Population-Level Analysis of Appropriateness of End-of-Life Care for Children with Neurologic Conditions.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to measure the appropriateness of end-of-life care for children who died with neurologic conditions. STUDY DESIGN: Based on linked routinely collected databases, we conducted a population-level decedent retrospective cohort study of children with neurologic conditions who died in Belgium between 2010 and 2017. We measured a set of 22 face-validated quality indicators. The set concerns 12 indicators of potentially appropriate end-of-life care (eg, specialized comfort medication, physician contact, continuous care) and 10 indicators of potentially inappropriate end-of-life care (eg, diagnostic tests, phlebotomy). We performed ANOVA for predictors (age, sex, disease category, nationality, having siblings, year of death) for scales of appropriate and inappropriate care. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2017, 139 children with neurologic conditions died in Belgium. For potentially appropriate care, in the last 30 days, 76% of children received clinical care, 55% had continuous care relationships, 17% had contact with a general physician, 8% of children received specialized comfort medication, and 14% received care from a palliative care team. For potentially inappropriate care, in the last 14 days, 45% had blood drawn and 27% were admitted to intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found indications of appropriate as well as inappropriate end-of-life care for children who died with neurologic conditions. These findings reveal a substantial margin for potential quality improvement, in regard to palliative care provision, multidisciplinary care, financial support, specialized comfort medication, clinical follow-up, general physician contact, diagnostics, and blood drawing.

Appropriateness of end-of-life care for children with genetic and congenital conditions: a cohort study using routinely collected linked data.

This study aims to evaluate the appropriateness of end-of-life care for children with genetic and congenital conditions. This is a decedent cohort study. We used 6 linked, Belgian, routinely collected, population-level databases containing children (1-17) who died with genetic and congenital conditions in Belgium between 2010 and 2017. We measured 22 quality indicators, face-validated using a previously published RAND/UCLA methodology. Appropriateness of care was defined as the overall "expected health benefit" of given healthcare interventions within a healthcare system exceeding expected negative outcomes. In the 8-year study period, 200 children were identified to have died with genetic and congenital conditions. Concerning appropriateness of care, in the last month before death, 79% of children had contact with specialist physicians, 17% had contact with a family physician, and 5% received multidisciplinary care. Palliative care was used by 17% of the children. Concerning inappropriateness of care, 51% of the children received blood drawings in the last week before death, and 29% received diagnostics and monitoring (2 or more magnetic resonance imaging scans, computed tomography scans, or X-rays) in the last month.    Conclusion: Findings suggest end-of-life care could be improved in terms of palliative care, contact with a family physician and paramedics, and diagnostics and monitoring in the form of imaging. What is Known: • Previous studies suggest that end-of life care for children with genetic and congenital conditions may be subject to issues with bereavement, psychological concerns for child and family, financial cost at the end of life, decision-making when using technological interventions, availability and coordination of services, and palliative care provision. Bereaved parents of children with genetic and congenital conditions have previously evaluated end-of-life care as poor or fair, and some have reported that their children suffered a lot to a great deal at the end of life. • However, no peer-reviewed population-level quality evaluation of end-of-life care for this population is currently present. What is New: • This study provides an evaluation of the appropriateness of end-of-life care for children who died in Belgium with genetic and congenital conditions between 2010 and 2017, using administrative healthcare data and validated quality indicators. The concept of appropriateness is denoted as relative and indicative within the study, not as a definitive judgement. • Our study suggests improvements in end-of-life care may be possible, for instance, in terms of the provision of palliative care, contact with care providers next to the specialist physician, and diagnostics and monitoring in terms of imaging (e.g., magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography scans). Further empirical research is necessary, for instance, into unforeseen and foreseen end-of-life trajectories, to make definitive conclusions about appropriateness of care.

