Cognitive testing of the Children's Palliative Outcome Scale (C-POS) with children, young people and their parents/carers.

BACKGROUND: The Children's Palliative Outcome Scale (C-POS) is being developed using best methodological guidance on outcome measure development, This recommends cognitive testing, an established method of item improvement, prior to psychometric testing. AIM: To cognitively test C-POS within the target population to establish comprehensibility, comprehensiveness, relevance and acceptability. DESIGN: Cross-sectional cognitive interview study following COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology and Rothrock guidance on outcome measure development. Cognitive interviews were conducted using 'think aloud' and verbal probing techniques. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Children 5-⩽17 years old with life-limiting conditions and parents/carers of children with life-limiting conditions were recruited from 14 UK sites. RESULTS: Forty-eight individuals participated (36 parents; 12 children) in cognitively testing the five versions of C-POS over two to seven rounds. Content and length were acceptable, and all questions were considered important. Refinements were made to parent/carer versions to be inclusive of non-verbal children such as changing 'share' to 'express' feelings; and 'being able to ask questions' to 'having the appropriate information'. Changes to improve comprehensibility of items such as 'living life to the fullest' were also made. Parents reported that completing an outcome measure can be distressing but this is anticipated and that being asked is important. CONCLUSION: Cognitive interviewing has facilitated refinement of the C-POS, especially for non-verbal children who represent a large proportion of those with a life-limiting condition. This study has enhanced the face and content validity of the measure and provided preliminary evidence for acceptability for use in routine practice.

'My life is a mess but I cope': An analysis of the language children and young people use to describe their own life-limiting or life-threatening condition.

BACKGROUND: Children and young people with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions have multidimensional needs and heterogenous cognitive and communicative abilities. There is limited evidence to support clinicians to tailor their communication to each individual child. AIM: To explore the language children and young people use to describe their own condition, to inform strategies for discussing needs and priorities. DESIGN: Positioned within a social constructivist paradigm, a secondary discourse analysis of semi-structured interview data was conducted incorporating the discourse dynamics approach for figurative language. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 26 children and young people aged 5-17 years with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions (6 cancer; 20 non-cancer) were recruited from nine clinical services (six hospitals and three hospices) across two UK nations. RESULTS: The language children and young people use positions them as 'experts in their condition'. They combine medical terminology with their preferred terms for their body to describe symptoms and treatments, and use comparatives and superlatives to communicate their health status. Their language depicts their condition as a 'series of (functional and social) losses', which single them out from their peers as 'the sick one'. Older children and young people also incorporate figurative language to expand their descriptions. CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION: Children and young people can provide rich descriptions of their condition. Paying attention to their lexical choices, and converging one's language towards theirs, may enable more child-centred discussions. Expanding discussions about 'what matters most' with consideration of the losses and differences they have experienced may facilitate a fuller assessment of their concerns, preferences and priorities.

What contributes to promote sexual health in cancer palliative care? A realist review.

INTRODUCTION: Sexuality is an important determinant of the overall health of a population and remains so at the end of life and in patients with advanced cancers. Despite the abundant literature on sexuality and intimacy, these topics have been rarely discussed in the context of cancer palliative care, and very few interventions to promote sexual health in patients undergoing cancer palliative care have been explored. OBJECTIVES: In this study we sought to identify which factors and mechanisms contribute to promoting sexual health in cancer palliative care. METHODS: A realist review was performed according to the guidelines of the realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis method guidelines. Articles published between January 2010 and June 2021 were searched in 4 databases. Records were screened for their relevance regarding a predefined list of context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations. Abstracts were independently screened by 2 authors before the data were extracted from the full-text articles selected for inclusion. With the use of abductive and retroductive reasoning techniques, each article was examined for evidence of its contribution to one of the CMO configurations, which could be refined when relevant. The data were summarized according to the final CMO configurations. RESULTS: Of the 2056 articles identified, 38 articles were included in the review. The data reported in these articles contributed to 7 CMO hypotheses: (1) improving communication skills, (2) healthcare provider training, (3) reorganizing the patient environment in care settings or at home, (4) managing sexual symptoms and also general symptoms, (5 and 6) patient-centered counseling or couple counseling, and (7) lifting the taboo. CONCLUSIONS: The findings reported here highlight various ways to improve sexual health for patients in cancer palliative care but are limited to genital cancers. Further research should consider all types of cancer rather than being restricted to genital cancers.

