Lead screening practices of pediatric residents

Stanley J. Schaffer, James R. Campbell, Peter G. Szilagyi, Michael Weitzman

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Objectives: As part of their training, pediatric residents provide primary care services to young children, including youngsters who may have elevated blood lead levels. We set out to (1) determine the percentage of pediatric residents who screen children for elevated blood lead levels according to the guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics; (2) assess the likelihood of lead screening by residents based on demographic and practice-setting characteristics; and (3) compare the attitudes of residents who report that they are universal screeners, selective screeners, or nonscreeners. Design: Confidential, cross-sectional survey of a nationally representative sample of pediatric residents conducted as part of the American Academy of Pediatrics 28th Periodic Survey of Fellows. Subjects: One hundred forty-three responding pediatric residents (51% response rate). Results: Seventy-five percent of pediatric residents reported screening all patients aged 9 to 36 months for elevated blood lead levels, 21% reported screening some, and 4% reported screening none. Pediatric residents who cared for patients in urban settings were more likely to report screening patients for elevated blood lead levels than were pediatric residents who cared for patients in suburban or rural settings (100% vs 73%; P<.001), and pediatric residents in the Northeast were more likely to report screening universally than were residents in the rest of the country (93% vs 63%; P<.001). Overall, pediatric residents who reported screening patients universally were more likely to believe that the benefits of screening outweigh the costs than were residents who reported screening patients selectively (67% vs 17%; P<.001). Conclusions: Most pediatric residents reported that they screened patients for elevated blood lead levels, either universally or selectively. Nevertheless, the screening practices of pediatric residents and their opinions concerning the relative benefits and costs of lead screening largely reflect the areas of the country and the practice settings in which they had their primary care experiences.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)185-189
    Number of pages5
    JournalArchives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine
    Volume152
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jan 1 1998

    Fingerprint

    Pediatrics
    Lead
    Primary Health Care
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.)
    Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Cross-Sectional Studies
    Demography
    Guidelines
    Costs and Cost Analysis

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

    Cite this

    Schaffer, S. J., Campbell, J. R., Szilagyi, P. G., & Weitzman, M. (1998). Lead screening practices of pediatric residents. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 152(2), 185-189. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.152.2.185

    Lead screening practices of pediatric residents. / Schaffer, Stanley J.; Campbell, James R.; Szilagyi, Peter G.; Weitzman, Michael.

    In: Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Vol. 152, No. 2, 01.01.1998, p. 185-189.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Schaffer, SJ, Campbell, JR, Szilagyi, PG & Weitzman, M 1998, 'Lead screening practices of pediatric residents', Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, vol. 152, no. 2, pp. 185-189. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.152.2.185
    Schaffer, Stanley J. ; Campbell, James R. ; Szilagyi, Peter G. ; Weitzman, Michael. / Lead screening practices of pediatric residents. In: Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. 1998 ; Vol. 152, No. 2. pp. 185-189.
    @article{ae149ac764d8436a8e291fed07f05964,
    title = "Lead screening practices of pediatric residents",
    abstract = "Objectives: As part of their training, pediatric residents provide primary care services to young children, including youngsters who may have elevated blood lead levels. We set out to (1) determine the percentage of pediatric residents who screen children for elevated blood lead levels according to the guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics; (2) assess the likelihood of lead screening by residents based on demographic and practice-setting characteristics; and (3) compare the attitudes of residents who report that they are universal screeners, selective screeners, or nonscreeners. Design: Confidential, cross-sectional survey of a nationally representative sample of pediatric residents conducted as part of the American Academy of Pediatrics 28th Periodic Survey of Fellows. Subjects: One hundred forty-three responding pediatric residents (51{\%} response rate). Results: Seventy-five percent of pediatric residents reported screening all patients aged 9 to 36 months for elevated blood lead levels, 21{\%} reported screening some, and 4{\%} reported screening none. Pediatric residents who cared for patients in urban settings were more likely to report screening patients for elevated blood lead levels than were pediatric residents who cared for patients in suburban or rural settings (100{\%} vs 73{\%}; P<.001), and pediatric residents in the Northeast were more likely to report screening universally than were residents in the rest of the country (93{\%} vs 63{\%}; P<.001). Overall, pediatric residents who reported screening patients universally were more likely to believe that the benefits of screening outweigh the costs than were residents who reported screening patients selectively (67{\%} vs 17{\%}; P<.001). Conclusions: Most pediatric residents reported that they screened patients for elevated blood lead levels, either universally or selectively. Nevertheless, the screening practices of pediatric residents and their opinions concerning the relative benefits and costs of lead screening largely reflect the areas of the country and the practice settings in which they had their primary care experiences.",
    author = "Schaffer, {Stanley J.} and Campbell, {James R.} and Szilagyi, {Peter G.} and Michael Weitzman",
    year = "1998",
    month = "1",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1001/archpedi.152.2.185",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "152",
    pages = "185--189",
    journal = "JAMA Pediatrics",
    issn = "2168-6203",
    publisher = "American Medical Association",
    number = "2",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Lead screening practices of pediatric residents