Face-Validated Quality Indicators for Appropriateness of End-of-Life Care in Children with Serious Illness: A Study Using the RAND/University of California at Los Angeles Appropriateness Method.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and face-validate population-level indicators for potential appropriateness of end-of-life care, for children with cancer, neurologic conditions, and genetic/congenital conditions, to be applied to administrative health data containing medication and treatment variables. STUDY DESIGN: Modified RAND/University of California at Los Angeles appropriateness method. We identified potential indicators per illness group through systematic literature review, scoping review, and expert interviews. Three unique expert panels, a cancer (n = 19), neurology (n = 21), and genetic/congenital (n = 17) panel, participated in interviews and rated indicators in individual ratings, group discussions, and second individual ratings. Each indicator was rated on a scale from 1 to 9 for suitability. Consensus was calculated with the interpercentile range adjusted for symmetry formula. Indicators with consensus about unsuitability were removed, those with consensus about suitability were retained, and those with lack of consensus deliberated in the group discussion. Experts included pediatricians, nurses, psychologists, physiotherapists, pharmacologists, care coordinators, general practitioners, social workers from hospitals, care teams, and general practice. RESULTS: Literature review and expert interviews yielded 115 potential indicators for cancer, 111 for neurologic conditions, and 99 for genetic/congenital conditions. We combined similar indicators, resulting in respectively 36, 32, and 33 indicators per group. Expert scoring approved 21 indicators for cancer, 24 for neurologic conditions, and 23 for genetic/congenital conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Our indicators can be applied to administrative data to evaluate appropriateness of children's end-of-life care. Differences from adults' indicators stress the specificity of children's end-of-life care. Individual care and remaining aspects, such as family support, can be evaluated with complementary tools.

Barriers and facilitators for parents in end-of-life decision-making for neonates at the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Mortality and end-of-life decision-making can occur in newborns, especially within the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. For parents, participating in end-of-life decision-making is taxing. Knowledge is lacking on what support is helpful to parents during decision-making. AIM: To identify barriers and facilitators experienced by parents in making an end-of-life decision for their infant. DESIGN: Qualitative study using face-to-face semi-structured interviews. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed 23 parents with a child that died after an end-of-life decision at a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit between April and September 2018. RESULTS: Parents stated barriers and facilitators within 4 themes: 1. Clinical knowledge and prognosis; 2. Quality of information provision; 3. Emotion regulation; and 4. Psychosocial environment. Facilitators include knowing whether the prognosis includes long-term negative quality of life, knowing all treatment options, receiving information according to health literacy level, being able to process intense emotions, having experienced counseling and practical help. Barriers include a lack of general medical knowledge, being unprepared for a poor prognosis, having an uninformed psychologist. CONCLUSIONS: We found that clinical information and psychosocial support aid parents in decision-making. Information is best tailored to health literacy. Psychosocial support can be provided by experienced, informed counselors, social services and sibling support, distinguishing between verbal and non-verbal coping preferences, and calm, familiar architecture. Intense emotions may hinder absorption of clinical information, therefore interventions to aid emotion regulation and reduce cognitive load may be looked at in further research. Adjustment of the Situations, Opinions and Options, Parents, Information, Emotions framework based on our results can be evaluated.

Healthcare interventions improving and reducing quality of life in children at the end of life: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Children with serious illness suffer from symptoms at the end of life that often fail to be relieved. An overview is required of healthcare interventions improving and decreasing quality of life (QOL) for children with serious illness at the end of life. METHODS: A systematic review was performed in five databases, January 2000 to July 2018 without language limit. Reviewers selected quantitative studies with a healthcare intervention, for example, medication or treatment, and QOL outcomes or QOL-related measures, for example, symptoms, for children aged 1-17 years with serious illness. One author assessed outcomes with the QualSyst and GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) Framework; two authors checked a 25% sample. QOL improvement or reduction was categorized. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies met the eligibility criteria studying 20 unique interventions. Designs included 1 randomized controlled trial, 1 cross-sectional study, and 34 cohort studies. Patient-reported symptom monitoring increased QOL significantly in cancer patients in a randomized controlled trial. Dexmedetomidine, methadone, ventilation, pleurodesis, and palliative care were significantly associated with improved QOL, and chemotherapy, stem cell transplant, and hospitalization with reduced QOL, in cohort studies. CONCLUSIONS: Use of patient-controlled symptom feedback, multidisciplinary palliative care teams with full-time practical support, inhalation therapy, and off-label sedative medication may improve QOL. Curative therapy may reduce QOL. IMPACT: QOL for children at the end of life may be improved with patient-controlled symptom feedback, multidisciplinary palliative care teams with full-time practical support, inhalation therapy, and off-label sedative medication. QOL for children at the end of life may be reduced with therapy with a curative intent, such as curative chemotherapy or stem cell transplant. A comprehensive overview of current evidence to elevate currently often-failing QOL management for children at the end of life. New paradigm-level indicators for appropriate and inappropriate QOL management in children at the end of life. New hypotheses for future research, guided by the current knowledge within the field. Various healthcare interventions (as described above) could or might be employed as tools to provide relief in QOL management for children with serious illness, such as cancer, at the end of life, and therefore could be discussed in pediatrician end-of-life training to limit the often-failed QOL management in this population, cave the one-size-fits-all approach for individual cases. Multidisciplinary team efforts and 24/7 presence, especially practical support for parents, might characterize effective palliative care team interventions for children with serious illness at the end of life, suggesting a co-regulating link between well-being of the child partly to that of the parents Hypothesis-oriented research is needed, especially for children with nonmalignant disorders, such as genetic or neurological disorders at the end of life, as well as QOL outcomes for intervention research and psychosocial or spiritual outcomes.

