Parents' experiences of support during and after their child's diagnosis of meningococcal disease

Familial experience of acute bacterial meningitis in children: a transversal qualitative study using interpretative phenomenological analysis

OBJECTIVES

To capture the subjective experience of close family ascendants of acute bacterial meningitis survivors and to explore how they give meaning to this specific experience.

DESIGN

A qualitative study of indepth interviews using interpretative phenomenological analysis.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Main meaning-making processes of participants' experience.

SETTINGS

Participants were recruited through two associations of people affected by meningitis and their family ascendants.

PARTICIPANTS

Convenience sampling of 11 women whose children or grandchildren were between 0.2 and 20 years old at the time of their meningitis diagnosis (M=4.06, SD=7.3). On average, 9.39 (SD=5.4) years had passed between the onset of illness and the interview.

RESULTS

Six superordinate themes (meningitis disease; healthcare services and professionals; knowledge/ignorance; repercussions of the meningitis experience: 'life afterwards'; sick child attitudes/behaviour; and sibling attitudes/behaviour) and two main meaning-making processes in relation to participants' experience of meningitis were identified: (1) the sick child becoming a 'hero': comparison with other children; and (2) engaging action/attitude: finding the 'positive' of the traumatic experience and engaging action to improve the care system. These two processes underpin the psychological adjustment to meningitis and its consequences.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a unique insight into close family members' first-hand experience with acute bacterial meningitis. Findings highlighted factors characterising the disease experience, the psychological adjustment of meningitis survivors' families and their meaning-making processes. These findings are important for research and clinical practice, demonstrating the multidimensional impact of the disease on family ascendants, their need for professional psychological support and the importance of direct involvement of parents in identifying key aspects of care.

Recognition and nursing management of sepsis in early infancy

Neonatal sepsis describes serious bacterial or viral infections that manifest in the first 28 days of life, causing significant morbidity and mortality. Although most babies with early-onset neonatal sepsis are born and managed in hospital, some are born in the community, or discharged early from postnatal wards. Consequently, emergency department (ED) nurses and other healthcare professionals need to be able to identify and treat these infants effectively to improve long-term outcomes. This article discusses neonatal sepsis, including causative organisms, types of neonatal sepsis and why neonates are vulnerable to infection. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence 2012 and 2014 guidance is also discussed in relation to management of neonatal sepsis and a case study is included to illustrate some of the challenges that ED nurses may encounter.

The health, social and educational needs of children who have survived meningitis and septicaemia: the parents' perspective

Background

Survivors of bacterial meningitis and septicaemia can experience a range of after-effects. There is little published research on the needs and provision of aftercare for children surviving bacterial meningitis and septicaemia.

Methods

Mixed methods study employing a survey and follow-up interviews with a sample of survey participants recruited from Meningitis Research Foundation’s member database and social media.

Results

Of 194 eligible survey respondents, 77% reported at least moderate short-term after-effects, and 57% a need for aftercare or support. Most parents reported that their child received a hearing test (98%) and follow-up appointment with a paediatrician (66%). Psychosocial after-effects were most common and the greatest need was for educational support. About half of participants felt their children’s needs for aftercare were met. We conducted interviews with 18 parents. Findings suggest access could be limited by: parents’ inability to navigate systems in place, child’s age, and delayed identification of sequelae. Parents felt a comprehensive explanation of possible after-effects on discharge from hospital was required, and found uncertain prognoses difficult. Good communication between professionals enabled a service tailored to the child’s needs.

Conclusions

Our study supports the NICE and SIGN guidelines and highlights areas for improvement in the aftercare of these children.