When rules turn into tools: An activity theory-based perspective on implementation processes and unintended consequences.

The idea that actions of people, organizations or governments may lead to Unintended Consequences (UICs) is not new. In health, UICs have been reported as a result of various interventions including quality improvement initiatives, health information technology implementation, and knowledge translation, especially those involving translation of broad policies (evidence-based medicine and patient-centred care) or system level improvement into actionable items or tools. While some unintended consequences cannot be anticipated, others may be predictable. In this article, we present a model based on cultural historical activity theory, which may help policy-makers, health leaders, and researchers better anticipate UICs resulting from implementation of new programs or technologies and take action to address them or mitigate their risk of occurrence. We support this model using examples of UICs of implementing family centred care principles, electronic health records, and computerized templates for quality improvement in chronic disease management.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on children with medical complexity.

BACKGROUND: Descriptions of the COVID-19 pandemic's indirect consequences on children are emerging. We aimed to describe the impacts of the pandemic on children with medical complexity (CMC) and their families. METHODS: A one-time survey of Canadian paediatricians using the Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program (CPSP) was conducted in Spring 2021. RESULTS: A total of 784 paediatricians responded to the survey, with 70% (n = 540) providing care to CMC. Sixty-seven (12.4%) reported an adverse health outcome due to a COVID-19 pandemic-related disruption in healthcare delivery. Disruption of the supply of medication and equipment was reported by 11.9% of respondents (n = 64). Respondents reported an interruption in family caregiving (47.5%, n = 252) and homecare delivery (40.8%, n = 218). Almost 47% of respondents (n = 253) observed a benefit to CMC due to COVID-19 related changes in healthcare delivery, including increased availability of virtual care and reduction in respiratory illness. Some (14.4%) reported that CMC were excluded from in-person learning when their peers without medical complexity were not. CONCLUSION: Canadian paediatricians reported that CMC experienced adverse health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic, including disruptions to family caregiving and community supports. They also describe benefits related to the pandemic including the expansion of virtual care. These results highlight the need for healthcare, community and education policymakers to collaborate with families to optimize their health.

Knowledge Exchange and Discovery in the Age of Social Media: The Journey From Inception to Establishment of a Parent-Led Web-Based Research Advisory Community for Childhood Disability.

BACKGROUND: Efforts to involve parents and families in all aspects of research, from initiating the question through to dissemination and knowledge exchange, are increasing. While social media as a method for health communication has shown numerous benefits, including increasing accessibility, interactions with others, and access to health care information, little work has been published on the use of social media to enhance research partnerships. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to describe the development and evaluation of a Web-based research advisory community, hosted on Facebook and connecting a diverse group of parents of special needs children with researchers at CanChild Centre for Childhood Disability Research. The goal of this community is to work together and exchange knowledge in order to improve research and the lives of children and their families. METHODS: The Web-based Parents Participating in Research (PPR) advisory community was a secret Facebook group launched in June 2014 and run by 2 parent moderators who worked in consultation with CanChild. We evaluated its success using Facebook statistics of engagement and activity (eg, number of posts, number of comments) between June 2014 and April 2015, and a Web-based survey of members. RESULTS: The PPR community had 96 participants (2 parent moderators, 13 researchers, and 81 family members) as of April 1, 2015. Over 9 months, 432 original posts were made: 155 (35.9%) by moderators, 197 (45.6%) by parents, and 80 (18.5%) by researchers. Posts had a median of 3 likes (range 0-24) and 4 comments (range 0-113). Members, rather than moderators, generated 64% (277/432) of posts. The survey had a 51% response rate (49/96 members), with 40 (82%) being parent members and 9 (18%) being researchers. The initial purpose of the group was to be an advisory to CanChild, and 76% (28/37) of parents and all the researchers (9/9) identified having an impact on childhood disability research as their reason for participating. A total of 58% (23/40) of parents and 56% (5/9) of researchers indicated they felt safe to share sensitive or personal information. While researchers shared evidence-based resources and consulted with families to get guidance on specific issues, there was an unexpected benefit of gaining an understanding of what issues were important to families in their daily lives. Parents felt a sense of belonging to this community where they could share their stories but also wanted more researcher participation and clarity on the purpose of the group. CONCLUSIONS: The PPR community grew from inception to an established community with active engagement and knowledge exchange. Both parents and researchers described valuable experiences. Researchers should consider social media as a means of engaging families in all phases of research to ensure that research and its outcomes are meaningful to those who need it most.

