ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Our objectives were to quantify the relationships among fatigue, pain interference, and physical disability in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and to test whether fatigue mediates the relationship between pain interference and physical disability in JIA. METHODS: Patients enrolled within three months of JIA diagnosis in the Canadian Alliance of Pediatric Rheumatology Investigators (CAPRI) Registry between February 2017 and May 2023 were included. Their parents completed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System fatigue and pain interference short proxy questionnaires and the Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index at registry enrollment. Associations were assessed using Pearson correlations and multiple linear regression. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test if fatigue mediates the relationship between pain interference and physical disability. RESULTS: Among 855 patients (61.4% female, 44.1% with oligoarthritis), most reported fatigue and pain interference scores similar to those in the reference population, but 15.6% reported severe fatigue and 7.3% reported severe pain interference, with wide variation across JIA categories. Fatigue was strongly correlated with pain interference (r = 0.72, P < 0.001) and with physical disability (r = 0.60, P < 0.001). Pain interference (ß = 0.027, P < 0.001) and fatigue (ß = 0.013, P < 0.001) were both associated with physical disability after controlling for each other and potential confounders. SEM supported our hypothesis that fatigue partially mediates the relationship between pain interference and physical disability. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest both fatigue and pain interference are independently associated with physical disability in children newly diagnosed with JIA, and the effect of pain interference may be partly mediated by fatigue.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Complementary Health Approaches (CHA) are commonly used by children with cancer; however, a few health care providers (HCPs) inquire about the use of CHA. A standardized questionnaire could facilitate such clinical discussions. We aimed to adapt and determine the face and content validity of the "Which Health Approaches and Treatments are you using?" (WHAT) child and parent-report questionnaires in pediatric oncology. METHODS: An electronic Delphi survey that included children with cancer (8-18 years), parents, and HCPs and CHA researchers was conducted to reach consensus on the content of the WHAT questionnaires in pediatric oncology. Children and parents from the Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids), and HCPs and researchers from the International Society of Pediatric Oncology and Pediatric Complementary and Alternative Medicine Research and Education Network completed the survey. To determine the face and content validity of the questionnaires, two iterative cycles of individual interviews were conducted with purposive samples of children (8-18 years), parents, and HCPs from SickKids. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on all domains and items of the original WHAT questionnaires after one Delphi cycle (n = 61). For face and content validity testing, the first cycle of interviews (n = 19) revealed that the questionnaires were mostly comprehensive and relevant. However, the paper-based format of the original WHAT was not user-friendly, and generic items were vague and not aimed at facilitating clinical dialogues about CHA use. The WHAT questionnaires were then modified into electronic cancer-specific self- and proxy-report questionnaires including 13 and 15 items, respectively. The second cycle (n = 21) showed no need for further changes. CONCLUSIONS: The modified electronic cancer-specific WHAT questionnaires showed adequate face and content validity. The next step is to determine inter-rater reliability, construct validity, and feasibility of administration of the modified WHAT questionnaires in pediatric oncology.
Subject(s)
Medical Oncology , Neoplasms , Child , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , Advance Directives , Consensus , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/therapyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To identify barriers, facilitators, and strategies for future implementation of the OMERACT-Adherence Core Outcome Set (COS) in medication adherence trials for rheumatic conditions. METHODS: Preliminary Delphi survey findings were discussed at OMERACT 2023, utilising the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research 2 to identify implementation barriers, facilitators, and solutions. RESULTS: Implementation strategies included simplifying the COS definitions, making it adaptabile for clinical practice and drug trials, adherence trial training workshops, and collaborating with key stakeholders such as payers and other COS developers. CONCLUSION: Ongoing collaboration with individuals and organisations within and beyond rheumatology ensures broader applicability of OMERACT-Adherence COS.
Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents , Medication Adherence , Rheumatic Diseases , Rheumatology , Humans , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Delphi Technique , Clinical Trials as Topic , Outcome Assessment, Health CareABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To generate candidates for contextual factors (CFs) for each CF type (i.e., Effect Modifying Contextual Factors (EM-CFs), Outcome Influencing Contextual Factors (OI-CFs), and Measurement Affecting Contextual Factors (MA-CFs)) considered important within rheumatology. METHODS: We surveyed OMERACT working groups and conducted a Special Interest Group (SIG) session at the OMERACT 2023 meeting, where the results were reviewed, and additional CFs suggested. RESULTS: The working groups suggested 44, 49, and 21 generic EM-CFs, OI-CFs, and MA-CFs, respectively. SIG participants added 49, 44, and 55 factors, respectively. CONCLUSION: Candidate CFs were identified, next step is a consensus-based set of endorsed (important) CFs.
Subject(s)
Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Rheumatology , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , ConsensusABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Shared decision making (SDM) is a central tenet in rheumatic and musculoskeletal care. The lack of standardization regarding SDM instruments and outcomes in clinical trials threatens the comparative effectiveness of interventions. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) SDM Working Group is developing a Core Outcome Set for trials of SDM interventions in rheumatology and musculoskeletal health. The working group reached consensus on a Core Outcome Domain Set in 2020. The next step is to develop a Core Outcome Measurement Set through the OMERACT Filter 2.2. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) to identify candidate instruments for the OMERACT Filter 2.2 We systematically reviewed five databases (Ovid MEDLINE®, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and Web of Science). An information specialist designed search strategies to identify all measurement instruments used in SDM studies in adults or children living with rheumatic or musculoskeletal diseases or their important others. Paired reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full text articles. We extracted characteristics of all candidate instruments (e.g., measured construct, measurement properties). We classified candidate instruments and summarized evidence gaps with an adapted version of the Summary of Measurement Properties (SOMP) table. RESULTS: We found 14,464 citations, read 239 full text articles, and included 99 eligible studies. We identified 220 potential candidate instruments. The five most used measurement instruments were the Decisional Conflict Scale (traditional and low literacy versions) (n=38), the Hip/Knee-Decision Quality Instrument (n=20), the Decision Regret Scale (n=9), the Preparation for Decision Making Scale (n=8), and the CollaboRATE (n=8). Only 44 candidate instruments (20%) had any measurement properties reported by the included studies. Of these instruments, only 57% matched with at least one of the 7-criteria adapted SOMP table. CONCLUSION: We identified 220 candidate instruments used in the SDM literature amongst people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. Our classification of instruments showed evidence gaps and inconsistent reporting of measurement properties. The next steps for the OMERACT SDM Working Group are to match candidate instruments with Core Domains, assess feasibility and review validation studies of measurement instruments in rheumatic diseases or other conditions. Development and validation of new instruments may be required for some Core Domains.
Subject(s)
Decision Making, Shared , Musculoskeletal Diseases , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Rheumatic Diseases , Humans , Rheumatology/standards , Patient ParticipationABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The OMERACT Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) Working Group (WG) aimed to reach agreement on a consensus-based definition and description of the core domain related to patient perception of overall well-being and disease activity. METHODS: A committee of patient research partners, clinicians, methodologists, and researchers drafted working definitions and descriptions. The WG conducted two iterative electronic stakeholder surveys to obtain consensus on domain description, definition, and the distinction between patient perception of overall well-being and disease activity. These definitions were then presented at the OMERACT 2023 Special Interest Group (SIG) session for agreement. RESULTS: Forty-five participants, from 7 countries and 4 continents, were comprised of six patients, 18 caregivers, and 21 healthcare providers. The consensus threshold (70%) was exceeded on all survey questions from both stakeholder groups (patients/caregivers, all others). Agreement was obtained on the new definition, description, and domain title, along with agreement on separate assessments of two target domains, patient perception of overall well-being as it relates to disease and patient perception of disease activity. CONCLUSION: Through an iterative consensus process and achieving agreement from the OMERACT SIG session attendees, the JIA WG has created a detailed definition and description for the two target domains in the patient perception of overall well-being related to disease core domain of the JIA mandatory core domain set. The next phase of this work will be instrument selection using the OMERACT filter 2.2.