What are the anticipated benefits, risks, barriers and facilitators to implementing person-centred outcome measures into routine care for children and young people with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions? A qualitative interview study with key stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing evidence-base underpinning implementation of person-centred outcome measures into adult palliative care. However evidence on how best to achieve this with children facing life-threatening and life-limiting conditions is limited. AIM: To identify the anticipated benefits, risks, barriers and facilitators to implementing person-centred outcome measures for children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional qualitative semi-structured interview study with key stakeholders analysed using Framework analysis informed by the adapted-Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of n = 26 children with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions, n = 40 parents/carers, n = 13 siblings and n = 15 health and social care professionals recruited from six hospitals and three children's hospices and n = 12 Commissioners of health services. RESULTS: All participants were supportive of future implementation of person-centred outcome measures into care. Anticipated benefits included: better understanding of patient and family priorities, improved communication and collaborative working between professionals and families and standardisation in data collection and reporting. Anticipated risks included increased workload for staff and measures not being used as intended. Implementation barriers included: acceptability and usability of outcome measures by children; burden and capacity of parents/carers regarding completion; privacy concerns; and language barriers. Implementation facilitators included designing measures using language that is meaningful to children and families, ensuring potential benefits of person-centred outcome measures are communicated to encourage 'buy-in' and administering measures with known and trusted professional. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of person-centred outcome measures offer potential benefits for children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. Eight recommendations are made to maximise benefits and minimise risks in implementation.

What are the barriers and facilitators to advance care planning with older people in long-term care facilities? A qualitative study.

AIM: To explore the views and preferences for advance care planning from the perspectives of residents, family members and healthcare professionals in long-term care facilities. DESIGN: A qualitative descriptive design. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 12 residents of long-term care facilities, 10 family members and 14 healthcare professionals. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. The social ecological model was used to develop implementation recommendations. RESULTS: We constructed a conceptual model of barriers and facilitators to advance care planning in long-term care facilities, drawing upon four dominant themes from the qualitative analysis: (1) The absence of discourse on end-of-life care: a lack of cultural climate to talk about death, the unspoken agreement to avoid conversations about death, and poor awareness of palliative care may hinder advance care planning initiation; (2) Relational decision-making process is a dual factor affecting advance care planning engagement; (3) Low trust and 'unsafe' cultures: a lack of honest information sharing, risks of violating social expectations and damaging social relationships, and risks of legal consequences may hinder willingness to engage in advance care planning; (4) Meeting and respecting residents' psychosocial needs: these can be addressed by readiness assessment, initiating advance care planning in an informal and equal manner and involving social workers. CONCLUSION: Our findings show that residents' voices were not being heard. It is necessary to identify residents' spontaneous conversation triggers, articulate the value of advance care planning in light of the family's values and preferences, and respect residents' psychosocial needs to promote advance care planning in long-term care facilities. Advance care planning may alleviate the decision-making burden of offspring in nuclear families. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: The evidence-based recommendations in this study will inform the implementation of context-specific advance care planning in Asia-Pacific regions. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and caregivers contributed to the interview pilot and data collection.

Between loss and restoration: The role of liminality in advancing theories of grief and bereavement.