Experiences of Financial Stress and Supports in Caregivers During Pediatric Hospital Admission.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In Canada and the United States, ∼1 in 5 children live in poverty, contributing to poor health outcomes. Families with children with chronic illness may experience additional financial stress related to hospitalization. This study aimed to capture experiences of financial needs and supports among caregivers with a child admitted to a tertiary care pediatric hospital to inform hospital-based financial services to reduce financial stress in families. METHODS: We recruited caregivers of children admitted to the general inpatient ward of an academic pediatric center using purposive sampling with no exclusion criteria. Individual, semistructured, in-depth interviews with participants were conducted. Data collected included socio-demographics, financial needs, and experiences with financial supports. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, coded, and analyzed on NVivo software using a modified-grounded theory approach and summative content analysis. RESULTS: Fifteen caregivers of diverse backgrounds were interviewed, including non-English speakers (n = 4). Three themes and associated subthemes (in parentheses) were identified: (1) financial stress expressed by participants (acute admission-related and chronic financial stress), (2) challenges associated with accessing and utilizing financial supports (caregiver factors, systemic hospital factors, and systemic government factors), and (3) ideas for financial services at the pediatric hospital (services that will provide acute- and chronic financial assistance including education about financial supports and benefits). CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlighted acute and chronic financial needs as well as challenges in accessing financial support. Participants were interested in the healthcare system gaining a comprehensive understanding of their financial circumstances and accessing financial services in a hospital setting.

Learning to Trust Yourself: Decision-Making Skills Among Parents of Children With Medical Complexity.

CONTEXT: Children with medical complexity have substantial medical needs and their caregivers must make many challenging decisions about their care. Caregivers often become more involved in decisions over time, but it is unclear what skills they develop that facilitate this engagement. OBJECTIVES: To describe the skills that caregivers developed as they gained experience making medical decisions. METHODS: Eligible caregivers had a child who met referral criteria for their centre's Complex Care program for >1 year, were adults responsible for their child's medical decisions, and spoke English or a language with an available interpreter. We followed a semistructured interview guide to ask caregivers to describe and reflect on two challenging medical decisions that they made for their child-one early and one recent. Guided by interpretive description, we identified and refined themes in an iterative process. RESULTS: We conducted 15 interviews with 16 parents (14 [88%] women, two [13%] men) of a child with medical complexity (aged 1-17 years). Parents described 1) becoming more adept at managing decisional information, 2) recognizing the influence of the decision's context, 3) building stronger relationships with providers, and 4) becoming more effective at guiding their child's care as a decision-maker. As parents built these skills, they developed a greater sense of agency and confidence as decision-makers. CONCLUSION: Parents of children with medical complexity change how they approach decision making over time as they acquire relevant skills. These findings can inform the development of interventions to support skill-building among new caregivers.

Acceptability of the Long-Term In-Home Ventilator Engagement virtual intervention for home mechanical ventilation patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative evaluation.

Background: Clinical management of ventilator-assisted individuals (VAIs) was challenged by social distancing rules during the COVID-19 pandemic. In May 2020, the Long-Term In-Home Ventilator Engagement (LIVE) Program was launched in Ontario, Canada to provide intensive digital care case management to VAIs. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the acceptability of the LIVE Program hosted via a digital platform during the COVID-19 pandemic from diverse perspectives. Methods: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study (May 2020-April 2021) comprising semi-structured interviews with participants from eight home ventilation specialty centers in Ontario, Canada. We purposively recruited patients, family caregivers, and providers enrolled in LIVE. Content analysis and the theoretical concepts of acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness were used to interpret findings. Results: A total of 40 individuals (2 VAIs, 18 family caregivers, 20 healthcare providers) participated. Participants described LIVE as acceptable as it addressed a longstanding imperative to improve care access, ease of use, and training provided; feasible for triaging problems and sharing information; and appropriate for timeliness of provider responses, workflows, and perceived value. Negative perceptions of acceptability among healthcare providers concerned digital workload and fit with existing clinical workflows. Perceived benefits accorded to LIVE included enhanced physical and psychological safety in the home, patient-provider relations, and VAI engagement in their own care. Conclusions: Study findings identify factors influencing the LIVE Program's acceptability by patients, family caregivers, and healthcare providers during pandemic conditions including enhanced access to care, ease of case management triage, and VAI safety. Findings may inform the implementation of digital health services to VAIs in non-pandemic circumstances.