Subject(s)
Arthritis, Juvenile , Rheumatology , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Consensus , PerceptionABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) can be beneficial for individuals with advanced cancer, but little is known on how to tailor rehabilitation strategies targeting LTPA in cancer care. Our objective was to explore perspectives and experiences of LTPA in people with stage 4 cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Guided by interpretive-description methodology, our qualitative study consisted of individual, semi-structured interviews with 20 Canadian adults diagnosed with stage 4 cancer. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed inductively. RESULTS: The participants' median age was 51.5 (range, 35-73) years. Cancer types included breast (n = 12), lung (n = 4), and other (n = 4). Participants highlighted their experiences of LTPA as diverse and complex, impacted by individual and cancer-related factors. They emphasized being intentional with LTPA through activity planning and modification. LTPA participation was linked to physical well-being, social connections, and meanings of accomplishment and loss. Many participants desired personalized support related to LTPA, that is integrated, interprofessional, and accessible in cancer care. CONCLUSION: The experiences of LTPA for people with stage 4 cancer are personal and connected to health and psychosocial meanings. Further efforts in rehabilitation are needed to address the challenges faced by people with advanced cancer and optimize safe, meaningful participation in LTPA.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONExperiences of leisure-time physical activity in individuals with stage 4 cancer are personal and linked to health benefits and psychosocial meanings.Activity participation frequently involves consideration of cancer-related symptoms, management of risks, and intentional planning and modification of activities.Trained rehabilitation professionals integrated in cancer care may be well suited to support people with stage 4 cancer through personalized activity recommendations.This research can help inform future clinical, research, and educational efforts in rehabilitation aimed at targeting physical activity in individuals with advanced cancer.
Subject(s)
Leisure Activities , Neoplasms , Adult , Humans , Middle Aged , Leisure Activities/psychology , Exercise/psychology , Canada , Motor Activity , Qualitative ResearchABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To educate and discuss pain mechanisms (nociceptive, neuropathic, nociplastic) illuminating its possible impact when measuring different outcomes, which may modify, confound and potentially bias the outcome measures applied across various aspects of Rheumatic Musculoskeletal Diseases (RMDs) clinical trials. METHODS: In the plenary presentations, PM lectured on different pain mechanisms and impact on disease activity assessment. Data from two data sets of RMDs patients, which assessed the prevalence and impact of nociplastic pain were presented and reviewed. Audience breakout group sessions and polling were conducted. RESULTS: Mixed pain etiologies may differentially influence disease activity assessment and therapeutic decision-making. Polling demonstrated a consensus on the need to assess different types of pain as a phenotype, as it constitutes an important contextual factor (a variable that is not an outcome of the trial, but needs to be recognized [and measured] to understand the study results), and to standardize across RMDs. CONCLUSION: There is need for a standardized pain measure that can differentiate underlying pain mechanisms.
Subject(s)
Chronic Pain , Musculoskeletal Diseases , Rheumatic Diseases , Rheumatology , Humans , Chronic Pain/therapy , Rheumatic Diseases/therapy , Outcome Assessment, Health CareABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to test the inter-rater reliability, construct validity, and feasibility of the modified "Which Health Approaches and Treatments Are You Using?" (WHAT) questionnaires in pediatric oncology; Methods: Parent-child dyads were invited to complete self- and proxy-report-modified WHAT, Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory, demographics, a diary of the child's recent use of CHA, and a questionnaire assessing the aspects of feasibility. Parents were asked to complete a satisfaction of their children's use of the CHA survey; Results: Twenty-four dyads completed the study. The mean weighted kappa showed strong inter-rater reliability (k = 0.77, SE = 0.056), and strong agreements between the modified WHAT and the diary (self-report [k = 0.806, SE = 0.046] and proxy-report [k = 0.894, SE = 0.057]). Significant relationships were found only between recent and non-recent CHA users in relation to the easy access to CHA (self-report [p = 0.02], proxy-report [p < 0.001]). The mean scores of the feasibility scale (out of 7.0) for the self- and proxy-report were 5.64 (SD = 0.23) and 5.81 (SD = 0.22), respectively, indicating the feasibility of the modified WHAT; Conclusions: The findings provide initial evidence of the reliability and validity of the modified WHAT and their feasibility. Further research is needed to test the theoretical relationships and further explore the validity and reliability of the modified WHAT.