This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Author in the Room Audio  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (9)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related articles  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Occupational and Environmental Medicine  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Alex R. Kemper, MD, MPH, MS; Lisa M. Cohn, MS; Kathryn E. Fant, MPH; Kevin J. Dombkowski, DrPH; Sharon R. Hudson, RN, MSN, CNM

JAMA. 2005;293:2232-2237.

Context  Follow-up testing after an abnormal screening blood lead level is a key component of lead poisoning prevention.

Objectives  To measure the proportion of children with elevated screening lead levels who have follow-up testing and to determine factors associated with such care.

Design, Setting, and Participants  Retrospective, observational cohort study of 3682 Michigan Medicaid-enrolled children aged 6 years or younger who had a screening blood lead level of at least 10 µg/dL (0.48 µmol/L) between January 1, 2002, and June 30, 2003.

Main Outcome Measure  Testing within 180 days of an elevated screening lead level.

Results  Follow-up testing was received by 53.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52.2%-55.5%) of the children. In multivariate analysis adjusting for age, screening blood lead level results, and local health department catchment area, the relative risk of follow-up testing was lower for Hispanic or nonwhite children than for white children (0.91; 95% CI, 0.87-0.94), for children living in urban compared with rural areas (0.92; 95% CI, 0.89-0.96), and for children living in high- compared with low-risk lead areas (0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.96). Among children who did not have follow-up testing, 58.6% (95% CI, 56.3%-61.0%) had at least 1 medical encounter in the 6-month period after the elevated screening blood lead level, including encounters for evaluation and management (39.3%; 95% CI, 36.9%-41.6%) or preventive care (13.2%; 95% CI, 11.6%-14.8%).

Conclusions  The rate of follow-up testing after an abnormal screening blood lead level was low, and children with increased likelihood of lead poisoning were less likely to receive follow-up testing. At least half of the children had a missed opportunity for follow-up testing. The observed disparities of care may increase the burden of cognitive impairment among at-risk children.

Author Affiliations: Child Health Evaluation and Research Unit, Division of General Pediatrics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (Drs Kemper and Dombkowski and Mss Cohn and Fant); and Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program, Michigan Department of Community Health, Lansing (Ms Hudson).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLES

Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention: Too Little, Too Late
Bruce P. Lanphear
JAMA. 2005;293(18):2274-2276.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Lead Poisoning
Sarah Ringold, Cassio Lynm, and Richard M. Glass
JAMA. 2005;293(18):2304.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Can We Turn a Toxin Into a Tonic? Toward 21st-Century Television Alchemy
Christakis
Pediatrics 2007;120:647-648.
FULL TEXT  

Primary Care Physicians' Attitudes Regarding Follow-up Care for Children With Positive Newborn Screening Results
Kemper et al.
Pediatrics 2006;118:1836-1841.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Lead Poisoning: Successes and 21st Century Challenges
Laraque and Trasande
Pediatr. Rev. 2005;26:435-443.
FULL TEXT  

Follow-Up of Elevated Screening Blood Lead Levels
Aldous
AAP Grand Rounds 2005;14:44-45.
FULL TEXT  

Children with elevated lead levels receive poor follow-up care
Kemp
AAP News 2005;26:2-2.
FULL TEXT  

What's new in the other general journals
Tonks
BMJ 2005;330:1171-1172.
FULL TEXT  

Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention: Too Little, Too Late
Lanphear
JAMA 2005;293:2274-2276.
FULL TEXT