Parenteral versus enteral fluids for infants hospitalized with bronchiolitis: The PREFER shared decision-making prospective observational study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Incorporating shared decision-making (SDM) with children and families in hospitals was a top priority identified by patients, caregivers, and clinicians. Bronchiolitis, a common and costly reason for hospitalization in children, is an exemplar condition to study SDM in hospitals. Internationally, clinical practice guidelines differ when recommending intravenous (IV or parenteral) or nasogastric (NG or enteral) fluids for hospitalized infants with bronchiolitis who are unsafe to be fed orally. While evidence indicates that either IV or NG fluids are safe and effective, parent involvement in SDM in selecting IV or NG fluids is unknown. Our aim is to generate knowledge of SDM with parents in choosing between IV or NG fluids and the benefits and harms of these two treatment options for hospitalized children with bronchiolitis. METHOD: This is a multicenter, prospective, observational study, including children aged <12 months admitted to hospital with bronchiolitis requiring supplemental IV or NG fluids. The primary outcome will evaluate the extent of SDM in choosing IV versus NG fluids using the validated CollaboRATE tool. Secondary outcomes include the proportion of parents provided a choice of IV versus NG fluids; parent knowledge of fluid therapy; rate of fluids; length of hospital stay; and complications. DISCUSSION: This study will evaluate the extent of SDM in hospitalized infants with bronchiolitis who require IV or NG fluids and will evaluate both patient-centered and clinical outcomes that are relevant to clinical practice.

#HowNotToDoPatientEngagement: the engaging with purpose patient engagement framework based on a twitter analysis of community perspectives on patient engagement.

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of patient engagement practices are frequently researcher-driven, researcher-funded, and asymmetric in power dynamics. Little to no literature on patient experiences in patient engagement exist that is are not framed by institutionally-driven research inquiries (i.e., from the lens of a research team lead, or healthcare administrative setting). Understanding these perspectives can help us understand: (i)what matters to patients when they are engaged in research; (ii)why it matters to them, and(iii) how to improve patient engagement practices, so that the needs and priorities of patients are consistently met. METHODS: This is a patient partner-initiated study. Study authors (including patient partners) conducted a conventional and summative content analysis of textual data retrieved from a highly engaged conversation on Twitter regarding the hashtags #HowNotToDoPatientEngagement and #HowToDoPatientEngagement posted between February 2018 to June 2021. Twitter is a microblogging platform that allows for free-flowing discussions between users not pre-bound by specific community groupings (like within that of Facebook). RESULTS: A total of 276 tweets were retrieved from 178 separate contributors across seven geographical locations. Four stakeholder groups were identified. We generated 24 codes, nine subthemes and five overarching themes: respect, support, collaboration, inclusivity and impact. Four of these themes are closely aligned with the Strategy for Patient Oriented (SPOR) Patient Engagement framework. We identify impact as a separate and new theme. INTERPRETATION: Based on our findings we offer the Engaging with Purpose Patient Engagement Framework that defines and describes respect, support, collaboration, inclusivity and impact as five key pillars of meaningful patient engagement.

Patient engagement in research is an important aspect of healthcare, but most studies on the topic are driven by researchers and healthcare settings. We wanted to understand patient experiences of patient engagement from the lens of patient partners that occurred outside the traditional norms of evaluating such engagements. To do this, we analyzed data from Twitter, a platform where users freely share their thoughts and opinions. Posts that included the hashtags #HowNotToDoPatientEngagement and #HowToDoPatientEngagement were of focus because they resonated with members of the online patient partner community who wanted to improve the current state of patient partnership. We identified 276 tweets from 178 contributors across seven geographic locations. Five themes emerged from the study: respect, support, collaboration, inclusivity, and impact which led to the development of the Engaging with Purpose Patient Engagement Framework. This framework highlights respect, support, collaboration, inclusivity, and impact as the five essential pillars of meaningful patient engagement in research. By understanding and implementing these pillars, researchers and institutions can improve patient engagement practices and ensure that the needs and priorities of patients are effectively addressed.

