odds ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.68; P = .0152) than parents in the standard care group. CONCLUSIONS: An early preventive care program for very preterm infants and their parents had minimal long-term effects on child neurodevelopmental outcomes at the 8-year follow-up, whereas primary caregivers in the intervention group reported less depression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]