Sustaining the benefits of structured education: Participants' experiences of receiving structured individual support during a programme (DAFNEplus) informed by behavioural science.

AIMS: The DAFNEplus programme seeks to promote sustained improvements in glycaemic management by incorporating techniques from behavioural science. It includes five sessions of structured individual support delivered over 12 months following group education. As part of a broader evaluation, and to inform decision-making about roll-out in routine care, we explored participants' experiences of, and engagement with, that individual support. METHODS: We interviewed DAFNEplus participants (n = 28) about their experiences of receiving individual support and the impact they perceived it as having on their self management practices. We analysed data thematically. RESULTS: Participants described several important ways individual support had helped strengthen their self management, including: consolidating and expanding their understandings of flexible intensive insulin therapy; promoting ongoing review and refinement of behaviour; encouraging continued and effective use of data; and facilitating access to help from healthcare professionals to pre-empt or resolve emergent difficulties. Participants characterised themselves as moving towards independence in self management over the time they received individual support, with their accounts suggesting three key stages in that journey: 'Working with healthcare professionals'; 'Growing sense of responsibility'; and, 'Taking control'. Whilst all portrayed themselves as changed, participants' progress through those stages varied; a few continued to depend heavily on DAFNEplus facilitators for advice and/or direction at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: While all participants benefited from individual support, our findings suggest that some may need, or gain further benefit from, longer-term, tailored support. This has important implications for decision-making about roll-out of DAFNEplus post-trial and for the development of future programmes seeking to bring about sustainable changes in self management practices.

Healthcare professionals' views about how pregnant women can benefit from using a closed-loop system: Qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Interest is growing in how closed-loop systems can support attainment of within-target glucose levels amongst pregnant women with type 1 diabetes. We explored healthcare professionals' views about how, and why, pregnant women benefitted from using the CamAPS FX system during the AiDAPT trial. METHODS: We interviewed 19 healthcare professionals who supported women using closed-loop during the trial. Our analysis focused on identifying descriptive and analytical themes relevant to clinical practice. RESULTS: Healthcare professionals highlighted clinical and quality-of-life benefits to using closed-loop in pregnancy; albeit, they attributed some of these to the continuous glucose monitoring component. They emphasised that the closed-loop was not a panacea and that, to gain maximum benefit, an effective collaboration between themselves, the woman and the closed-loop was needed. Optimal performance of the technology, as they further noted, also required women to interact with the system sufficiently, but not excessively; a requirement that they felt some women had found challenging. Even where healthcare professionals felt that this balance was not achieved, they suggested that women had still benefitted from using the system. Healthcare professionals reported difficulties predicting how specific women would engage with the technology. In light of their trial experiences, healthcare professionals favoured an inclusive approach to closed-loop rollout in routine clinical care. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare professionals recommended that closed-loop systems be offered to all pregnant women with type 1 diabetes in the future. Presenting closed-loop systems to pregnant women and healthcare teams as one pillar of a three-party collaboration may help promote optimal use.

Parents' experiences of using remote monitoring technology to manage type 1 diabetes in very young children during a clinical trial: Qualitative study.

AIMS: To explore parents' experiences of using remote monitoring technology when caring for a very young child with type 1 diabetes during a clinical trial. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with parents of 30 children (aged 1-7 years) participating in a trial (the KidsAP02 study) comparing hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery with sensor-augmented pump therapy. In both arms, parents had access to remote monitoring technology. Data analysis focused on identification of descriptive themes. RESULTS: Remote monitoring technology gave parents improved access to data which helped them pre-empt and manage glucose excursions. Parents observed how, when children were in their own care, they could be more absent while present, as their attention could shift to non-diabetes-related activities. Conversely, when children were others' care, remote monitoring enabled parents to be present while absent, by facilitating oversight and collaboration with caregivers. Parents described how remote monitoring made them feel more confident allowing others to care for their children. Parents' confidence increased when using a hybrid closed-loop system, as less work was required to keep glucose in range. Benefits to children were also highlighted, including being able to play and sleep uninterrupted and attend parties and sleepovers without their parents. While most parents welcomed the increased sense of control remote monitoring offered, some noted downsides, such as lack of respite from caregiving responsibilities. CONCLUSIONS: Remote monitoring can offer manifold benefits to both parents and very young children with type 1 diabetes. Some parents, however, may profit from opportunities to take 'time out'.

