Cognitive testing of the Children's Palliative Outcome Scale (C-POS) with children, young people and their parents/carers.

BACKGROUND: The Children's Palliative Outcome Scale (C-POS) is being developed using best methodological guidance on outcome measure development, This recommends cognitive testing, an established method of item improvement, prior to psychometric testing. AIM: To cognitively test C-POS within the target population to establish comprehensibility, comprehensiveness, relevance and acceptability. DESIGN: Cross-sectional cognitive interview study following COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology and Rothrock guidance on outcome measure development. Cognitive interviews were conducted using 'think aloud' and verbal probing techniques. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Children 5-⩽17 years old with life-limiting conditions and parents/carers of children with life-limiting conditions were recruited from 14 UK sites. RESULTS: Forty-eight individuals participated (36 parents; 12 children) in cognitively testing the five versions of C-POS over two to seven rounds. Content and length were acceptable, and all questions were considered important. Refinements were made to parent/carer versions to be inclusive of non-verbal children such as changing 'share' to 'express' feelings; and 'being able to ask questions' to 'having the appropriate information'. Changes to improve comprehensibility of items such as 'living life to the fullest' were also made. Parents reported that completing an outcome measure can be distressing but this is anticipated and that being asked is important. CONCLUSION: Cognitive interviewing has facilitated refinement of the C-POS, especially for non-verbal children who represent a large proportion of those with a life-limiting condition. This study has enhanced the face and content validity of the measure and provided preliminary evidence for acceptability for use in routine practice.

What are the anticipated benefits, risks, barriers and facilitators to implementing person-centred outcome measures into routine care for children and young people with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions? A qualitative interview study with key stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing evidence-base underpinning implementation of person-centred outcome measures into adult palliative care. However evidence on how best to achieve this with children facing life-threatening and life-limiting conditions is limited. AIM: To identify the anticipated benefits, risks, barriers and facilitators to implementing person-centred outcome measures for children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional qualitative semi-structured interview study with key stakeholders analysed using Framework analysis informed by the adapted-Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of n = 26 children with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions, n = 40 parents/carers, n = 13 siblings and n = 15 health and social care professionals recruited from six hospitals and three children's hospices and n = 12 Commissioners of health services. RESULTS: All participants were supportive of future implementation of person-centred outcome measures into care. Anticipated benefits included: better understanding of patient and family priorities, improved communication and collaborative working between professionals and families and standardisation in data collection and reporting. Anticipated risks included increased workload for staff and measures not being used as intended. Implementation barriers included: acceptability and usability of outcome measures by children; burden and capacity of parents/carers regarding completion; privacy concerns; and language barriers. Implementation facilitators included designing measures using language that is meaningful to children and families, ensuring potential benefits of person-centred outcome measures are communicated to encourage 'buy-in' and administering measures with known and trusted professional. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of person-centred outcome measures offer potential benefits for children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. Eight recommendations are made to maximise benefits and minimise risks in implementation.

Implementation of child-centred outcome measures in routine paediatric healthcare practice: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Person-centred outcome measures (PCOMs) are commonly used in routine adult healthcare to measure and improve outcomes, but less attention has been paid to PCOMs in children's services. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and synthesise existing evidence of the determinants, strategies, and mechanisms that influence the implementation of PCOMs into paediatric healthcare practice. METHODS: The review was conducted and reported in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Databased searched included CINAHL, Embase, Medline, and PsycInfo. Google scholar was also searched for grey literature on 25th March 2022. Studies were included if the setting was a children's healthcare service, investigating the implementation or use of an outcome measure or screening tool in healthcare practice, and reported outcomes relating to use of a measure. Data were tabulated and thematically analysed through deductive coding to the constructs of the adapted-Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results were presented as a narrative synthesis, and a logic model developed. RESULTS: We retained 69 studies, conducted across primary (n = 14), secondary (n = 13), tertiary (n = 37), and community (n = 8) healthcare settings, including both child self-report (n = 46) and parent-proxy (n = 47) measures. The most frequently reported barriers to measure implementation included staff lack of knowledge about how the measure may improve care and outcomes; the complexity of using and implementing the measure; and a lack of resources to support implementation and its continued use including funding and staff. The most frequently reported facilitators of implementation and continued use include educating and training staff and families on: how to implement and use the measure; the advantages of using PCOMs over current practice; and the benefit their use has on patient care and outcomes. The resulting logic model presents the mechanisms through which strategies can reduce the barriers to implementation and support the use of PCOMs in practice. CONCLUSIONS: These findings can be used to support the development of context-specific implementation plans through a combination of existing strategies. This will enable the implementation of PCOMs into routine paediatric healthcare practice to empower settings to better identify and improve child-centred outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospero CRD 42022330013.