A recent national survey of bereaved partners found high levels of complicated grief and psychological distress, with evidence that loneliness and isolation may contribute to these outcomes. However, the mechanisms of action for this have not been explored. To advance grief theory this paper reports analysis of the survey free-text data to examine the relationship between social support and emotional responses to bereavement. Individuals bereaved of a civil partner or spouse 6-10 months previously were identified through death registration data. 569/1945 (29 %) completed surveys were received. Of those, 311 participants (55 %) provided responses to two free-text questions which asked about their 'feelings since the death of their partner or spouse', and 'about the support around' them. Data were analysed using corpus-assisted discourse analysis and the discourse dynamics approach for figurative language. Participants described diverse emotional responses to the bereavement (e.g. sadness, anger, denial, acceptance), and the value of formal and informal bereavement support. Although many of the experiences described are accounted for in existing grief theory, some participants described a liminal experience not recognised within these theories. They felt trapped, unable to engage with loss or restoration, and unable to move forward as their planned future no longer existed. They sought out 'communitas' (solidarity in experiences), but often found support from their social networks had diminished. Metaphors were used to describe this liminality, with partner grief expressed as a dark agentic force, a monster, an abyss, and as water. The findings of this study offer original insights into experiences and trajectories of bereavement, and our understandings of prolonged or complicated grief. A novel model 'Between Loss and Restoration' is presented to include these experiences. Recognition of the place for liminality within the spectrum of grief experiences could enhance grief literacy and improve formal and informal bereavement support provision.

Achieving consensus on priority items for paediatric palliative care outcome measurement: Results from a modified Delphi survey, engagement with a children's research involvement group and expert item generation.

BACKGROUND: There is no validated outcome measure for use in children's palliative care outside sub-Saharan Africa. Stakeholders must be involved in the development of such measures to ensure face and content validity. AIM: To gain expert stakeholder consensus on items for inclusion in a paediatric palliative care outcome measure to establish face and content validity. DESIGN: This study was conducted in two phases following Rothrock and COSMIN guidance on patient-reported outcome measure development. Phase 1: Three-round modified Delphi survey to establish consensus on priority items. Phase 2: Item generation meeting with key stakeholders to develop initial measure versions. A young person's advisory group was also consulted on priority outcomes. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Delphi survey: Parents and professionals with experience of caring for a child with a life-limiting condition. Young person's advisory group: young people age 10-20 years. Item generation meeting: bereaved parents, academics and clinicians. RESULTS: Phase 1: Delphi survey (n = 82). Agreement increased from Kendall's W = 0.17 to W = 0.61, indicating movement towards consensus. Agreement between professional and parent ranking was poor (Cohen's kappa 0.13). Professionals prioritised physical symptoms, whereas parents prioritised psychosocial and practical concerns. Advisory group: Children (n = 22) prioritised items related to living a 'normal life' in addition to items prioritised by adult participants. Phase 2: Five age/developmental stage appropriate child and proxy-reported versions of C-POS, containing 13 items, were drafted. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance and feasibility of involving key stakeholders in PROM item generation, as important differences were found in the priority outcomes identified by children, parents and professionals.

Implementation of child-centred outcome measures in routine paediatric healthcare practice: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Person-centred outcome measures (PCOMs) are commonly used in routine adult healthcare to measure and improve outcomes, but less attention has been paid to PCOMs in children's services. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and synthesise existing evidence of the determinants, strategies, and mechanisms that influence the implementation of PCOMs into paediatric healthcare practice. METHODS: The review was conducted and reported in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Databased searched included CINAHL, Embase, Medline, and PsycInfo. Google scholar was also searched for grey literature on 25th March 2022. Studies were included if the setting was a children's healthcare service, investigating the implementation or use of an outcome measure or screening tool in healthcare practice, and reported outcomes relating to use of a measure. Data were tabulated and thematically analysed through deductive coding to the constructs of the adapted-Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results were presented as a narrative synthesis, and a logic model developed. RESULTS: We retained 69 studies, conducted across primary (n = 14), secondary (n = 13), tertiary (n = 37), and community (n = 8) healthcare settings, including both child self-report (n = 46) and parent-proxy (n = 47) measures. The most frequently reported barriers to measure implementation included staff lack of knowledge about how the measure may improve care and outcomes; the complexity of using and implementing the measure; and a lack of resources to support implementation and its continued use including funding and staff. The most frequently reported facilitators of implementation and continued use include educating and training staff and families on: how to implement and use the measure; the advantages of using PCOMs over current practice; and the benefit their use has on patient care and outcomes. The resulting logic model presents the mechanisms through which strategies can reduce the barriers to implementation and support the use of PCOMs in practice. CONCLUSIONS: These findings can be used to support the development of context-specific implementation plans through a combination of existing strategies. This will enable the implementation of PCOMs into routine paediatric healthcare practice to empower settings to better identify and improve child-centred outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospero CRD 42022330013.