Parents' views about healthcare professionals having real-time remote access to their young child's diabetes data: Qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: We explored parents' views about healthcare professionals having remote access to their young child's insulin and glucose data during a clinical trial to inform use of data sharing in routine pediatric diabetes care. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Interviews with 33 parents of 30 children (aged 1-7 years) with type 1 diabetes participating in a randomized trial (KidsAP02) comparing hybrid closed-loop system use with sensor-augmented pump therapy. Data were analyzed using a qualitative descriptive approach. RESULTS: Parents reported multiple benefits to healthcare professionals being able to remotely access their child's glucose and insulin data during the trial, despite some initial concerns regarding the insights offered into everyday family life. Key benefits included: less work uploading/sharing data; improved consultations; and, better clinical input and support from healthcare professionals between consultations. Parents noted how healthcare professionals' real-time data access facilitated remote delivery of consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic, and how these were more suitable for young children than face-to-face appointments. Parents endorsed use of real-time data sharing in routine clinical care, subject to caveats regarding data access, security, and privacy. They also proposed that, if data sharing were used, consultations for closed-loop system users in routine clinical care could be replaced with needs-driven, ad-hoc contact. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time data sharing can offer clinical, logistical, and quality-of-life benefits and enhance opportunities for remote consultations, which may be more appropriate for young children. Wider rollout would require consideration of ethical and cybersecurity issues and, given the heightened intrusion on families' privacy, a non-judgmental, collaborative approach by healthcare professionals.

Adolescents and young adults' (AYA) views on their cancer knowledge prior to diagnosis: Findings from a qualitative study involving AYA receiving cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is rare amongst adolescents and young adults (AYA). Previous research has reported (healthy) AYA's knowledge of risk factors and symptoms as limited, with this potentially leading to delays in help-seeking and diagnosis. OBJECTIVES: We explored AYA's views on their cancer knowledge prior to diagnosis and if/how they perceived this as having affected their experiences of diagnosis and care. METHODS: We interviewed 18 AYA diagnosed with cancer (aged 16-24 years). Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We undertook qualitative descriptive analysis, exploring both a priori topics and emergent themes, including cancer knowledge prior to diagnosis. RESULTS: Adolescents and young adults characterized their knowledge of cancer and treatment prior to diagnosis and treatment initiation as limited and superficial. AYA perceived gaps in their knowledge as having profound consequences throughout their cancer journey. These included: hindering recognition of symptoms, thereby delaying help-seeking; impeding understanding of the significance of tests and referrals; amplifying uncertainty on diagnosis; and affording poor preparation for the harsh realities of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents and young adults perceived their limited cancer knowledge prior to diagnosis as affecting experiences of diagnosis and initial/front-line care. These findings prompt consideration of whether, when and how, AYA's knowledge of cancer might be improved. Two broad approaches are discussed: universal education on AYA cancer and/or health; and targeted education (enhanced information and counselling) at and after diagnosis. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Our work was informed throughout by discussions with an advisory group, whose membership included AYA treated for cancer.

Strategies for improving access to clinical trials by teenagers and young adults with cancer: A qualitative study of health professionals' views.

OBJECTIVE: Few teenagers and young adults (TYA) with cancer participate in clinical trials. Lack of opportunity has been identified as a major barrier. We canvassed health professionals' views on how TYA's access to trials might be improved. METHODS: We interviewed 35 professionals with responsibility for delivering or facilitating cancer care and/or clinical trials. We analysed data using a qualitative descriptive approach. RESULTS: Interviewees viewed improving TYA's access to trials as challenging, but possible. They reframed the problem as one of rare disease and surmised that modifying the organisation, administration and resourcing of research (and care) might expand opportunities for both TYA and other patients with low volume conditions. Proposals coalesced around four themes: consolidating the pool of patients; streamlining bureaucratic requirements; investing in the research workforce; and promoting pragmatism in trial design. CONCLUSION: Accounts suggest there is scope to improve access to trials by TYA with cancer and other patients with rare diseases. Though re-configuring care, research and resource frameworks would present substantial challenges, doing nothing would also have costs. Change will require the support of a range of stakeholders, and agreement as to the best way forward. Further work, such as priority setting exercises, may be necessary to reach a consensus.