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Involving collaborators and partners in research may increase relevance and uptake, while reducing health and social inequities. Collaborators and partners include people and groups interested in health research: health care providers, patients and caregivers, payers of health research, payers of health services, publishers, policymakers, researchers, product makers, program managers, and the public. Evidence syntheses inform decisions about health care services, treatments, and practice, which ultimately affect health outcomes. Our objectives are to: A. Identify, map, and synthesize qualitative and quantitative findings related to engagement in evidence syntheses B. Explore how engagement in evidence synthesis promotes health equity C. Develop equity-oriented guidance on methods for conducting, evaluating, and reporting engagement in evidence syntheses METHODS: Our diverse, international team will develop guidance for engagement with collaborators and partners throughout multiple sequential steps using an integrated knowledge translation approach: 1. Reviews. We will co-produce 1 scoping review, 3 systematic reviews and 1 evidence map focusing on (a) methods, (b) barriers and facilitators, (c) conflict of interest considerations, (d) impacts, and (e) equity considerations of engagement in evidence synthesis. 2. Methods study, interviews, and survey. We will contextualise the findings of step 1 by assessing a sample of evidence syntheses reporting on engagement with collaborators and partners and through conducting interviews with collaborators and partners who have been involved in producing evidence syntheses. We will use these findings to develop draft guidance checklists and will assess agreement with each item through an international survey. 3. CONSENSUS: The guidance checklists will be co-produced and finalised at a consensus meeting with collaborators and partners. 4. DISSEMINATION: We will develop a dissemination plan with our collaborators and partners and work collaboratively to improve adoption of our guidance by key organizations. CONCLUSION: Our international team will develop guidance for collaborator and partner engagement in health care evidence syntheses. Incorporating partnership values and expectations may result in better uptake, potentially reducing health inequities.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Health Facilities , Humans , Health PersonnelABSTRACT
Interprofessional communication about inflammatory and non-inflammatory musculoskeletal conditions is an important component of assessment and management in paediatric rheumatology. Chronic pain is a feature of some of these conditions which likely influences the extent and type of communication about pain. Research investigating interprofessional communication about paediatric pain is limited but has found that communication is inclusive of the biopsychosocial context of children/adolescents as well as their families. The aim of this ethnographic study was to explore interprofessional communication about children and adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal pain in paediatric rheumatology. We observed forty-five healthcare professionals recruited from 3 UK paediatric rheumatology teams during thirty multi-disciplinary team meetings. Contemporaneous field notes created during observations were analysed using grounded theory procedures. Core processes identified in interprofessional communication involved describing, making sense of, and managing children/adolescents with pain and their families. Topic areas discussed within these core processes included healthcare professional perceptions about children's and parents' personality characteristics, as well as healthcare professionals' familiarity with families. Underlying diagnoses and possible attributions of pain aetiology were also discussed. Interprofessional narratives included consideration of the potential anxieties and uncertainties about pain within families. Healthcare professionals communicated about strategies for managing expectations about pain. These findings characterise the nuances in interprofessional communication about pain and can be used to inform future work aimed at understanding and optimising the impact of interprofessional communication on clinical decisions and pain outcomes. PERSPECTIVE: This study characterises the processes (series of actions), the function (purpose) and the content (topic areas) of interprofessional communication about paediatric pain in rheumatology settings. These findings should be used to inform interventions targeting both the appropriateness and effectiveness of this communication.