Exploring the lived experience of patients and families who speak language other than English (LOE) for healthcare: developing a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Patients who use Languages other than English (LOE) for healthcare communication in an English-dominant region are at increased risk for experiencing adverse events and worse health outcomes in healthcare settings, including in pediatric hospitals. Despite the knowledge that individuals who speak LOE have worse health outcomes, they are often excluded from research studies on the basis of language and there is a paucity of data on ways to address these known disparities. Our work aims to address this gap by generating knowledge to improve health outcomes for children with illness and their families with LEP. BODY: We describe an approach to developing a study with individuals marginalized due to using LOE for healthcare communication, specifically using semi-structured qualitative interviews. The premise of this study is participatory research-our overall goal with this systematic inquiry is to, in collaboration with patients and families with LOE, set an agenda for creating actionable change to address the health information disparities these patients and families experience. In this paper we describe our overarching study design principles, a collaboration framework in working with different stakeholders and note important considerations for study design and execution. CONCLUSIONS: We have a significant opportunity to improve our engagement with marginalized populations. We also need to develop approaches to including patients and families with LOE in our research given the health disparities they experience. Further, understanding lived experience is critical to advancing efforts to address these well-known health disparities. Our process to develop a qualitative study protocol can serve as an example for engaging this patient population and can serve as a starting point for other groups who wish to develop similar research in this area. Providing high-quality care that meets the needs of marginalized and vulnerable populations is important to achieving an equitable, high-quality health care system. Children and families who use a Language other than English (LOE) in English dominant regions for healthcare have worse health outcomes including a significantly increased risk of experiencing adverse events, longer lengths of stay in hospital settings, and receiving more unnecessary tests and investigations. Despite this, these individuals are often excluded from research studies and the field of participatory research has yet to meaningfully involve them. This paper aims to describe an approach to conducting research with a marginalized population of children and families due to using a LOE. We detail protocol development for a qualitative study exploring the lived experiences of patients and families who use a LOE during hospitalization. We aim to share considerations when conducting research within this population of families with LOE. We highlight learning applied from the field of patient-partner and child and family-centred research and note specific considerations for those with LOE. Developing strong partnerships and adopting a common set of research principles and collaborative framework underlies our approach and initial learnings, which we hope spark additional work in this area.

Opening the digital front door for individuals using long-term in-home ventilation (LIVE) during a pandemic- implementation, feasibility and acceptability.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to an unprecedented need for virtual healthcare that was safe, acceptable and feasible to deliver. In May 2020, we launched the Long-term In-Home Ventilator Engagement (LIVE) program for ventilator assisted individuals using ventilators hosted on an e-platform in Ontario, Canada. Objectives: To assess the acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility and usability of the LIVE program reported by patients, family caregivers, and healthcare providers (HCP). Design and Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study. We provided HCPs participating in the LIVE program anonymized questionnaires (Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM), Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM), and mHealth App Usability (MAUQ). Patients and family caregivers completed the AIM and MAUQ. Questionnaires were administered via an e-platform. Results: We recruited 105/251 (42%) patients and family caregivers and 42/48 (87.5%) HCPs. Patients and caregivers rated a mean (SD) overall AIM score of 4.3 (0.7) (maximum score 5; higher scores indicate greater acceptability) and a mean (SD) overall MAUQ score of 5.8 (1.5) (maximum score 7; higher scores indicate greater useability). HCPs rated a mean (SD) overall AIM score of 4.3 (0.7), IAM score of 4.3 (0.8), FIM score of 4.2 (0.7) and overall MAUQ score of 5.6 ± 1.5. There were no differences in AIM ((4.3 (0.7) vs 4.3 (0.8), p = 1) or MAUQ (5.8 (1.5) vs 5.6 (1.5), p = 0.5) scores between patients/ family caregivers and HCPs. Interpretation: This study suggests that the LIVE program was acceptable, appropriate, feasible, and usable from the perspective of patients, family caregivers and HCPs.

Severe Respiratory Disease Among Children With and Without Medical Complexity During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Severe respiratory disease declined during the COVID-19 pandemic, partially due to decreased circulation of respiratory pathogens. However, the outcomes of children with higher risk have not been described using population-based data. Objective: To compare respiratory-related hospitalizations, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and mortality during the pandemic vs prepandemic, among children with medical complexity (CMC) and without medical complexity (non-CMC). Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based repeated cross-sectional study used Canadian health administrative data of children aged younger than 18 years in community and pediatric hospitals during a pandemic period (April 1, 2020, to February 28, 2022) compared with a 3-year prepandemic period (April 1, 2017, to March 31, 2020). The pandemic period was analyzed separately for year 1 (April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021) and year 2 (April 1, 2021, to February 28, 2022). Statistical analysis was performed from October 2022 to April 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Respiratory-related hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and mortality before and during the pandemic among CMC and non-CMC. Results: A total of 139 078 respiratory hospitalizations (29 461 respiratory hospitalizations for CMC and 109 617 for non-CMC) occurred during the study period. Among CMC, there were fewer respiratory hospitalizations in both 2020 (rate ratio [RR], 0.44 [95% CI, 0.42-0.46]) and 2021 (RR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.51-0.62]) compared with the prepandemic period. Among non-CMC, there was an even larger relative reduction in respiratory hospitalizations in 2020 (RR, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.17-0.19]) and a similar reduction in 2021 (RR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.54-0.56]), compared with the prepandemic period. Reductions in ICU admissions for respiratory illness followed a similar pattern for CMC (2020: RR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.53-0.59]; 2021: RR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.63-0.70]) and non-CMC (2020: RR, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.20-0.24]; RR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.61-0.69]). In-hospital mortality for these conditions decreased among CMC in both 2020 (RR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.51-0.77]) and 2021 (RR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.59-0.87]). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found a substantial decrease in severe respiratory disease resulting in hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and mortality during the first 2 years of the pandemic compared with the 3 prepandemic years. These findings suggest that future evaluations of the effect of public health interventions aimed at reducing circulating respiratory pathogens during nonpandemic periods of increased respiratory illness may be warranted.

