Pain assessment tools in paediatric palliative care: A systematic review of psychometric properties and recommendations for clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Assessing pain in infants, children and young people with life-limiting conditions remains a challenge due to diverse patient conditions, types of pain and often a reduced ability or inability of patients to communicate verbally. AIM: To systematically identify pain assessment tools that are currently used in paediatric palliative care and examine their psychometric properties and feasibility and make recommendations for clinical practice. DESIGN: A systematic literature review and evaluation of psychometric properties of pain assessment tools of original peer-reviewed research published from inception of data sources to April 2021. DATA SOURCES: PsycINFO via ProQuest, Web of Science Core, Medline via Ovid, EMBASE, BIOSIS and CINAHL were searched from inception to April 2021. Hand searches of reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews were performed. RESULTS: From 1168 articles identified, 201 papers were selected for full-text assessment. Thirty-four articles met the eligibility criteria and we examined the psychometric properties of 22 pain assessment tools. Overall, the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) had high cross-cultural validity, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and responsiveness; while the Faces, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale and Paediatric Pain Profile (PPP) had high internal consistency, criterion validity, reliability and responsiveness. The number of studies per psychometric property of each pain assessment tool was limited and the methodological quality of included studies was low. CONCLUSION: Balancing aspects of feasibility and psychometric properties, the FPS-R is recommended for self-assessment, and the FLACC scale/FLACC Revised and PPP are the recommended observational tools in their respective age groups.

Carer preferences of route of administration of transmucosal diamorphine and willingness to take part in a randomised controlled trial: an interview study (DIPPER).

BACKGROUND: Children and young people are usually given liquid morphine by mouth for breakthrough pain, which can take thirty minutes to work. A faster-acting, quickly absorbed, needle-free pain medicine, that is easy to administer is needed such as transmucosal (sublingual, buccal, intranasal) diamorphine. Research evidence relating to the administration of medication for breakthrough pain in children and young people is limited. This study aims to describe the experiences and preferences of parents and/or children and young people regarding the route of administration of diamorphine, barriers and facilitators comparative to oral morphine, and participation in a randomised controlled trial. METHODS: In-depth, semi-structured interviews with parents and/or children and young people at home or hospital/hospice. RESULTS: Thirteen interviews with: nine mothers, one father, and three sets of parents jointly. No interviews took place with a child/young person. Most families had experience of the buccal route which was effective in ease of administration and time to control pain. The intranasal route was preferred by parents irrespective of experience. Parents' willingness for their child to take part in a trial depended on the time commitment, their child's pain trajectory and the stability of analgesic requirements. CONCLUSION: A randomised controlled trial of oral morphine versus transmucosal diamorphine would need to consider trial logistics, especially time commitment. Parents felt that the trial should be introduced initially by the clinical team, with written information from the research team, and sufficient time to ask questions. Patients who had discontinued oral morphine because of side effects, or those with gastrointestinal failure, should be excluded. Maintaining stability in pain management was essential to families, so the timing of the trial is a potential issue.

Healthcare professionals' views of the use of oral morphine and transmucosal diamorphine in the management of paediatric breakthrough pain and the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial: A focus group study (DIPPER).

BACKGROUND: Oral morphine is frequently used for breakthrough pain but the oral route is not always available and absorption is slow. Transmucosal diamorphine is administered by buccal, sublingual or intranasal routes, and rapidly absorbed. AIM: To explore the perspectives of healthcare professionals in the UK caring for children with life-limiting conditions concerning the assessment and management of breakthrough pain; prescribing and administration of transmucosal diamorphine compared with oral morphine; and the feasibility of a comparative clinical trial. DESIGN/ PARTICIPANTS: Three focus groups, analysed using a Framework approach. Doctors, nurses and pharmacists (n = 28), caring for children with life-limiting illnesses receiving palliative care, participated. RESULTS: Oral morphine is frequently used for breakthrough pain across all settings; with transmucosal diamorphine largely limited to use in hospices or given by community nurses, predominantly buccally. Perceived advantages of oral morphine included confidence in its use with no requirement for specific training; disadvantages included tolerability issues, slow onset, unpredictable response and unsuitability for patients with gastrointestinal failure. Perceived advantages of transmucosal diamorphine were quick onset and easy administration; barriers included lack of licensed preparations and prescribing guidance with fears over accountability of prescribers, and potential issues with availability, preparation and palatability. Factors potentially affecting recruitment to a trial were patient suitability and onerousness for families, trial design and logistics, staff time and clinician engagement. CONCLUSIONS: There were perceived advantages to transmucosal diamorphine, but there is a need for access to a safe preparation. A clinical trial would be feasible provided barriers were overcome.