Subject(s)
Chronic Pain , Musculoskeletal Pain , Rheumatology , Humans , Child , Adolescent , Chronic Pain/therapy , Musculoskeletal Pain/therapy , Qualitative Research , CommunicationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is a common pediatric rheumatic condition and is associated with symptoms such as joint pain that can negatively impact health-related quality of life. To effectively manage pain in JIA, young people, their families, and health care providers (HCPs) should be supported to discuss pain management options and make a shared decision. However, pain is often under-recognized, and pain management discussions are not optimal. No studies have explored decision-making needs for pain management in JIA using a shared decision making (SDM) model. We sought to explore families' decision-making needs with respect to pain management among young people with JIA, parents/caregivers, and HCPs. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured virtual or face-to-face individual interviews with young people with JIA 8-18 years of age, parents/caregivers and HCPs using a qualitative descriptive study design. We recruited participants online across Canada and the United States, from a hospital and from a quality improvement network. We used interview guides based on the Ottawa Decision Support Framework to assess decision-making needs. We audiotaped, transcribed verbatim and analyzed interviews using thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 12 young people (n = 6 children and n = 6 adolescents), 13 parents/caregivers and 11 HCPs participated in interviews. Pediatric HCPs were comprised of rheumatologists (n = 4), physical therapists (n = 3), rheumatology nurses (n = 2) and occupational therapists (n = 2). The following themes were identified: (1) need to assess pain in an accurate manner; (2) need to address pain in pediatric rheumatology consultations; (3) need for information on pain management options, especially nonpharmacological approaches; (4) importance of effectiveness, safety and ease of use of treatments; (5) need to discuss young people/families' values and preferences for pain management options; and the (6) need for decision support. Themes were similar for young people, parents/caregivers and HCPs, although their respective importance varied. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest a need for evidence-based information and communication about pain management options, which would be addressed by decision support interventions and HCP training in pain and SDM. Work is underway to develop such interventions and implement them into practice to improve pain management in JIA and in turn lead to better health outcomes.
Subject(s)
Arthritis, Juvenile , Pain Management , Adolescent , Child , Humans , Arthritis, Juvenile/complications , Arthritis, Juvenile/therapy , Pain , Qualitative Research , Quality of Life , Decision Making, SharedABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Cochlear implant (CI) decision-making is particularly challenging for families of children who have residual hearing. Parents of these children may be uncertain about whether the potential benefits of CIs outweigh the risks. This study aimed to understand parents' decisional needs during the decision-making process for children with residual hearing. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with parents of 11 children who had received CIs. Open-ended questions were asked to encourage parents to share their experiences about the decision-making process, their values/preferences, and their needs. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Data were organized according to three key themes: (1) Parents' decisional conflict, (2) values and preferences, (3) decision support and parents' needs. We found that overall parents were satisfied with their decision-making process and the decision support from practitioners. However, parents stressed the importance of receiving more personalized information that considers their specific concerns, values and preferences related to family's circumstances. CONCLUSIONS: Our research provides additional evidence to guide the CI decision-making process for children with residual hearing. Additional collaborative research with audiology and decision-making experts specifically on facilitating shared decision-making is needed to provide better decision coaching for these families.
Subject(s)
Cochlear Implantation , Cochlear Implants , Child , Humans , Parents , Hearing , Decision MakingABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The 2021 Action Plan for Pain from the Canadian Pain Task Force advocates for patient-centred pain care at all levels of healthcare across provinces. Shared decision-making is the crux of patient-centred care. Implementing the action plan will require innovative shared decision-making interventions, specifically following the disruption of chronic pain care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The first step in this endeavour is to assess current decisional needs (ie, decisions most important to them) of Canadians with chronic pain across their care pathways. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: DesignGrounded in patient-oriented research approaches, we will perform an online population-based survey across the ten Canadian provinces. We will report methods and data following the CROSS reporting guidelines.SamplingThe Léger Marketing company will administer the online population-based survey to its representative panel of 500 000 Canadians to recruit 1646 adults (age ≥18 years old) with chronic pain according to the definition by the International Association for the Study of Pain (eg, pain ≥12 weeks). ContentBased on the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, the self-administered survey has been codesigned with patients and contain six core domains: (1) healthcare services, consultation and postpandemic needs, (2) difficult decisions experienced, (3) decisional conflict, (4) decisional regret, (5) decisional needs and (6) sociodemographic characteristics. We will use several strategies such as random sampling to improve survey quality. AnalysisWe will perform descriptive statistical analysis. We will identify factors associated with clinically significant decisional conflict and decision regret using multivariate analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics was approved by the Research Ethics Board at the Research Centre of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke (project #2022-4645). We will codesign knowledge mobilisation products with research patient partners (eg, graphical summaries and videos). Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journals and national and international conferences to inform the development of innovative shared decision-making interventions for Canadians with chronic pain.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Chronic Pain , Adult , Humans , Adolescent , Needs Assessment , Chronic Pain/therapy , Pandemics , Canada , Surveys and Questionnaires , Decision MakingABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Cochlear implants (CIs) are increasingly considered for children with residual hearing who benefit from hearing aids (HAs). However, the decision-making process for families of these children and for practitioners is particularly challenging because there is no clear audiological cut point for CI candidacy. This study aimed to understand Canadian practitioners' perspectives of the CI decision-making process and how they guide families of children with residual hearing. METHOD: Semistructured interviews were conducted with a total of 17 practitioners through four focus groups and one individual interview. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and a thematic analysis was carried out. RESULTS: Data were organized into five broad domains: candidacy issues for children with residual hearing, practitioners' roles in decision support, additional considerations affecting decision making, factors facilitating decision making, and practitioners' needs. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that practitioners' confidence in determining candidacy and supporting parents has increased due to their experiences with positive outcomes for these children. Practitioners indicated that there was a need for more research to guide the decision-making process.