Patients and Families as Partners in Patient-Oriented Research: How Should They Be Compensated?

Patient and family engagement has become a widely accepted approach in health care research. We recognize that research conducted in partnership with people with relevant lived experience can substantially improve the quality of that research and lead to meaningful outcomes. Despite the benefits of patient-researcher collaboration, research teams sometimes face challenges in answering the questions of how patient and family research partners should be compensated, due to the limited guidance and lack of infrastructure for acknowledging partner contributions. In this paper, we present some of the resources that might help teams to navigate conversations about compensation with their patient and family partners and report how existing resources can be leveraged to compensate patient and family partners fairly and appropriately. We also present some of our first-hand experiences with patient and family compensation and offer suggestions for research leaders, agencies, and organizations so that the health care stakeholders can collectively move toward more equitable recognition of patient and family partners in research.

The Research Family Advisory Committee: the patient and family view of implementing a research-focused patient engagement strategy.

Patient engagement in research, a collaborative practice of including patients and families as active and respected partners in the research process, leads to improved quality of patient care and positively affects outcomes for patients and families. There is strong support for the benefits of patient engagement. What is less clear are the methods by which organizations can achieve authentic patient engagement in research and the ways a committee structure can support an institutional research engagement need beyond the individual investigators. In this report, we describe the mechanisms needed to support the implementation of a research-focused patient engagement strategy and lessons learned from the patient and family perspective.

Patient engagement in research is a way of working in partnership with patients and members of the public to plan, manage, design and carry out health research, leading to improved patient care. Extensive research has been published on the practices individual research teams can use to positively engage patients and families in research. A current gap in existing research is the methods health care organization can use to achieve authentic patient engagement. In this report, we describe the implementation of a research-focused patient engagement strategy and the lessons learned from the patients and families involved in developing the strategy.

Decision-making for Parents of Children With Medical Complexities: Activity Theory Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM), a collaborative approach to reach decisional agreement, has been advocated as an ideal model of decision-making in the medical encounter. Frameworks for SDM have been developed largely from the clinical context of a competent adult patient facing a single medical problem, presented with multiple treatment options informed by a solid base of evidence. It is difficult to apply this model to the pediatric setting and children with medical complexity (CMC), specifically since parents of CMC often face a myriad of interconnected decisions with minimal evidence available on the multiple complex and co-existing chronic conditions. Thus, solutions that are developed based on the traditional model of SDM may not improve SDM practices for CMCs and may be a factor contributing to the low rate of SDM practiced with CMCs. OBJECTIVE: The goal of our study was to address the gaps in the current approach to SDM for CMC by better understanding the decision-making activity among parents of CMCs and exploring what comprises their decision-making activity. METHODS: We interviewed 12 participants using semistructured interviews based on activity theory. Participants identified as either a parent of a CMC or a CMC over the age of 18 years. Qualitative framework analysis and an activity theory framework were employed to understand the complexity of the decision-making process in context. RESULTS: Parents of CMCs in our study made decisions based on a mental model of their child's illness, informed by the activities of problem-solving, seeking understanding, obtaining tests and treatment, and caregiving. These findings suggest that the basis for parental choice and values, which are used in the decision-making activity, was developed by including activities that build concrete understanding and capture evidence to support their decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Our interviews with parents of CMCs suggest that we can address both the aims of each individual activity and the related outcomes (both intended and unintended) by viewing the decision-making activity as a combination of caregiving, problem-solving, and seeking activities. Clinicians could consider using this lens to focus decision-making discussions on integrating the child's unique situation, the insights parents gain through their decision-making activity, and their clinical knowledge to enhance the understanding between parents and health care providers, beyond the narrow concept of parental values.