The challenges of making informed decisions about treatment and trial participation following a cancer diagnosis: a qualitative study involving adolescents and young adults with cancer and their caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Limited attention has been paid to adolescents and young adults' (AYA's) experiences in the aftermath of a cancer diagnosis, despite this being a time when potentially life-changing decisions are made. We explored AYA's and caregivers' experiences of, and views about, making treatment and trial participation decisions following a cancer diagnosis, in order to understand, and help facilitate, informed treatment decision-making in this age group. METHODS: Interviews were undertaken with 18 AYA diagnosed, or re-diagnosed, with cancer when aged 16-24 years, and 15 parents/caregivers. Analysis focused on the identification and description of explanatory themes. RESULTS: Most AYA described being extremely unwell by the time of diagnosis and, consequently, experiencing difficulties processing the news. Distress and acceleration in clinical activity following diagnosis could further impede the absorption of treatment-relevant information. After referral to a specialist cancer unit, many AYA described quickly transitioning to a calm and pragmatic mind-set, and wanting to commence treatment at the earliest opportunity. Most reported seeing information about short-term side-effects of treatment as having limited relevance to their recovery-focused outlook at that time. AYA seldom indicated wanting to make choices about front-line treatment, with most preferring to defer decisions to health professionals. Even when charged with decisions about trial participation, AYA reported welcoming a strong health professional steer. Parents/caregivers attempted to compensate for AYA's limited engagement with treatment-relevant information. However, in seeking to ensure AYA received the best treatment, these individuals had conflicting priorities and information needs. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the challenging context in which AYA are confronted with decisions about front-line treatment, and reveals how their responses make it hard to ensure their decisions are fully informed. It raises questions about the direct value, to AYA, of approaches that aim to promote decision-making by improving understanding and recall of information, though such approaches may be of value to caregivers. In seeking to improve information-giving and involvement in treatment-related decision-making at diagnosis, care should be taken not to delegitimize the preference of many AYA for a directive approach from trusted clinicians.

Young people's decisions about biologic therapies: who influences them and how?

OBJECTIVES: Young people with inflammatory arthritis can have severe disease warranting biologic therapy. They face complex treatment decisions, with profound consequences. This study aimed to explore the influence of individuals outside the care team (trusted others) on the treatment decisions made by young people, in particular their decisions about biologic therapies. METHODS: Young people (16-25 years of age) with inflammatory arthritis and experience of treatment decision making were recruited from three NHS Hospital Trusts. Twenty-five were interviewed, plus 11 trusted others identified by young people as being involved in their decision making, as well as 6 health professionals. The data were analysed using coding, memoing and mapping techniques and the findings were tested through a series of focus groups. RESULTS: Young people initially emphasized their decisional autonomy, typically describing people other than health professionals as limited in influence. However, discussions revealed the involvement--in deliberation and enactment--of a range of other people. This cast of trusted others was small and largely consistent; mothers played a particularly prominent role, providing cognitive, practical and emotional support. Members of the wider cast of trusted others were involved in more limited but still significant ways. CONCLUSION: Young people claim autonomy but other people enable this. The network of relationships in which they are embedded is distinctive and evolving. Mothers play a supporting role well into early adulthood; in contrast, partners are involved in far more limited ways. As such, the applicability of adult models of decision making is unclear. This must be taken into account if the support provided by professionals is to be optimally tailored to young people's needs.

Rollout of Closed-Loop Technology to Pregnant Women with Type 1 Diabetes: Healthcare Professionals' Views About Potential Challenges and Solutions.

