CritCom: assessment of quality of interdisciplinary communication around deterioration in pediatric oncologic patients.

Background: High-quality clinical care requires excellent interdisciplinary communication, especially during emergencies, and no tools exist to evaluate communication in critical care. We describe the development of a pragmatic tool focusing on interdisciplinary communication during patient deterioration (CritCom). Methods: The preliminary CritCom tool was developed after a literature review and consultation with a multidisciplinary panel of global experts in communication, pediatric oncology, and critical care to review the domains and establish content validity iteratively. Face and linguistic validity were established through cognitive interviews, translation, and linguistic synthesis. We conducted a pilot study among an international group of clinicians to establish reliability and usability. Results: After reviewing 105 potential survey items, we identified 52 items across seven domains. These were refined through cognitive interviews with 36 clinicians from 15 countries. CritCom was piloted with 433 clinicians (58% nurses, 36% physicians, and 6% other) from 42 hospitals in 22 countries. Psychometric testing guided the refinement of the items for the final tool. CritCom comprised six domains with five items each (30 total). The final tool has excellent reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.81-0.86), usability (93% agree or strongly agree that the tool is easy to use), and similar performance between English and Spanish tools. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to establish the final 6-domain structure. Conclusions: CritCom is a reliable and pragmatic bilingual tool to assess the quality of interdisciplinary communication around patient deterioration for children in diverse resource levels globally. Critcom results can be used to design and evaluate interventions to improve team communication.

Supporting Disclosure of Unmet Mental Health Needs among Parents of Critically Ill Infants.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize (1) the prevalence of mental health discussion and (2) facilitators of and barriers to parent disclosure of mental health needs to clinicians. STUDY DESIGN: Parents of infants with neurologic conditions in neonatal and pediatric intensive care units participated in a longitudinal decision-making study from 2018 through 2020. Parents completed semi-structured interviews upon enrollment, within 1 week after a conference with providers, at discharge, and 6 months post-discharge. We used a conventional content analysis approach and NVIVO 12 to analyze data related to mental health. RESULTS: We enrolled 61 parents (n = 40 mothers, n = 21 fathers) of 40 infants with neurologic conditions in the intensive care unit. In total, 123 interviews were conducted with 52 of these parents (n = 37 mothers, n = 15 fathers). Over two-thirds of parents (n = 35/52, 67%) discussed their mental health in a total of 61 interviews. We identified two key domains when approaching the data through the lens of mental health: (1) self-reported barriers to communicating mental health needs: parents shared uncertainty about the presence or benefit of support, a perceived lack of mental health resources and emotional support, and concerns about trust; (2) self-reported facilitators and benefits of communicating mental health needs: parents described the value of supportive team members, connecting to peer support, and speaking to a mental health professional or neutral third party. CONCLUSIONS: Parents of critically ill infants are at high risk of unmet mental health needs. Our results highlight modifiable barriers and actionable facilitators to inform interventions to improve mental health support for parents of critically ill infants.

A new measure for multi-professional medical team communication: design and methodology for multilingual measurement development.

Background: As implementation science in global health continues to evolve, there is a need for valid and reliable measures that consider diverse linguistic and cultural contexts. A standardized, reproducible process for multilingual measure development may improve accessibility and validity by participants in global health settings. To address this need, we propose a rigorous methodology for multilingual measurement development. We use the example of a novel measure of multi-professional team communication quality, a determinant of implementation efforts. Methods: The development and translation of this novel bilingual measure is comprised of seven steps. In this paper, we describe a measure developed in English and Spanish, however, this approach is not language specific. Participants are engaged throughout the process: first, an interprofessional panel of experts and second, through cognitive interviewing for measure refinement. The steps of measure development included: (1) literature review to identify previous measures of team communication; (2) development of an initial measure by the expert panel; (3) cognitive interviewing in a phased approach with the first language (English); (4): formal, forward-backward translation process with attention to colloquialisms and regional differences in languages; (5) cognitive interviewing repeated in the second language (Spanish); (6) language synthesis to refine both instruments and unify feedback; and (7) final review of the refined measure by the expert panel. Results: A draft measure to assess quality of multi-professional team communication was developed in Spanish and English, consisting of 52 questions in 7 domains. This measure is now ready for psychometric testing. Conclusions: This seven-step, rigorous process of multilingual measure development can be used in a variety of linguistic and resource settings. This method ensures development of valid and reliable tools to collect data from a wide range of participants, including those who have historically been excluded due to language barriers. Use of this method will increase both rigor and accessibility of measurement in implementation science and advance equity in research and practice.

The Landscape of Outpatient Pediatric Palliative Care: A National Cross-Sectional Assessment.

CONTEXT: Inpatient pediatric palliative care (PPC) has grown substantially over the past 20 years; however, PPC in the outpatient setting remains underdeveloped. Outpatient PPC (OPPC) offers opportunities to improve access to PPC as well as facilitate care coordination and transitions for children with serious illness. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to characterize the national status of OPPC programmatic development and operationalization in the United States. METHODS: Utilizing a national report, freestanding children's hospitals with existing PPC programs were identified to query OPPC status. An electronic survey was developed and distributed to PPC participants at each site. Survey domains included hospital and PPC program demographics; OPPC development, structure, staffing, and workflow; metrics of successful OPPC implementation; and other services/partnerships. RESULTS: Of 48 eligible sites, 36 (75%) completed the survey. Clinic-based OPPC programs were identified at 28 (78%) sites. OPPC programs reported a median age of 9 years [range: 1-18 years] with growth peaks in 2011, 2012 and 2020. OPPC availability was significantly associated with increased hospital size [P = 0.05] and inpatient PPC billable full time equivalent staff [P = 0.01]. Top referral indications included pain management, goals of care, and advance care planning. Funding primarily came from institutional support and billing revenue. CONCLUSIONS: Although OPPC remains a young field, many inpatient PPC programs are growing into the outpatient setting. Increasingly, OPPC services have institutional support and diverse referral indications from multiple subspecialties. However, despite high demand, resources remain limited. Characterization of the current OPPC landscape is crucial to optimize future growth.