Design and Administration of Patient-Centred Outcome Measures: The Perspectives of Children and Young People with Life-Limiting or Life-Threatening Conditions and Their Family Members.

BACKGROUND: Self-reported health data from children with life-limiting conditions is rarely collected. To improve acceptability and feasibility of child and family-centred outcome measures for children, they need to be designed in a way that reflects preferences, priorities and abilities. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to identify preferences for patient-reported outcome measure design (recall period, response format, length, administration mode) to improve the feasibility, acceptability, comprehensibility and relevance of a child and family-centred outcome measure, among children with life-limiting conditions and their family members. METHOD: A semi-structured qualitative interview study seeking the perspectives of children with life-limiting conditions, their siblings and parents on measure design was conducted. Participants were purposively sampled and recruited from nine UK sites. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: A total of 79 participants were recruited: 39 children aged 5-17 years (26 living with a life-limiting condition; 13 healthy siblings) and 40 parents (of children aged 0-17 years). Children found a short recall period and a visually appealing measure with ten questions or fewer most acceptable. Children with life-limiting conditions were more familiar with using rating scales such as numeric and Likert than their healthy siblings. Children emphasised the importance of completing the measure alongside interactions with a healthcare professional to enable them to talk about their responses. While parents assumed that electronic completion methods would be most feasible and acceptable, a small number of children preferred paper. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that children with life-limiting conditions can engage in communicating preferences regarding the design of a patient-centred outcome measure. Where possible, children should be given the opportunity to participate in the measure development process to enhance acceptability and uptake in clinical practice. Results of this study should be considered in future research on outcome measure development in children.

Spiritual, religious, and existential concerns of children and young people with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions: A qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Despite being a core domain of palliative care, primary data on spiritual and existential concerns has rarely been collected among children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions and their families. Existing evidence has tended to focus on the religious aspects among children with cancer. AIM: To identify the spiritual needs of children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional semi-structured, qualitative interview study with children, families and health and social care professionals. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using Framework analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Purposively sampled children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions, their parents and siblings, health and social care professionals recruited from six hospitals and three children's hospices in the UK, and commissioners of paediatric palliative care services recruited through networks and a national charity. RESULTS: One hundred six participants were interviewed: 26 children (5-17 years), 53 family members (parents/carers of children 0-17 years and siblings (5-17 years)), 27 professionals (health and social care professionals and commissioners of paediatric palliative care). Themes included: living life to the fullest, meaning of life and leaving a legacy, uncertainty about the future, determination to survive, accepting or fighting the future and role of religion. Children as young as 5 years old identified needs or concerns in the spiritual domain of care. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing spiritual concerns is essential to providing child- and family-centred palliative care. Eliciting spiritual concerns may enable health and social care professionals to identify the things that can support and enhance a meaningful life and legacy for children and their families.