Aims: To explore healthcare professionals' views about the training and support needed to rollout closed-loop technology to pregnant women with type 1 diabetes. Methods: We interviewed (n = 19) healthcare professionals who supported pregnant women using CamAPS FX closed-loop during the Automated insulin Delivery Amongst Pregnant women with Type 1 diabetes (AiDAPT) trial. Data were analyzed descriptively. An online workshop involving (n = 15) trial team members was used to inform recommendations. Ethics approvals were obtained in conjunction with those for the wider trial. Results: Interviewees expressed enthusiasm for a national rollout of closed-loop, but anticipated various challenges, some specific to use during pregnancy. These included variations in insulin pump and continuous glucose monitoring expertise and difficulties embedding and retaining key skills, due to the relatively small numbers of pregnant women using closed-loop. Inexperienced staff also highlighted difficulties interpreting data downloads. To support rollout, interviewees recommended providing expert initial advice training, delivered by device manufacturers together with online training resources and specific checklists for different systems. They also highlighted a need for 24 h technical support, especially when supporting technology naive women after first transitioning onto closed-loop in early pregnancy. They further recommended providing case-based meetings and mentorship for inexperienced colleagues, including support interpreting data downloads. Interviewees were optimistic that if healthcare professionals received training and support, their long-term workloads could be reduced because closed-loop lessened women's need for glycemic management input, especially in later pregnancy. Conclusions: Interviewees identified challenges and opportunities to rolling-out closed-loop and provided practical suggestions to upskill inexperienced staff supporting pregnant women using closed-loop. A key priority will be to determine how best to develop mentorship services to support inexperienced staff delivering closed-loop. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT04938557.

Parents' experiences of using a hybrid closed-loop system (CamAPS FX) to care for a very young child with type 1 diabetes: Qualitative study.

AIMS: To explore parents' experiences of using a hybrid closed-loop system (CamAPS FX) when caring for a very young child (aged 1-7 years) with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Interviews with n = 33 parents of 30 children who used the system during a randomised controlled trial. Data analysis used a descriptive thematic approach. RESULTS: While some parents were initially reticent about handing control to the system, all reported clinical benefits to using the technology, having to do less diabetes-related work and needing less clinical input over time. Parents welcomed opportunities to enhance the system's efficacy (using Ease-off and Boost functions) as required. Parents described how the system's automated glucose control facilitated more normality, including sleeping better, worrying less about their child, and feeling more confident and able to outsource care. Parents also described more normality for the child (alongside better sleep, mood and concentration, and lessened distress) and siblings. Parents liked being able to administer insulin using a smartphone, but suggested refinements to device size and functionality. CONCLUSIONS: Using a hybrid closed-loop system in very young children can facilitate greater normality and may result in a lessened demand for health professionals' input. Systems may need to be customised for very young children.

Feasibility and design of a trial regarding the optimal mode of delivery for preterm birth: the CASSAVA multiple methods study.

BACKGROUND: Around 60,000 babies are born preterm (prior to 37 weeks' gestation) each year in the UK. There is little evidence on the optimal birth mode (vaginal or caesarean section). OBJECTIVE: The overall aim of the CASSAVA project was to determine if a trial to define the optimal mode of preterm birth could be carried out and, if so, determine what sort of trial could be conducted and how it could best be performed. We aimed to determine the specific groups of preterm women and babies for whom there are uncertainties about the best planned mode of birth, and if there would be willingness to recruit to, and participate in, a randomised trial to address some, but not all, of these uncertainties. This project was conducted in response to a Heath Technology Assessment programme commissioning call (17/22 'Mode of delivery for preterm infants'). METHODS: We conducted clinician and patient surveys (n = 224 and n = 379, respectively) to identify current practice and opinion, and a consensus survey and Delphi workshop (n = 76 and n = 22 participants, respectively) to inform the design of a hypothetical clinical trial. The protocol for this clinical trial/vignette was used in telephone interviews with clinicians (n = 24) and in focus groups with potential participants (n = 13). RESULTS: Planned sample size and data saturation was achieved for all groups except for focus groups with participants, as this had to be curtailed because of the COVID-19 pandemic and data saturation was not achieved. There was broad agreement from parents and health-care professionals that a trial is needed. The clinician survey demonstrated a variety of practice and opinion. The parent survey suggested that women and their families generally preferred vaginal birth at later gestations and caesarean section for preterm infants. The interactive workshop and Delphi consensus process confirmed the need for more evidence (hence the case for a trial) and provided rich information on what a future trial should entail. It was agreed that any trial should address the areas with most uncertainty, including the management of women at 26-32 weeks' gestation, with either spontaneous preterm labour (cephalic presentation) or where preterm birth was medically indicated. Clear themes around the challenges inherent in conducting any trial emerged, including the concept of equipoise itself. Specific issues were as follows: different clinicians and participants would be in equipoise for each clinical scenario, effective conduct of the trial would require appropriate resources and expertise within the hospital conducting the trial, potential participants would welcome information on the trial well before the onset of labour and minority ethnic groups would require tailored approaches. CONCLUSION: Given the lack of evidence and the variation of practice and opinion in this area, and having listened to clinicians and potential participants, we conclude that a trial should be conducted and the outlined challenges resolved. FUTURE WORK: The CASSAVA project could be used to inform the design of a randomised trial and indicates how such a trial could be carried out. Any future trial would benefit from a pilot with qualitative input and a study within a trial to inform optimal recruitment. LIMITATIONS: Certainty that a trial could be conducted can be determined only when it is attempted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12295730. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 61. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Around 60,000 babies are born preterm each year in the UK. We do not know what the safest mode of birth is for these babies. Birth options include a vaginal birth or a caesarean section (which involves an operation for the mother). Normally, the ideal way to find out what clinical options are best is to carry out a 'randomised trial' in which participants are allocated to a particular treatment group (in this case, vaginal birth or caesarean section) by chance. It is not clear if women who have their babies preterm would want to take part in such a trial or that the clinicians looking after the women would be happy to ask them to, as previous trials have failed to recruit sufficient participants. The purpose of the CASSAVA research project was to find out what people think is the best and safest method of delivering preterm babies, their views on doing a research trial and what sort of research trial could be carried out. We conducted a survey asking clinicians and women their views. We gathered clinicians and women together to discuss and agree the key questions for a trial to answer. We then developed a protocol (plan) for a possible trial. Using this trial protocol, we conducted telephone interviews with clinicians, asking them if they would be willing to be involved and if they would be willing to ask pregnant women to participate. We also conducted focus groups with women, using a vignette (storyboard) about a possible trial. We found that there is a lot of uncertainty about the best way for preterm babies to be born. Clinicians and women broadly agreed that it would be good to resolve this uncertainty through a trial. We were able to identify some areas of the greatest uncertainty where clinicians and women would consider participating in a study. We gained a lot of useful information about how we could best set up a trial and support clinicians and women to get involved.