Achieving consensus on priority items for paediatric palliative care outcome measurement: Results from a modified Delphi survey, engagement with a children's research involvement group and expert item generation.

BACKGROUND: There is no validated outcome measure for use in children's palliative care outside sub-Saharan Africa. Stakeholders must be involved in the development of such measures to ensure face and content validity. AIM: To gain expert stakeholder consensus on items for inclusion in a paediatric palliative care outcome measure to establish face and content validity. DESIGN: This study was conducted in two phases following Rothrock and COSMIN guidance on patient-reported outcome measure development. Phase 1: Three-round modified Delphi survey to establish consensus on priority items. Phase 2: Item generation meeting with key stakeholders to develop initial measure versions. A young person's advisory group was also consulted on priority outcomes. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Delphi survey: Parents and professionals with experience of caring for a child with a life-limiting condition. Young person's advisory group: young people age 10-20 years. Item generation meeting: bereaved parents, academics and clinicians. RESULTS: Phase 1: Delphi survey (n = 82). Agreement increased from Kendall's W = 0.17 to W = 0.61, indicating movement towards consensus. Agreement between professional and parent ranking was poor (Cohen's kappa 0.13). Professionals prioritised physical symptoms, whereas parents prioritised psychosocial and practical concerns. Advisory group: Children (n = 22) prioritised items related to living a 'normal life' in addition to items prioritised by adult participants. Phase 2: Five age/developmental stage appropriate child and proxy-reported versions of C-POS, containing 13 items, were drafted. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance and feasibility of involving key stakeholders in PROM item generation, as important differences were found in the priority outcomes identified by children, parents and professionals.

Spiritual, religious, and existential concerns of children and young people with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions: A qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Despite being a core domain of palliative care, primary data on spiritual and existential concerns has rarely been collected among children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions and their families. Existing evidence has tended to focus on the religious aspects among children with cancer. AIM: To identify the spiritual needs of children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional semi-structured, qualitative interview study with children, families and health and social care professionals. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using Framework analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Purposively sampled children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions, their parents and siblings, health and social care professionals recruited from six hospitals and three children's hospices in the UK, and commissioners of paediatric palliative care services recruited through networks and a national charity. RESULTS: One hundred six participants were interviewed: 26 children (5-17 years), 53 family members (parents/carers of children 0-17 years and siblings (5-17 years)), 27 professionals (health and social care professionals and commissioners of paediatric palliative care). Themes included: living life to the fullest, meaning of life and leaving a legacy, uncertainty about the future, determination to survive, accepting or fighting the future and role of religion. Children as young as 5 years old identified needs or concerns in the spiritual domain of care. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing spiritual concerns is essential to providing child- and family-centred palliative care. Eliciting spiritual concerns may enable health and social care professionals to identify the things that can support and enhance a meaningful life and legacy for children and their families.

COVID-19: Impact on Pediatric Palliative Care.

CONTEXT: Children and young people with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions and their families are potentially vulnerable during COVID-19 lockdowns due to pre-existing high clinical support needs and social participation limitations. OBJECTIVES: To explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns on this population. METHODS: Sub-analysis of an emergent COVID-19 related theme from a larger semi-structured interview study investigating priority pediatric palliative care outcomes. One hundred and six United Kingdom-wide purposively-sampled Children and young people with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions, parent/carers, siblings, health professionals, and commissioners. RESULTS: COVID-19 was raised by participants in 12/44 interviews conducted after the United Kingdom's first confirmed COVID-19 case. Key themes included loss of vital social support, disruption to services important to families, and additional psychological distress. CONCLUSION: Continued delivery of child- and family-centered palliative care requires innovative assessment and delivery of psycho-social support. Disruptions within treatment and care providers may compound support needs, requiring cordination for families facing multiagency delays.