Communication about sexual orientation and gender between clinicians, LGBT+ people facing serious illness and their significant others: a qualitative interview study of experiences, preferences and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare organisations have legal and ethical duties to reduce inequalities in access to healthcare services and related outcomes. However, lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender (LGBT+) people continue to experience and anticipate discrimination in health and social care. Skilled communication is vital for quality person-centred care, but there is inconsistent provision of evidence-based clinician education on health needs and experiences of LGBT+ people to support this. This study aimed to identify key stakeholders' experiences, preferences and best practices for communication regarding sexual orientation, gender identity and gender history in order to reduce inequalities in healthcare. METHODS: Semistructured qualitative interviews with LGBT+ patients with serious illness, significant others and clinicians, recruited via UK-wide LGBT+ groups, two hospitals and one hospice in England. We analysed the interview data using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: 74 stakeholders participated: 34 LGBT+ patients with serious illness, 13 significant others and 27 multiprofessional clinicians. Participants described key communication strategies to promote inclusive practice across three domains: (1) 'Creating positive first impressions and building rapport' were central to relationship building and enacted through routine use of inclusive language, avoiding potentially negative non-verbal signals and echoing terminology used by patients and caregivers; (2) 'Enhancing care by actively exploring and explaining the relevance of sexual orientation and gender identity', participants described the benefits of clinicians initiating these discussions, pursuing topics guided by the patient's response or expressed preferences for disclosure. Active involvement of significant others was encouraged to demonstrate recognition of the relationship; these individual level actions are underpinned by a foundation of (3) 'visible and consistent LGBT+ inclusiveness in care systems'. Although participants expressed hesitance talking about LGBT+ identities with individuals from some sociocultural and religious backgrounds, there was widespread support for institutions to adopt a standardised, LGBT+ inclusive, visibly supportive approach. CONCLUSIONS: Person-centred care can be enhanced by incorporating discussions about sexual orientation and gender identity into routine clinical practice. Inclusive language and sensitive exploration of relationships and identities are core activities. Institutions need to support clinicians through provision of adequate training, resources, inclusive monitoring systems, policies and structures. Ten inclusive communication recommendations are made based on the data.

Does the impact of bereavement vary between same and different gender partnerships? A representative national, cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Data suggest poorer bereavement outcomes for lesbian, gay and bisexual people, but this has not been estimated in population-based research. This study compared bereavement outcomes for partners of same-gender and different-gender decedents. METHODS: In this population-based, cross-sectional survey of people bereaved of a civil partner or spouse 6-10 months previously, we used adjusted logistic and linear regression to investigate outcomes of interest: (1) positive screen on Inventory of Complicated Grief (ICG), (2) positive screen on General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), (3) grief intensity (ICG) and (4) psychiatric symptoms (GHQ-12). RESULTS: Among 233 same-gender partners and 329 of different-gender partners, 66.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 60.0-72.2] and 59.2% [95% CI (53.9-64.6)] respectively screened positive for complicated grief on the ICG, whilst 76.0% [95% CI (70.5-81.5)] and 69.3% [95% CI (64.3-74.3)] respectively screened positive on the GHQ-12. Same-gender bereaved partners were not significantly more likely to screen positive for complicated grief than different-gender partners [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.56, 95% CI (0.98-2.47)], p = 0.059, but same-gender bereaved partners were significantly more likely to screen for psychiatric caseness [aOR 1.67 (1.02, 2.71) p = 0.043]. We similarly found no significant association of partner gender with grief intensity [B = 1.86, 95% CI (-0.91to 4.63), p = 0.188], but significantly greater psychological distress for same-gender partners [B = 1.54, 95% CI (-0.69-2.40), p < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Same-gender bereaved partners report significantly more psychological distress. In view of their poorer sub-clinical mental health, clinical and bereavement services should refine screening processes to identify those at risk of poor mental health outcomes.

Palliative and end-of-life care needs, experiences, and preferences of LGBTQ+ individuals with serious illness: A systematic mixed-methods review.

BACKGROUND: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ+) individuals experience discrimination throughout the care continuum, including during serious illness and at end of life. High-quality palliative care requires that health professionals deliver individualized services that reflect the needs, experiences, and preferences of LGBTQ+ persons. AIM: To identify and appraise existing evidence related to the needs, experiences, and preferences for palliative and end of life care among LGBTQ+ individuals with serious illness. DESIGN: Data-based convergent synthesis design reported per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus from January 1, 2010 to November 6, 2020. RESULTS: Of 4875 results captured, 69 articles underwent full-text review and 13 were retained for analysis. Most studies were from North America with trans individuals represented in 10 of 13 studies. Needs (n = 6) included increased social support, institutional safety, economic and legal supports, and advocacy to mitigate health barriers.Experiences (n = 12) were driven by fear and worry associated with discrimination/stigma,providers' hetero-/cisnormative assumptions, homophobia and transphobia, social isolation, and an undignified death. Preferences (n = 6) pertained to inclusion of chosen families in decision-making, disclosure of LGBTQ+ identity based on safety of the clinical environment, and a desire to maintain autonomy. CONCLUSIONS: The robustness of the science has improved regarding the needs, experiences, and preferences of trans individuals. Actionable, inclusive policies coupled with sustained and integrated cultural sensitivity training for health workers are mandatory. Interventional research is critical to enhance tailored palliative care for LGBTQ+ people and their chosen families.