Data Sharing While Using a Closed-Loop System: Qualitative Study of Adolescents' and Parents' Experiences and Views.

Objective: To understand and explore data sharing practices among adolescents and their parents using a closed-loop system. Methods: Eighteen adolescents (aged 11-18 years) and 19 parents were interviewed after adolescents had ∼6 months experience of using a closed-loop system, which permitted them to share glucose and insulin data with parents/caregivers. Data were analyzed thematically. Results: There was considerable variability in how parent-child dyads perceived, valued, and undertook data sharing. Parents of early adolescents (11-13 years) reported making extensive use of "real time" data to remotely manage their child's diabetes and early adolescents described needing and wanting this input. Parents of middle adolescents (14-16 years) described making greater use of retrospective data. To avoid conflict and encourage and support their son/daughter's autonomy, these individuals reported practicing watchful waiting and only intervening after concerns about a pattern of problematic behavior or their child's safety arose. Middle adolescents indicated that data sharing had been done primarily for the benefit of their parents, although they also noted quality of life benefits for themselves. Among late adolescents (17+ years), parents were simply remote because their son/daughter had not permitted access to their data. Participants recommended clear ground rules be put in place about when, and how, data sharing should be used. Conclusions: To help parent-child dyads use data sharing in ways which minimize conflict and optimize constructive parental support, we recommend tailored input and support, which takes account of family dynamics, the young person's developmental maturity, and the different ways in which data are used across the adolescent age range.

Clinician-researchers and custodians of scarce resources: a qualitative study of health professionals' views on barriers to the involvement of teenagers and young adults in cancer trials.