    AU - Schaffer, Stanley J.

    AU - Campbell, James R.

    AU - Szilagyi, Peter G.

    AU - Weitzman, Michael

    PY - 1998/1/1

    Y1 - 1998/1/1

    N2 - Objectives: As part of their training, pediatric residents provide primary care services to young children, including youngsters who may have elevated blood lead levels. We set out to (1) determine the percentage of pediatric residents who screen children for elevated blood lead levels according to the guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics; (2) assess the likelihood of lead screening by residents based on demographic and practice-setting characteristics; and (3) compare the attitudes of residents who report that they are universal screeners, selective screeners, or nonscreeners. Design: Confidential, cross-sectional survey of a nationally representative sample of pediatric residents conducted as part of the American Academy of Pediatrics 28th Periodic Survey of Fellows. Subjects: One hundred forty-three responding pediatric residents (51% response rate). Results: Seventy-five percent of pediatric residents reported screening all patients aged 9 to 36 months for elevated blood lead levels, 21% reported screening some, and 4% reported screening none. Pediatric residents who cared for patients in urban settings were more likely to report screening patients for elevated blood lead levels than were pediatric residents who cared for patients in suburban or rural settings (100% vs 73%; P<.001), and pediatric residents in the Northeast were more likely to report screening universally than were residents in the rest of the country (93% vs 63%; P<.001). Overall, pediatric residents who reported screening patients universally were more likely to believe that the benefits of screening outweigh the costs than were residents who reported screening patients selectively (67% vs 17%; P<.001). Conclusions: Most pediatric residents reported that they screened patients for elevated blood lead levels, either universally or selectively. Nevertheless, the screening practices of pediatric residents and their opinions concerning the relative benefits and costs of lead screening largely reflect the areas of the country and the practice settings in which they had their primary care experiences.

    AB - Objectives: As part of their training, pediatric residents provide primary care services to young children, including youngsters who may have elevated blood lead levels. We set out to (1) determine the percentage of pediatric residents who screen children for elevated blood lead levels according to the guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics; (2) assess the likelihood of lead screening by residents based on demographic and practice-setting characteristics; and (3) compare the attitudes of residents who report that they are universal screeners, selective screeners, or nonscreeners. Design: Confidential, cross-sectional survey of a nationally representative sample of pediatric residents conducted as part of the American Academy of Pediatrics 28th Periodic Survey of Fellows. Subjects: One hundred forty-three responding pediatric residents (51% response rate). Results: Seventy-five percent of pediatric residents reported screening all patients aged 9 to 36 months for elevated blood lead levels, 21% reported screening some, and 4% reported screening none. Pediatric residents who cared for patients in urban settings were more likely to report screening patients for elevated blood lead levels than were pediatric residents who cared for patients in suburban or rural settings (100% vs 73%; P<.001), and pediatric residents in the Northeast were more likely to report screening universally than were residents in the rest of the country (93% vs 63%; P<.001). Overall, pediatric residents who reported screening patients universally were more likely to believe that the benefits of screening outweigh the costs than were residents who reported screening patients selectively (67% vs 17%; P<.001). Conclusions: Most pediatric residents reported that they screened patients for elevated blood lead levels, either universally or selectively. Nevertheless, the screening practices of pediatric residents and their opinions concerning the relative benefits and costs of lead screening largely reflect the areas of the country and the practice settings in which they had their primary care experiences.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031911112&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031911112&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1001/archpedi.152.2.185

    DO - 10.1001/archpedi.152.2.185

    M3 - Article

    VL - 152

    SP - 185

    EP - 189

    JO - JAMA Pediatrics

    JF - JAMA Pediatrics

    SN - 2168-6203

    IS - 2

    ER -