LGBT+ partner bereavement and appraisal of the Acceptance-Disclosure Model of LGBT+ bereavement: A qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Support from social networks is vital after the death of a partner. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender (LGBT+) people can face disenfranchisement and isolation in bereavement. The Acceptance-Disclosure Model (of LGBT+ bereavement) posits that experiences are shaped by the extent to which individuals feel able to disclose their bereavement to others, and whether that loss is acknowledged appropriately. AIM: To explore LGBT+ specific experiences of partner bereavement; determine decision-making processes regarding disclosure of relationships/identities; and appraise the Acceptance-Disclosure Model using primary qualitative data. DESIGN: Exploratory in-depth qualitative interview study positioned within a social constructivist paradigm. Data were analysed using inductive and deductive reflexive thematic analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: 21 LGBT+ people from across England bereaved of their civil partner/spouse. RESULTS: Participants described LGBT+ specific stressors in bereavement: lack of recognition of their loss; inappropriate questioning; unwanted disclosure of gender history; and fears of discrimination when accessing support. Disclosure of LGBT+ identities varied across social networks. Some participants described hiding their identities and bereavement to preserve relationships, and challenging intersections between LGBT+ identities and other aspects of culture or self. These findings provide primary evidence to support the Acceptance-Disclosure Model. CONCLUSIONS: LGBT+ people face additional stressors in bereavement. Not all LGBT+ people want to talk directly about their relationships/identities. Sensitive exploration of support needs, aligned with preferences around disclosure of identities, can help foster trust. Five recommendations for inclusive practice are presented. Further research should consider whether the Acceptance-Disclosure Model has utility to explain bereavement experiences for other isolated or disenfranchised groups.

Achieving child-centred care for children and young people with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions-a qualitative interview study.

This study aims to identify the symptoms, concerns, and care priorities of children with life-limiting conditions and their families. A semi-structured qualitative interview study was conducted, seeking perspectives from multiple stakeholders on symptoms, other concerns, and care priorities of children and young people with life limiting and life-threatening conditions and their families. Participants were recruited from six hospitals and three children's hospices in the UK. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using framework analysis. A total of 106 participants were recruited: 26 children (5-17 years), 40 parents (of children 0-17 years), 13 siblings (5-17 years), 15 health and social care professionals, 12 commissioners. Participants described many inter-related symptoms, concerns, and care priorities impacting on all aspects of life. Burdensome symptoms included pain and seizures. Participants spoke of the emotional and social impacts of living with life-limiting conditions, such as being able to see friends, and accessing education and psychological support. Spiritual/existential concerns included the meaning of illness and planning for an uncertain future. Data revealed an overarching theme of pursuing 'normality', described as children's desire to undertake usual childhood activities. Parents need support with practical aspects of care to help realise this desire for normality. CONCLUSION: Children with life-limiting conditions and their families experience a wide range of inter-related symptoms, concerns, and care priorities. A holistic, child-centred approach to care is needed, allowing focus on pursuit of normal childhood activities. Improvements in accessibility, co-ordination, and availability of health services are required to achieve this. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Existing evidence regarding symptoms, concerns, and care priorities for children with life-limiting conditions is largely limited to proxy-reported data and those with a cancer diagnosis. • Child-centred care provision must be directed by children's perspectives on their priorities for care. WHAT IS NEW: • Social and educational activities are more important to children with life-limiting conditions than their medical concerns. • A holistic approach to care is required that extends beyond addressing medical needs, in order to support children with life-limiting conditions to focus on pursuit of normal childhood activities.

