Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to consider mental health issues in children and adolescents with chronic illness or health conditions, including their treatment, and issues related to delivery of services.Design/methodology/approach: A selective review of the literature was conducted to highlight significant mental health issues and their treatment in youth with various types of chronic illness.Findings: A significant portion of youth experience mental health problems related to their chronic health conditions. While evidence-based treatments are available to address these problems, significant barriers exist that impede the delivery of psychological and behavioral interventions for many youth.Research limitations/implications: More controlled studies are needed to demonstrate the effectiveness and cost offset of delivering psychological and behavioral interventions for the population of youth with various types of chronic health conditions, particularly in clinical and community settings.Social implications: Policy reform can ensure that mental health issues are effectively addressed for children with chronic illness. Policy is needed that promotes integrated health care, whereby psychological and behavioral interventions are delivered in health care settings along with medical interventions to reduce barriers to care.Originality/value: Significant numbers of children and adolescents have chronic health conditions and many experience mental health problems related to their conditions. While evidence-based treatments are available to address these problems, significant barriers impede the delivery of psychological and behavioral interventions for many youth. Health care policy promoting integrated health care to deliver psychological and behavioral interventions in health care settings along with medical interventions should reduce barriers to care and improve both physical and mental health outcomes for youth.

Ambulatory antibiotic stewards, researchers, and performance measurement programs choose different durations to associate diagnoses with antibiotic prescriptions. We assessed how the apparent appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing changes when using different look-back and look-forward periods. Examining durations of 0 days (same-day), −3 days, −7 days, −30 days, ±3 days, ±7 days, and ±30 days, we classified all ambulatory antibiotic prescriptions in the electronic health record of an integrated health care system from 2016 to 2019 (714,057 prescriptions to 348,739 patients by 2391 clinicians) as chronic, appropriate, potentially appropriate, inappropriate, or not associated with any diagnosis. Overall, 16% percent of all prescriptions were classified as chronic infection related. Using only same-day diagnoses, appropriate, potentially appropriate, inappropriate, and not-associated antibiotics, accounted for 14%, 36%, 22%, and 11% of prescriptions, respectively. As the duration of association increased, the proportion of appropriate antibiotics stayed the same (range, 14% to 18%), potentially appropriate antibiotics increased (e.g., 43% for −30 days), inappropriate stayed the same (range, 22% to 24%), and not-associated antibiotics decreased (e.g., 2% for −30 days). Using the longest look-back-and-forward duration (±30 days), appropriate, potentially appropriate, inappropriate, and not-associated antibiotics, accounted for 18%, 44%, 20%, and 2% of prescriptions, respectively. Ambulatory programs and studies focused on appropriate or inappropriate antibiotic prescribing can reasonably use a short duration of association between an antibiotic prescription and diagnosis codes. Programs and studies focused on potentially appropriate antibiotic prescribing might consider examining longer durations.

Background: Among all ambulatory antibiotic prescriptions, about 20% are non-visit-based (ordered outside of an in-person clinical encounter), and about 30% are not associated with an infection-related diagnosis code. Objective/Methods: To identify the rationale for ambulatory antibiotic prescribing, we queried the electronic health record (EHR) of a single, large health system in the Midwest United States to identify all oral antibiotics prescribed from November 2018 to February 2019 and examined visit, procedure, lab, department, and diagnosis codes. For the remaining antibiotic prescriptions—mostly non-visit-based, no-infectious-diagnosis-documented—we randomly selected and manually reviewed the EHR to identify a prescribing rationale and, if none was present, surveyed prescribers for their rationale. Results: During the study period, there were 47,619 antibiotic prescriptions from 1177 clinicians to 41,935 patients, of which 2608 (6%) were eligible non-visit-based, no-infectious-diagnosis-documented. We randomly selected 2298. There was a documented rationale for 2116 (92%) prescriptions. The most common documented reasons—not mutually exclusive—were patient-reported symptoms (71%), persistence of symptoms after initial management (18%), travel (17%), and responding to lab or imaging results (11%). We contacted 160 clinicians who did not document any prescribing rationale in the EHR and received responses from 62 (39%). Clinicians’ stated reasons included upcoming or current patient travel (19%), the antibiotic was for the prescriber’s own family member (19%), or the clinician made a diagnosis but did not document it in the EHR (18%). Conclusions: Non-visit-based, no-infectious-diagnosis-documented antibiotic prescriptions were most often in response to patient-reported symptoms, though they also occur for a variety of other reasons, some problematic, like in the absence of documentation or for a family member.