OBJECTIVE: Black and Latino children experience significantly worse asthma morbidity than their white peers for multifactorial reasons. This study investigated differences in family-provider interactions for pediatric asthma, based on race/ethnicity. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of parent surveys of asthmatic children within the Population-Based Effectiveness in Asthma and Lung Diseases Network. Our study population comprised 647 parents with survey response data. Data on self-reported race/ethnicity of the child were collected from parents of the children with asthma. Outcomes studied were responses to the questions about family-provider interactions in the previous 12 months: (1) number of visits with asthma provider; (2) number of times provider reviewed asthma medications with patient/family; (3) review of a written asthma treatment plan with provider; and (4) preferences about making asthma decisions. RESULTS: In multivariate adjusted analyses controlling for asthma control and other co-morbidities, black children had fewer visits in the previous 12 months for asthma than white children: OR 0.63 (95% CI 0.40, 0.99). Additionally, black children were less likely to have a written asthma treatment plan given/reviewed by a provider than their white peers, OR 0.44 (95% CI 0.26, 0.75). There were no significant differences by race in preferences about asthma decision-making nor in the frequency of asthma medication review. CONCLUSION: Black children with asthma have fewer visits with their providers and are less likely to have a written asthma treatment plan than white children. Asthma providers could focus on improving these specific family-provider interactions in minority children.

PURPOSE: To validate an algorithm based upon International Classification of Diseases, 9(th) revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) documented within the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database (MSDD). METHODS: Using an ICD-9-CM-based algorithm (hospitalized patients with 410.x0 or 410.x1 in primary position), we identified a random sample of potential cases of AMI in 2009 from four Data Partners participating in the Mini-Sentinel Program. Cardiologist reviewers used information abstracted from hospital records to assess the likelihood of an AMI diagnosis based on criteria from the Joint European Society of Cardiology and American College of Cardiology Global Task Force. Positive predictive values (PPVs) of the ICD-9-based algorithm were calculated. RESULTS: Of the 153 potential cases of AMI identified, hospital records for 143 (93%) were retrieved and abstracted. Overall, the PPV was 86.0% (95% confidence interval; 79.2%, 91.2%). PPVs ranged from 76.3% to 94.3% across the four Data Partners. CONCLUSIONS: The overall PPV of potential AMI cases, as identified using an ICD-9-CM-based algorithm, may be acceptable for safety surveillance; however, PPVs do vary across Data Partners. This validation effort provides a contemporary estimate of the reliability of this algorithm for use in future surveillance efforts conducted using the Food and Drug Administration's MSDD. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.