Immunotherapy and associated immune-related adverse events at a large UK centre: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: The development and rapid uptake of immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) has changed the outlook for patients with cancer. However, CPIs have different adverse event (AE) profiles to other systemic therapies, and prompt AE management is essential to assure optimal outcomes. In order to understand what and when adverse events are experienced, reported and managed during CPI treatment, a mixed methods study was conducted, including a case note review of patients who were receiving immunotherapy and semi-structured interviews with patients to understand their experience, management and reporting of AEs after receiving immune CPI treatment. METHODS: This mixed methods study was conducted at a large cancer hospital in the United Kingdom. A case note review identified how and where patients reported AEs. Data relating to patients with lung, bladder, prostate and head & neck cancers who received CPI treatment between 01/04/2015 and 31/07/2018 were extracted from e-prescribing databases and clinical data were included for analysis at a single time point (31 July 2018). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients receiving CPI treatment, exploring experience of AEs and reasons for delays in AE reporting and management. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were included in the case note review, with 78 AEs being experienced by 36 patients (58%), including one patient experiencing 10 AEs. Serious AEs were experienced by 12 patients (19%) and ten AEs (17%) required oral steroids as treatment. The majority of AEs were reported to clinicians prior to further dosing, although milder AEs were often not addressed until subsequent clinic appointments. Interviews with 13 patients yielded major themes: variability, causality, decision making and impact. CONCLUSION: Most CPI-associated AEs are manageable if reported and treated promptly. Both the case note review and interviews found that reporting of non-serious AEs is often left until routine clinic visits, despite impacting patient experience, leaving the opportunity for AEs to be left unreported and implying a potential benefit for real time monitoring. Our study highlights a need to provide patients with reminders around AEs and their timely reporting even when apparently innocuous; patients must understand that AEs can occur at any cycle and even following treatment completion.

Providing support for newly qualified practitioners in Scotland.

This article describes the development, implementation and outcomes of Flying Start NHS, a web-based learning programme developed by NHS Education for Scotland (NES) for newly qualified nurses, midwives and allied health professionals. Flying Start NHS aims to address the issues faced by newly qualified staff in the transition from student to capable, confident, registered practitioner. The programme is delivered through a dedicated website that promotes work-based learning. Since 2006, the Flying Start website has registered more than 20,000 newly qualified practitioners taking their first post in NHS Scotland. NES has worked with NHS West Midlands Strategic Health Authority to customise the Flying Start NHS programme, which is now being introduced throughout England.

Oral morphine versus transmucosal diamorphine for breakthrough pain in children: methods and outcomes: UK (DIPPER study) consensus.

OBJECTIVES: No randomised controlled trials have been conducted for breakthrough pain in paediatric palliative care and there are currently no standardised outcome measures. The DIPPER study aims to establish the feasibility of conducting a prospective randomised controlled trial comparing oral and transmucosal administration of opioids for breakthrough pain. The aim of the current study was to achieve consensus on design aspects for a small-scale prospective study to inform a future randomised controlled trial of oral morphine, the current first-line treatment, versus transmucosal diamorphine. METHODS: The nominal group technique was used to achieve consensus on best practice for mode of administration, dose regimen and a range of suitable pain intensity outcome measures for transmucosal diamorphine in children and young people with breakthrough pain. An expert panel of ten clinicians in paediatric palliative care and three parent representatives participated. Consensus was achieved when agreement was reached and no further comments from participants were forthcoming. RESULTS: The panel favoured the buccal route of administration, with dosing according to the recommendations in the Association for Paediatric Palliative Medicine formulary (fifth Edition, 2020). The verbal Numerical Rating Scale was selected to measure pain in children 8 years old and older, the Faces Pain Scale-Revised for children between 4 and 8 years old, and Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC)/FLACC-Revised as the observational tools. CONCLUSIONS: The nominal group technique allowed consensus to be reached for a small-scale, prospective, cohort study and provided information to inform the design of a randomised controlled trial.