BACKGROUND: Equipoise and role conflict have been previously identified as important factors in professionals' engagement with trials, inducing behaviours which can impact on recruitment. We explored these phenomena as potential explanations for the low levels of involvement of teenagers and young adults (TYA) with cancer in clinical trials in oncology. METHODS: We report findings from interviews with 30 purposively sampled direct-care professionals involved in delivering cancer care and/or facilitating clinical trials in Scotland. We undertook qualitative descriptive analysis, focussed on identifying key issues and themes. RESULTS: Interviewees largely identified as clinician-researchers and portrayed oncology as a specialty in which research was integral to care. They saw their primary responsibility as ensuring patients received the best treatment, but asserted that, in general, trials provided a vehicle for optimal care. Role conflict in its traditional form was rarely evident; however, other tensions were manifest. Professionals found the significant time costs of delivering trials difficult to reconcile with the increasing pressures on clinical services. They felt a responsibility to make prudent choices about the trials with which to engage. Guided by utilitarian principles, these choices were oriented towards benefiting the largest number of patients. This favoured trials in high volume diseases; as TYA tend to have rarer forms of cancer, professionals' support for-and TYA's access to-relevant trials was, by default, more limited. CONCLUSIONS: Neither lack of individual equipoise nor experiences of traditional forms of role conflict accounted for the low levels of involvement of TYA with cancer in clinical trials. However, prominent tensions around the management of scarce resources provided an alternative explanation for TYA's limited access to cancer trials. The prevailing approach to decision-making about whether and which trials to support was recognised as contributing to inequalities in access and care. Professionals' choices, however, were made in the context of scarcity, and structured by incentives and sanctions understood by them as signalling governmental priorities. A franker discussion of the extent and distribution of the costs and benefits of trials work is needed, for change to be achieved.

Disease-related factors affecting timely lymphoma diagnosis: a qualitative study exploring patient experiences.

BACKGROUND: Expediting cancer diagnosis is widely perceived as one way to improve patient outcomes. Evidence indicates that lymphoma diagnosis is often delayed, yet understanding of issues influencing this is incomplete. AIM: To explore patients' and their relatives' perceptions of disease-related factors affecting time to diagnosis of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative UK study involving patients with indolent and aggressive lymphomas, and their relatives, from an established population-based cohort in the north of England. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with 35 patients and 15 of their relatives. Interviews were audiorecorded and transcribed, and qualitative descriptive analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: Participant accounts suggest that certain features of lymphoma can impact on patients' and healthcare providers' (HCPs) responses to disease onset. Three characteristics stand out: disease occurrence (rare), manifestation (varied), and investigative options (often inconclusive). Interviewees described how they, and some HCPs, lacked familiarity with lymphoma, seldom considering it a likely explanation for their symptoms. Symptoms reported were highly variable, frequently non-specific, and often initially thought to be associated with various benign, self-limiting causes. Blood tests and other investigations, while frequently able to detect abnormalities, did not reliably indicate malignancy. Interviewees reported the potential for improvements among HCPs in information gathering, communication of uncertainty, and re-presentation advice for non-resolving/progressive health changes. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the complex characteristics of lymphoma, perceived by patients as prolonging time to diagnosis, often despite significant effort by themselves, their relatives, and HCPs to expedite this process. The findings also illustrate why simple solutions to delayed diagnosis of lymphoma are lacking.

Experiences of employment among young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: This study explored expectations and experiences of employment among young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis and the role of health professionals in promoting positive employment outcomes. METHODS: Semistructured interviews (n = 13) and three focus groups (n = 9, n = 4, n = 3) were conducted with young people (16-25 y) and adults (26-31 y) with juvenile idiopathic arthritis and semistructured interviews (n = 9) were conducted with health professionals. Transcripts were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis have concerns about employers' attitudes toward employees with long-term health conditions and lack knowledge of antidiscrimination legislation. Young people not in education, employment or training identify arthritis as a key barrier. Challenges associated with arthritis (e.g., pain, psychological distress) may not be visible to employers. Decisions about disclosing arthritis are challenging and cause anxiety. Young people associate good disease management and access to flexible and convenient care with their capacity to succeed in employment. Psychosocial and vocational interventions have benefited some young people but are not routinely available. CONCLUSIONS: Low expectations of employers may affect young people's decisions about disclosure and seeking appropriate support in the work place. Health professionals can equip young people with knowledge and skills to negotiate appropriate support, through signposting to antidiscrimination information and offering practice of transferable skills such as disclosure in consultations. Implications for rehabilitation Young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis encounter challenges with regard to employment; many lack the knowledge and skills to negotiate appropriate support from employers. Rehabilitation professionals could play a more substantial role in equipping them with relevant knowledge and skills by signposting to antidiscrimination information and nurturing transferable skills, such as disclosure, in consultations. Potentially helpful interventions, such as group activities or assessment by a psychologist, have benefited some but need more evaluative scrutiny with respect to employment outcomes.