Subject(s)
Cochlear Implantation , Cochlear Implants , Child , Humans , Canada , Hearing , Decision MakingABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To (i) validate the JIA parent global assessment (parent global) as a health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument; (ii) evaluate measurement properties of accepted HRQoL measures relative to those of the parent global; and (iii) assess causal pathways determining parent global scores. METHODS: Data from the Research in Arthritis in Canadian Children emphasizing outcomes (ReACCh-Out) cohort were used. Measurement properties were assessed in 344 patients at enrolment and 6 months later. Causal pathways were tested by structural equation modelling to understand root causes and mediators leading to parent global scores. RESULTS: Construct validity was supported by Spearman correlations of 0.53-0.70 for the parent global with the Juvenile Arthritis Quality of Life Questionnaire, Quality of My Life health scale (HRQoML), Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL)-Parent, and Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ)-Physical. Exceptions were PedsQL-Child (0.44) and CHQ-Psychosocial (0.31). Correlations were lower (0.14-0.49) with disease activity measures (physician global assessment of disease activity, active joint count, ESR). Responsiveness of the parent global to improvement according to parent ratings (0.51) was acceptable and within the range (0.32-0.71) of that of other measures. Reliability estimates and measurement errors for all measures were unsatisfactory, likely due to the prolonged time between assessments. Causal pathways for the parent global matched those previously reported for HRQoML. CONCLUSIONS: Our results offer support for the parent global as a valid measure of HRQoL for JIA. If confirmed, existing studies using the parent global may be re-interpreted, enhancing our knowledge of HRQoL in children with JIA.
Subject(s)
Arthritis, Juvenile , Quality of Life , Humans , Quality of Life/psychology , Arthritis, Juvenile/diagnosis , Arthritis, Juvenile/psychology , Health Status , Reproducibility of Results , Canada , Parents , Disability Evaluation , PsychometricsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite recommendations for regular lung volume recruitment (LVR) use in clinical practice guidelines for children with neuromuscular disease, adherence to LVR is poor. We aimed to describe the experience of LVR by boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), their families, and healthcare providers (HCPs), as well as to identify the barriers and facilitators to LVR use. METHODS: This multicenter, qualitative study evaluated boys with DMD (n = 11) who used twice-daily LVR as part of a randomized controlled trial, as well as their parents (n = 11), and HCPs involved in the clinical use of LVR (n = 9). Semistructured interviews were conducted to identify participants' understanding of LVR therapy and their beliefs, barriers and facilitators to its use. Thematic analysis was conducted using an inductive approach. A subanalysis compared adherent and nonadherent children. RESULTS: Seven themes were identified related to participants' beliefs and experiences with LVR: emotional impact, adaptation to LVR, perceived benefits of LVR, routine, family engagement, clinical resources, and equipment-related factors. Strategies to improve adherence were also identified, including education, reinforcement and demonstration of LVR benefit, as well as clinician support. There were no thematic differences between adherent and nonadherent children. DISCUSSION: Despite the benefits of LVR and positive experiences with it by many families, there remain barriers to adherence to treatment. HCPs need to balance the need for early introduction to give families time to adapt to LVR while ensuring that the benefit of LVR outweighs the burden. Clinician support is important for family engagement.