Case-mix & patients' reports of outcome in Independent Sector Treatment Centres: Comparison with NHS providers.

BACKGROUND: There has been considerable concern expressed about the outcomes achieved in Independent Sector Treatment Centres (ISTCs) introduced in England since 2003. Our aim was to compare the case-mix and patients' reported outcomes of surgery in ISTCs and in NHS providers. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 769 patients treated in six ISTCs and 1895 treated in 20 NHS providers (acute hospitals and treatment centres) in England during 2006-07. Participants underwent one of three day surgery procedures (inguinal hernia repair, varicose vein surgery, cataract extraction) or hip or knee replacement. Change in patient-reported health status and health related quality of life (measured using a disease-specific and a generic (EQ-5D) instrument) was assessed either 3-months (day surgery) or 6-months (hip/knee) after surgery. In addition patient-reported post-operative complications and an overall assessment of success of surgery were collected. Outcome measures were adjusted (using multivariable regression) for patient characteristics (disease severity, duration of symptoms, age, sex, socioeconomic status, general health, previous similar surgery, comorbidity). RESULTS: Post-operative response rates varied by procedure (73%-88%) and were similar for those treated in ISTCs and NHS facilities. Patients treated in ISTCs were healthier, were less likely to have any comorbidity and, for those undergoing cataract surgery or joint replacement, their primary condition was less severe. Those undergoing hernia repair or joint replacement were less likely to have had similar surgery before. When adjustment was made for pre-operative characteristics, patients undergoing cataract surgery or hip replacement in ISTCs achieved a slightly greater improvement in functional status and quality of life than those treated in NHS facilities, while the opposite was true of patients undergoing hernia repair. No significant differences were found for the two other procedures. Patients treated in ISTCs were less likely to report post-operative problems than those treated in NHS facilities for cataract surgery (Adjusted Odds Ratio 0.35; 95% CI 0.17-0.70), hernia repair (0.42; 0.28-0.63) and knee replacement (0.44; 0.28-0.69). Most patients described the result of their operation as excellent, very good or good, regardless of where they were treated. CONCLUSION: The case-mix of patients treated in ISTCs differs from that in NHS providers, in line with the intention of the contracts. Caution is needed in interpreting the observation that patients treated in ISTCs reported slightly better outcomes as very few ISTCs participated, case-mix adjustment might have been insufficient, and patients' reports might have been biased as they were more likely to be satisfied with the way they were treated.

Palliative medicines for children - a new frontier in paediatric research.

OBJECTIVES: This paper seeks to highlight from a UK perspective the current lack of a research evidence base in paediatric palliative care that has resulted in a paucity of available medicines with appropriate formulations (strength and dosage form) to provide symptom management for children with life-limiting illnesses and to raise awareness of this group of 'therapeutic orphans'. Currently, clinicians have limited, often unsuitable medication choices for their paediatric palliative care patients, with little hope of moving away from the status quo. KEY FINDINGS: Most medicines used in children receiving palliative care are old and off-patent drugs, developed for and tested in an adult population. Many are not available in suitable formulations (dosage form and strength) for administration to children, and there are often no age-related profiles of adverse drug reactions or for safe dosing. SUMMARY: Existing regional paediatric palliative care networks and support organisations should lobby funding bodies and the academic community to support appropriate research for this group of therapeutic orphans. Support must also be provided to pharmaceutical companies in the development of suitable products with appropriate formulations.