Myeloma: Patient accounts of their pathways to diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Pathways to myeloma diagnosis can be prolonged, and are often preceded by multiple GP consultations and emergency presentation. This is the first qualitative study to examine events leading to diagnosis by asking patients about their experiences during this time. METHODS: Set within a UK population-based cohort, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 myeloma patients with varying characteristics and pathways, 12 of whom invited their relatives to take part. Interviews were audio-recorded and qualitative analysis undertaken. RESULTS: Pre-diagnostic awareness of myeloma was minimal. Disease onset was typically described as gradual, and health changes vague but progressive, with increasing loss of function. A wide range of symptoms was reported, with the similarity of these to self-limiting conditions failing to raise suspicion of myeloma among patients and GPs. Patients tended to normalise symptoms at first, although all eventually sought GP advice. GPs often initially suggested benign diagnoses, which were sometimes only revised after multiple consultations with persistent/worsening symptoms. Referrals were made to various hospital specialities, and haematology if associated with abnormal blood tests suggestive of myeloma. Once in secondary care, progress towards diagnosis was generally rapid. CONCLUSIONS: Accounts confirmed that pathways to diagnosis could be difficult, largely due to the way myeloma presents, and how symptoms are interpreted and managed by patients and GPs. Recognition of 'normal' health and consultation patterns for the individual could promote appropriate help-seeking and timely referral when changes occur, and may be more effective than raising awareness about the myriad of potential symptoms associated with this disease.

What impact does written information about fatigue have on patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases? Findings from a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Although fatigue is a common symptom for people with rheumatic diseases, limited support is available. This study explored the impact of written information about fatigue, focusing on a booklet, Fatigue and arthritis. METHODS: Thirteen patients with rheumatic disease and fatigue were recruited purposively from a rheumatology outpatient service. They were interviewed before and after receiving the fatigue booklet. Two patients, plus six professionals with relevant interests, participated in a focus group. Transcripts were analysed thematically and a descriptive summary was produced. RESULTS: Interviewees consistently reported that fatigue made life more challenging, and none had previously received any support to manage it. Reflecting on the booklet, most said that it had made a difference to how they thought about fatigue, and that this had been valuable. Around half also said that it had affected, or would affect, how they managed fatigue. No one reported any impact on fatigue itself. Comments from interviewees and focus group members alike suggested that the research process may have contributed to the changes in thought and behaviour reported. Its key contributions appear to have been: clarifying the booklet's relevance; prompting reflection on current management; and introducing accountability. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated that written information can make a difference to how people think about fatigue and may also prompt behaviour change. However, context appeared to be important: it seems likely that the research process played a part and that the impact of the booklet may have been less if read in isolation. Aspects of the research appearing to facilitate impact could be integrated into routine care, providing a pragmatic (relatively low-cost) response to an unmet need.

Being as Normal as Possible: How Young People Ages 16-25 Years Evaluate the Risks and Benefits of Treatment for Inflammatory Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how young people (ages 16-25 years) with inflammatory arthritis evaluate the risks and benefits of treatment, particularly treatment with biologic therapies. METHODS: This qualitative study involved in-depth interviews (n = 44) with young people, trusted others (e.g., parents), and health professionals; audio-recordings (n = 4) of biologic therapy-related consultations; and focus groups (n = 4). Analysis used techniques from grounded theory (open and focused coding, constant comparison, memoing, and mapping). RESULTS: Young people aspired to live what they perceived as a "normal" life. They saw treatment as presenting both an opportunity for and a threat to achieving this. Treatment changes were therefore subject to complex and ongoing evaluation, covering administration, associated restrictions, anticipated effects, and side effects. Information sources included expert opinion (of professionals and other patients) and personal experience. Previous treatments provided important reference points. Faced with uncertain outcomes, young people made provisional decisions. Both trusted others and health professionals expressed concern that young people were too focused on short-term outcomes. CONCLUSION: Young people value treatment that helps them to live a "normal" life. There is more to this than controlling disease. The emotional, social, and vocational consequences of treatment can be profound and lasting: opportunities to discuss the effects of treatment should be provided early and regularly. While making every effort to ensure understanding of the long-term clinical consequences of taking or not taking medication, the wider impact of treatment should not be dismissed. Only through understanding young people's values, preferences, and concerns can a sustainable balance between disease control and treatment burden be achieved.