The psychosocial impact of food allergy and food hypersensitivity in children, adolescents and their families:a review

Food allergy affects 6% of children but there is no cure, and strict avoidance of index allergens along with immediate access to rescue medication is the current best management. With specialist care, morbidity from food allergy in children is generally low, and mortality is very rare. However, there is strong evidence that food allergy and food hypersensitivity has an impact on psychological distress and on the quality of life (QoL) of children and adolescents, as well as their families. Until recently, the measurement of QoL in allergic children has proved difficult because of the lack of investigative tools available. New instruments for assessing QoL in food allergic children have recently been developed and validated, which should provide further insights into the problems these children encounter and will enable us to measure the effects of interventions in patients. This review examines the published impact of food allergy on affected children, adolescents and their families. It considers influences such as gender, age, disease severity, co-existing allergies and external influences, and examines how these may impact on allergy-related QoL and psychological distress including anxiety and depression. Implications of the impact are considered alongside avenues for future research.

Validation of the English version of the Scale for Psychosocial Factors in Food Allergy and the relationship with mental health, quality of life, and self-efficacy

Background. The Scale for Psychosocial Factors in Food Allergy (SPS-FA) is based on the biopsychosocial model of health and was developed and validated in Chile to measure the interaction between psychological variables and allergy symptoms in the child. We sought to validate this scale in an English speaking population and explore its relationship with parental quality of life, self-efficacy, and mental health. Methods. Parents (n = 434) from the general population in the UK, who had a child with a clinical diagnosis of food allergy, completed the SPS-FA and validated scales on food allergy specific parental quality of life (QoL), parental self-efficacy, and general mental health. Findings. The SPS-FA had good internal consistency (alphas = .61-.86). Higher scores on the SPS-FA significantly correlated with poorer parental QoL, self-efficacy, and mental health. All predictors explained 57% of the variance in SPS-FA scores with QoL as the biggest predictor (β = .52). Discussion. The SPS-FA is a valid scale for use in the UK and provides a holistic view of the impact of food allergy on the family. In conjunction with health-related QoL measures, it can be used by health care practitioners to target care for patients and evaluate psychological interventions for improvement of food allergy management.

FOCUS : frailty management optimisation through EIPAHA commitments and utilisation of stakeholders’ input – an innovative European project in elderly care

The goal of FOCUS, which stands for Frailty Management Optimization through EIPAHA Commitments and Utilization of Stakeholders’ Input, is to reduce the burden of frailty in Europe. The partners are working on advancing knowledge of frailty detection, assessment, and management, including biological, clinical, cognitive and psychosocial markers, in order to change the paradigm of frailty care from acute intervention to prevention. FOCUS partners are working on ways to integrate the best available evidence from frailty-related screening tools, epidemiological and interventional studies into the care of frail people and their quality of life. Frail citizens in Italy, Poland and the UK and their caregivers are being called to express their views and their experiences with treatments and interventions aimed at improving quality of life. The FOCUS Consortium is developing pathways to leverage the knowledge available and to put it in the service of frail citizens. In order to reach out to the broadest audience possible, the FOCUS Platform for Knowledge Exchange and the platform for Scaling Up are being developed with the collaboration of stakeholders. The FOCUS project is a development of the work being done by the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIPAHA), which aims to increase the average healthy lifespan in Europe by 2020 while fostering sustainability of health/social care systems and innovation in Europe. The knowledge and tools developed by the FOCUS project, with input from stakeholders, will be deployed to all EIPAHA participants dealing with frail older citizens to support activities and optimize performance.

A cross-sectional survey of 5-year-old children with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate:the Cleft Care UK study. Part 1: background and methodology

OBJECTIVES: We describe the methodology for a major study investigating the impact of reconfigured cleft care in the United Kingdom (UK) 15 years after an initial survey, detailed in the Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG) report in 1998, had informed government recommendations on centralization. SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: This is a UK multicentre cross-sectional study of 5-year-olds born with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate. Children born between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2007 were seen in cleft centre audit clinics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consent was obtained for the collection of routine clinical measures (speech recordings, hearing, photographs, models, oral health, psychosocial factors) and anthropometric measures (height, weight, head circumference). The methodology for each clinical measure followed those of the earlier survey as closely as possible. RESULTS: We identified 359 eligible children and recruited 268 (74.7%) to the study. Eleven separate records for each child were collected at the audit clinics. In total, 2666 (90.4%) were collected from a potential 2948 records. The response rates for the self-reported questionnaires, completed at home, were 52.6% for the Health and Lifestyle Questionnaire and 52.2% for the Satisfaction with Service Questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: Response rates and measures were similar to those achieved in the previous survey. There are practical, administrative and methodological challenges in repeating cross-sectional surveys 15 years apart and producing comparable data.

Centralization of cleft care in the UK. Part 6:a tale of two studies

OBJECTIVES: We summarize and critique the methodology and outcomes from a substantial study which has investigated the impact of reconfigured cleft care in the United Kingdom (UK) 15 years after the UK government started to implement the centralization of cleft care in response to an earlier survey in 1998, the Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG). SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: A UK multicentre cross-sectional study of 5-year-olds born with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate. Data were collected from children born in the UK with a unilateral cleft lip and palate between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2007. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We discuss and contextualize the outcomes from speech recordings, hearing, photographs, models, oral health and psychosocial factors in the current study. We refer to the earlier survey and other relevant studies. RESULTS: We present arguments for centralization of cleft care in healthcare systems, and we evidence this with improvements seen over a period of 15 years in the UK. We also make recommendations on how future audit and research may configure. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for children with a unilateral cleft lip and palate have improved after the introduction of a centralized multidisciplinary service, and other countries may benefit from this model. Predictors of early outcomes are still needed, and repeated cross-sectional studies, larger longitudinal studies and adequately powered trials are required to create a research-led evidence-based (centralized) service.