Mechanisms and contextual influences on the implementation of advance care planning for older people in long-term care facilities: A realist review.

BACKGROUND: Older people in long-term care facilities face clinical uncertainty and unpredictable decline. Advance care planning enables older people to identify preferences and wishes for future treatment and care before any loss of capacity. However, it is unclear how, why and under what circumstances the implementation of advance care planning for older people can be normalised into routine practice within long-term care facilities. OBJECTIVE: To identify and explain mechanisms and contextual factors that underpin the implementation of advance care planning for older people in long-term care facilities. DESIGN: Realist review. SETTING(S): Long-term care facilities. METHODS: Consistent with realist review methodology, we developed the initial programme theory by scoping reviews, engaging UK and China stakeholders and utilising the Normalisation Process Theory. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus were subsequently searched from 01/01/1990 to 11/06/2021. Inductive and deductive coding was used to generate context-mechanism-outcome configurations, which were iteratively tested to refine the programme theory. RESULTS: 5459 records were identified, and 48 were retained for final synthesis. Seven context-mechanism-outcome configurations were identified: (1) carry out sensitive conversation gradually in a nonthreatening way; (2) identify 'a window of opportunity'; (3) deliver sustainable and available training; (4) build a collaborative and multidisciplinary network; (5) conduct collaborative negotiation to achieve shared decision-making; (6) secure active leadership buy-in; (7) keep conversation and documentation on track. A logic model was developed to conceptualise the causal pathways between the contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Normalising conversations about death is paramount to mainstreaming advance care planning implementation in long-term care facilities. The key to achieving this is older people, family members and staff have a shared understanding of the aims, values, and potential benefits of advance care planning. Advance care planning should be introduced at a time that is important to older people and families, rather than being process-driven. Nurse facilitators play a vital role in ensuring older people's voices are heard and in building bridges between participants in advance care planning. The findings of this study inform the appropriate development and evaluation of advance care planning interventions for older people in long-term care facilities. Further research is needed to explore mechanisms that underpin the implementation of advance care planning in Asian countries. REGISTRATION: This review is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021214317).

COVID-19: Impact on Pediatric Palliative Care.

CONTEXT: Children and young people with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions and their families are potentially vulnerable during COVID-19 lockdowns due to pre-existing high clinical support needs and social participation limitations. OBJECTIVES: To explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns on this population. METHODS: Sub-analysis of an emergent COVID-19 related theme from a larger semi-structured interview study investigating priority pediatric palliative care outcomes. One hundred and six United Kingdom-wide purposively-sampled Children and young people with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions, parent/carers, siblings, health professionals, and commissioners. RESULTS: COVID-19 was raised by participants in 12/44 interviews conducted after the United Kingdom's first confirmed COVID-19 case. Key themes included loss of vital social support, disruption to services important to families, and additional psychological distress. CONCLUSION: Continued delivery of child- and family-centered palliative care requires innovative assessment and delivery of psycho-social support. Disruptions within treatment and care providers may compound support needs, requiring cordination for families facing multiagency delays.

Reflective insights from developing a palliative care children and young people's advisory group.

BACKGROUND: The importance of actively involving patient and public members throughout the different stages of palliative care and health research projects is widely acknowledged, however patient and public involvement work rarely considers insight from children and young people. Although this is becoming increasingly recognised in other areas of research, there is currently no structured guidance on how to best involve children and young people in palliative care research. AIM: To plan and deliver a Young People's Advisory Group in palliative care and health research at a secondary school. FINDINGS: Attending an after-school 'Health and Social Research Methods Club' for 11 weeks benefitted children and researchers. Children were taught about data collection methods, data analysis and ethics in health research and used these skills to provide valuable feedback which has been implemented in current palliative care research projects. Children took part in considered discussions around palliative care topics and enjoyed attending the group. CONCLUSION: This project has equipped researchers with skills and provided a structured template for future Young People's Advisory Groups, ensuring the unique voices of children and young people are considered and valued in future palliative care research.