A Review of Creative Play Interventions to Improve Children's Hospital Experience and Wellbeing.

CONTEXT: Being in the hospital can be stressful for children and caregivers. Evidence-based play interventions to reduce this stress, such as play therapy or Child Life services, have been introduced in hospitals globally, with growing awareness of potential benefits. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of nonmedical/illness-specific creative or play-based programs in hospital settings on children's (<18 years) and their caregivers' hospital experiences, wellbeing, and other health outcomes. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, CINAHL, Google Scholar. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of original articles published since 2011, screening 2701 de-duplicated articles. RESULTS: We identified 25 eligible articles, representing 1629 children (57% male), 422 caregivers, and 128 health professionals. Included studies most commonly evaluated professional children's entertainers (n = 8 studies), music therapy (n = 4), unstructured play (n = 3), and humanoid/animal robots (n = 3). Most studies evaluated the impact on the child's level of anxiety (n = 14/25), mostly supporting a reduction (n = 13/14 studies). Several studies provided evidence for a reduction in children's pain (n = 4/6), and negative emotional/behavioral outcomes (eg, sadness, anger, irritability; n = 5/6 studies). There was mixed evidence for the impact of the included interventions on physiologic outcomes (eg, systolic pressure, heart frequency; n = 3/5 studies) and fatigue (n = 1/2 studies). Evidence on caregiver outcomes and the impact on health care services was limited. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our review generally supported the value of play-based interventions on children's' wellbeing while in the hospital, particularly reducing anxiety and pain. Further evaluation of their impact on caregivers' outcomes and the health care system is needed.

Mothers of a child with Down syndrome: A qualitative analysis of the perspectives on non-invasive prenatal testing.

OBJECTIVE: The introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for Down syndrome (DS) has sparked social and ethical debates. To date, in-depth exploration of the voices of Australian mothers of a child with DS about NIPT has been lacking. The purpose of this study was to investigate the perspectives of Australian mothers of a child with DS towards the increasing availability of NIPT. DESIGN AND SETTING: Fifteen mothers of children with DS aged 8 months-39 years participated in-depth interviews, conducted online via the software Zoom™. An inductive thematic analysis of interview data explored mothers' perceptions of NIPT. FINDINGS: Mothers perspectives were nuanced and personal to each woman's circumstance. All mothers highlighted the inevitable association between testing and termination, the importance of autonomy and respecting [m]others' choices to test and to terminate, and that appropriate supports must be provided to ensure informed decision-making. These perspectives existed within an overarching theme of NIPT reflecting and reinforcing societal attitudes towards disability. CONCLUSION: Mothers of a child with DS viewed informed decision-making as crucial both prior to undertaking NIPT and following a positive test result. This study adds a unique Australian perspective to the necessary ongoing social and ethical debate.

'We would have missed out so much had we terminated': What fathers of a child with Down syndrome think about current non-invasive prenatal testing for Down syndrome.

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) allows early, accurate diagnosis of Down syndrome that has resulted in increased terminations. This qualitative study involved in-depth interviews of fathers of children with Down syndrome about their views on the availability of NIPT. Thematic network analysis revealed that although fathers appreciated an early diagnosis with NIPT, they saw the test as being a predetermined pathway to termination. Fathers felt that expectation to terminate reflects negative societal attitudes towards those with Down syndrome and disability, fearing that NIPT may become a form of eugenics. Fathers retrospectively contrasted these attitudes with the actual reality of raising their children with Down syndrome, which they described as bringing joy to their lives. Findings suggest that although fathers valued NIPT as an information-giving tool that allowed autonomous parental choices about the pregnancy, they believe that it should be accompanied by balanced information about the reality of raising a child with Down syndrome.