Neonatologists and neonatal nurses have positive attitudes towards perinatal end-of-life decisions, a nationwide survey.

AIM: Perinatal death is often preceded by an end-of-life decision (ELD). Disparate hospital policies, complex legal frameworks and ethically difficult cases make attitudes important. This study investigated attitudes of neonatologists and nurses towards perinatal ELDs. METHODS: A survey was handed out to all neonatologists and neonatal nurses in all eight neonatal intensive care units in Flanders, Belgium in May 2017. Respondents indicated agreement with statements regarding perinatal ELDs on a Likert-scale and sent back questionnaires via mail. RESULTS: The response rate was 49.5% (302/610). Most neonatologists and nurses found nontreatment decisions such as withholding or withdrawing treatment acceptable (90-100%). Termination of pregnancy when the foetus is viable in cases of severe or lethal foetal problems was considered highly acceptable in both groups (80-98%). Physicians and nurses do not find different ELDs equally acceptable, e.g. nurses more often than physicians (74% vs 60%, p = 0.017) agree that it is acceptable in certain cases to administer medication with the explicit intention of hastening death. CONCLUSION: There was considerable support for both prenatal and neonatal ELDs, even for decisions that currently fall outside the Belgian legal framework. Differences between neonatologists' and nurses' attitudes indicate that both opinions should be heard during ELD-making.

Barriers to and Facilitators of End-of-Life Decision Making by Neonatologists and Neonatal Nurses in Neonates: A Qualitative Study.

CONTEXT: Making end-of-life decisions (ELDs) in neonates involves ethically difficult and distressing dilemmas for health care providers. Insight into which factors complicate or facilitate this decision-making process could be a necessary first step in formulating recommendations to aid future practice. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify barriers to and facilitators of the ELD-making process as perceived by neonatologists and nurses. METHODS: We conducted semistructured face-to-face interviews with 15 neonatologists and 15 neonatal nurses, recruited through four neonatal intensive care units in Flanders, Belgium. They were asked what factors had facilitated and complicated previous ELD-making processes. Two researchers independently analyzed the data, using thematic content analysis to extract and summarize barriers and facilitators. RESULTS: Barriers and facilitators were found at three distinct levels: the case-specific context (e.g., uncertainty of the diagnosis and specific characteristics of the child, parents, and health care providers, which make decision making more difficult), decision-making process (e.g., multidisciplinary consultations and advance care planning, which make decision making easier), and overarching structure (e.g., lack of privacy and complex legislation making decision making more challenging). CONCLUSION: Barriers and facilitators found in this study can lead to recommendations, some simpler to implement than others, to aid the complex ELD-making process. Recommendations include establishing regular multidisciplinary meetings to include all health care providers and reduce unnecessary uncertainty, routinely implementing advance care planning in severely ill neonates to make important decisions beforehand, creating privacy for bad-news conversations with parents, and reviewing the complex legal framework of perinatal ELD making.

Influence of health interventions on quality of life in seriously ill children at the end of life: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Seriously ill children suffer from numerous symptoms at the end of their lives, including pain, anxiety, and restricted communication. There are currently no comprehensive overviews of which health interventions have proven benefits and which have proven detrimental effects on the quality of life of children in an end-of-life context. In order to identify potential quality indicators to eventually improve care, a systematic review of available evidence is needed. The aim of the current systematic review will be to make an overview of the influence of health interventions on associated outcomes related to quality of life at the end of life in seriously ill children. METHODS: A systematic search will be conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Web of Science. We will include quantitative empirical designs looking into the influence of a health intervention on (proxies of) quality of life at the end of life in seriously ill children. Three independent authors will review titles and abstracts and screen full texts against eligibility criteria. One reviewer will carry out full data extraction and quality assessment, and a 20% random sample will be extracted and assessed by two independent reviewers. We will use the QualSyst Tool for assessment of the quality of the included studies (QualSyst Tool) for quality assessment; overall strength of the body of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. An overview table of health interventions will be discussed through narrative synthesis. Should sufficient homogeneous publications arise, we will perform meta-analyses with a random-effects model. Our protocol adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist for study protocols. DISCUSSION: As part of a larger project, we will use the results of this review to identify a first set of quality indicators for the care for children at the end of life. Reviewing the current span of evidence and identifying research gaps will uncover future research priorities into the care for children at the end of life. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018105109.