Implementing a structured education program for children with diabetes: lessons learnt from an integrated process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: There is recognition of an urgent need for clinic-based interventions for young people with type 1 diabetes mellitus that improve glycemic control and quality of life. The Child and Adolescent Structured Competencies Approach to Diabetes Education (CASCADE) is a structured educational group program, using psychological techniques, delivered primarily by diabetes nurses. Composed of four modules, it is designed for children with poor diabetic control and their parents. A mixed methods process evaluation, embedded within a cluster randomized control trial, aimed to assess the feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, and perceived impact of CASCADE. METHODS: 28 pediatric diabetes clinics across England participated and 362 children aged 8-16 years, with type 1 diabetes and a mean glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) of 8.5 or above, took part. The process evaluation used a wide range of research methods. RESULTS: Of the 180 families in the intervention group, only 55 (30%) received the full program with 53% attending at least one module. Only 68% of possible groups were run. Staff found organizing the groups burdensome in terms of arranging suitable dates/times and satisfactory group composition. Some staff also reported difficulties in mastering the psychological techniques. Uptake, by families, was influenced by the number of groups run and by school, work and other commitments. Attendees described improved: family relationships; knowledge and understanding; confidence; motivation to manage the disease. The results of the trial showed that the intervention did not significantly improve HbA1c at 12 or 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: Clinic-based structured group education delivered by staff using psychological techniques had perceived benefits for parents and young people. Staff and families considered it a valuable intervention, yet uptake was poor and the burden on staff was high. Recommendations are made to inform issues related to organization, design, and delivery in order to potentially enhance the impact of CASCADE and future programs. CURRENT CONTROLLED TRIALS: ISRCTN52537669.

Mental disorder and perceived threat to the public: people who do not return to community living.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, people with mental disorder thought to pose a high risk of harm to others are usually put in a high-security (special) hospital. Little is known about what happens after that. AIMS: To test a hypothesis that, under current services and laws (from the mid-1980s), no one leaving high-security hospitals remains indefinitely institutionalised. METHOD: The special hospitals' case register was used for case ascertainment and admission data; post-discharge data were collected from multiple sources on patients discharged in 1984 (census date 31.12.1995). RESULTS: In this discharge cohort (n=223), 36 (17%) did not return to the community: 17 died in special hospital and 19 continuously lived in other institutions until death or the census date. Over two-thirds of these had mental illness, were older on admission and had lived longer in special hospital than their better-rehabilitated peers. Offending history was irrelevant to this. Most post-discharge institution time was in open psychiatric hospital, or back in special hospital, not in medium secure units or prison. CONCLUSIONS: The hypothesis was not sustained, but fewer people never reached the community than before the mid-1980s. Atypical antipsychotics might reduce this number. We found no justification for a new tier of long-term medium secure units.

Name change among offender patients: an English high security hospital sample.

BACKGROUND: There is scant literature on change of name among psychiatric patients but a more substantial amount on the use of aliases among offenders. No one to our knowledge has explored name changes among offender patients. AIM: This study was undertaken to establish the prevalence of name change among high security hospital patients and to compare those who changed name with those who did not. HYPOTHESIS: It was hypothesized that name change would be associated with male gender, repeated offending and a diagnosis of personality disorder. METHOD: The clinical records of all patients resident in one high security hospital on 31 January 2000 were searched. As all such patients are compulsorily detained, all name changes must be recorded. Any change prior to that date was also noted, together with basic demographic and diagnostic information; supplementary data were obtained from the special hospitals' case register. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients (17%) of the resident population changed names (exclusive of a woman changing her surname on marriage). Name changing was associated with disrupted upbringing. Patients with personality disorder were more likely to change names than those with psychosis, regardless of sex, age or ethnic group. Those with psychosis were more likely to select unusual or symbolic names. CONCLUSIONS: On the evidence of previous literature, people from this serious offender patient population were more likely to change names than other psychiatric patients but less likely than non-mentally-disordered offenders. Changes by people with psychosis seemed related to their illness, whereas changes by those with personality disorder might reflect childhood disruptions in rearing patterns.