A multicountry assessment in Eurasia: Alignment of physician perspectives on palliative care integration in pediatric oncology with World Health Organization guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) advocates for early integration of palliative care for all children with life-threatening illness. Provider awareness and misperceptions, however, can impede this imperative. In the Eurasian region, little is known about physician knowledge and perspectives on palliative care. METHODS: The Assessing Doctors' Attitudes on Palliative Treatment survey was developed as an evidence-based and culturally relevant assessment of physician perceptions on palliative care integration into childhood cancer care in Eurasia. Iteratively tested by American and Eurasian palliative care experts, the survey was culturally adapted, translated, and piloted in English, Russian, and Mongolian. The survey was distributed to physicians caring for children with cancer. Fifteen statements were scored in accordance with WHO guidelines to evaluate provider knowledge. The statistical analysis was complemented by a qualitative analysis of open-ended responses. RESULTS: This study received 424 responses from 11 countries in Eurasia. The mean alignment between provider perspectives and WHO recommendations was 70% (range, 7%-100%). Significant independent predictors of higher alignment included country, prior palliative care education, and greater experience with patient death. Respondents primarily described palliative care as end-of-life care and symptom management. Two-thirds of respondents (67%) reported not feeling confident about delivering at least 1 component of palliative care. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study assessing physician perspectives and knowledge of palliative care in Eurasia and reveals wide variability in alignment with WHO guidelines and limited confidence in providing palliative care. Study findings will inform targeted educational interventions, which must be tailored to the local political, economic, and cultural context.

Are we meeting the informational needs of cancer patients and families? Perception of physician communication in pediatric oncology.

BACKGROUND: High-quality oncology care is marked by skillful communication, yet little is known about patient and family communication perceptions or content preferences. Our study sought to elicit pediatric oncology patient and parent perceptions of early cancer communication to establish whether informational needs were met and identify opportunities for enhanced communication throughout cancer care. METHOD: An original survey instrument was developed, pretested, and administered to 129 patients, age 10-18 years, and their parents at 3 cancer centers between 2011 and 2015. Statistical analysis of survey items about perceived communication, related associations, and patient/parent concordance was performed. RESULTS: A greater percentage of participants reported "a lot" of discussion about the physical impact of cancer (patients, 58.1% [n = 75]; parents, 69.8% [n = 90]) compared with impact on quality of life (QOL) (patients, 44.2% [n = 57]; parents, 55.8% [n = 72]) or emotional impact (patients, 31.8% [n = 41]; parents, 43.4% [n = 56]). One fifth of patients (20.9% [n = 27]) reported they had no up-front discussion about the emotional impact of cancer treatment. Parents indicated a desire for increased discussion regarding impact on family life (27.9% [n = 36]), long-term QOL (27.9% [n = 36]), and daily activities (20.2% [n = 26]). Patients more frequently than parents indicated a desire for increased physician/patient discussion around the impact on daily activities (patients, 40.3% [n = 52]; parents, 21.7% [n = 28]; P < .001), long-term QOL (patients, 34.9% [n = 45]; parents, 16.3% [n = 21]; P < .001), pain management (patients, 23.3% [n = 30]; parents, 7% [n = 9]; P < .001), physical symptom management (patients, 24% [n = 31]; parents, 7.8% [n = 10]; P < .001), short-term QOL (patients, 23.3% [n = 30]; parents, 9.3% [n = 12]; P = .001), and curative potential (patients, 21.7% [n = 28]; parents, 8.5% [n = 11]; P = .002, P values calculated using McNemar's test). CONCLUSION: Oncologists may not be meeting the informational needs of many patients and some parents/caregivers. Communication could be enhanced through increased direct physician-patient communication, as well as proactive discussion of emotional symptoms and impact of cancer on QOL.

Going straight to the source: A pilot study of bereaved parent-facilitated communication training for pediatric subspecialty fellows.

BACKGROUND: Medical trainees consistently report suboptimal instruction and poor self-confidence in communication skills. Despite this deficit, few established training programs provide comprehensive, pediatric-specific communication education, particularly in the provision of "bad news." To our knowledge, no programs currently use bereaved parent educators to facilitate communication training for pediatric subspecialty trainees. PROCEDURE: The authors designed and implemented a pilot communication training seminar in which bereaved parent educators and faculty facilitators led small groups in interactive, role-play scenarios. Surveys incorporating a retrospective preprogram assessment item to account for response-shift bias were used to assess short- and long-term changes in trainee comfort with delivering "bad news." RESULTS: Fifteen pediatric fellowship trainees participated in the communication seminar; complete data were available for 12 participants. After accounting for response-shift bias, participants reported significant improvement in overall preparedness, breaking bad news to a patient and family, and including the adolescent or young adult patient in conversations. Additionally, participants reported a significant improvement in their ability to address a patient and family's need for information, emotional suffering at the end of life (EOL), if and when a patient should be included in the conversation, and EOL care decisions. The participant's self-perceived improvement in comfort and preparedness persisted over time. CONCLUSIONS: Communication training for pediatric subspecialty trainees using bereaved parent educators is feasible and effective. Both medical trainee and bereaved parent participants benefited from involvement in this pilot study. Further iterations of this training will be modified to assess objective measures of improvement in trainees' communication skills.