Subject(s)
Muscular Dystrophy, Duchenne , Child , Male , Humans , Muscular Dystrophy, Duchenne/drug therapy , Lung Volume Measurements , Parents/psychology , Qualitative ResearchABSTRACT
Objectives: Appendicitis is one of the most commonly encountered pediatric surgical diagnoses, with non-operative management of perforated appendicitis leading to two treatment options: an interval appendectomy (IA) or expectant management. The primary objective of this study was to assess parents' need for a patient decision aid (PDA) among parents considering IA or expectant management. A secondary objective was to determine parent preferences for the format and distribution plan of a drafted patient decision aid. Methods: Coulter's systematic development process for PDA was used to guide the assessment interviews for parents. Participants included caregivers of a patient who experienced perforated appendicitis, and admission between 2019 and 2020. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted to collect information about decision-making needs of parents of children who experienced perforated appendicitis. Results: A total of 12 different parents participated in the interviews. Results indicate decisional conflict associated with the lack of evidence for optimal treatment, supporting the need for the development of a patient decision aid to assist in clarifying information and parent values with practitioners. Parents clearly identified a need for evidence to support decision-making in various formats (eg, pamphlet or electronic). Timing of when to deliver the PDA varied (ie, during hospital admission, at discharge, or at follow-up appointment). Conclusion: Results indicated various factors contributing to parental decisional conflict, including the lack of evidence showing the optimal treatment, the need for more information, and guidance from practitioners. Overall, findings indicate a strong need for a patient decision aid.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to synthesise information concerning the potential benefits and risks related to cochlear implants (CIs) versus hearing aids (HAs) in children with residual hearing. DESIGN: A systematic review of articles published from January 2003 to January 2019 was conducted. STUDY SAMPLE: Our review included studies that compared the benefits and risks of CIs versus HAs in children (≤18 years old) with residual hearing. A total of 3265 citations were identified; 8 studies met inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Children with CIs showed significantly better speech perception scores post-CI than pre-CI. There was limited evidence related to improvement in everyday auditory performance, and the results showed non-significant improvement in speech intelligibility. One study on social-emotional functioning suggested benefits from CIs. In four studies, 37.2% (16/43) of children showed loss of residual hearing and 14.0% (8/57) had discontinued or limited use of their device. CONCLUSIONS: Children with CIs showed improvement in speech perception outcomes compared to those with HAs. However, due to the limited number of studies and information to guide decision-making related to other areas of development, it will be important to conduct further research of both benefits and risks of CIs in this specific population to facilitate decision-making.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Individuals with advanced cancer can benefit from physical activity (PA), but face barriers to PA participation. Physiotherapists can be well-positioned to support this patient population. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to describe the perspectives, practices, knowledge, and skills of oncology physiotherapists related to PA in people with advanced cancer. METHODS: In this mixed-methods study, we recruited Canadian physiotherapists with current or recent clinical experience with advanced cancer. Phase I consisted of an online survey about views toward PA in advanced cancer and activity-related recommendations and concerns for two case scenarios. Phase II involved individual, semi-structured interviews about perspectives related to working with advanced cancer. RESULTS: Sixty-two physiotherapists participated in the survey, of which 13 participated in interviews. Most respondents (> 85%) agreed or strongly agreed PA is important and safe for individuals with advanced cancer. Case responses highlighted cancer-related considerations (e.g. bone metastases) tailored activity recommendations, and patient-centered, interprofessional care. Interview themes included: 1) situating PA within individually meaningful goals; 2) tailored strategies to promote PA; 3) overarching roles in functional optimization and symptom management; and 4) generalized lack of awareness regarding physiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate Canadian oncology physiotherapists describe knowledge of the safety and importance of PA, as well as key considerations in advanced cancer. Moreover, they highlight the importance of a patient-centered approach to support this population, particularly in facilitating safe and meaningful PA, as well as optimizing function and alleviating symptom burden. Further efforts are needed to investigate the development and integration of physiotherapy within cancer care.