Face and content validity, acceptability, feasibility, and implementability of a novel outcome measure for children with life-limiting or life-threatening illness in three sub-Saharan African countries

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.

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.

Shared-decision-making and communication in paediatric palliative care within Uganda

The first palliative care services were started in Uganda 30 years ago with services continuing to develop since then. The Ministry of Health and the Palliative Care Association of Uganda have played key roles in the development of paediatric palliative care in the country. There are a range of paediatric palliative care service providers in Uganda, and these have developed alongside educational programmes and research in PPC. Care is provided across the Uganda health system and across the age range from neonates through to adolescents and young adults. Whilst recognising the importance of shared decision-making there is little literature with regards to this in the Ugandan context. However, a variety of factors have been shown to influence decision-making, along with the challenges and recommendations for the future. Uganda has made significant strides in the provision of paediatric palliative care although there is still a way to go before all children with palliative care needs, and their families, can access palliative care.

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.

Patient-reported outcome measures in children, adolescents, and young adults with palliative care needs-a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Measuring outcomes facilitates evaluation of palliative services for children, adolescents, and young adults (CAYAs) with life-limiting and/or life-threatening (LL/LT) conditions. Implementation of patient-reported, proxy-reported, or patient-centered outcome measures (hereafter PROMs) is recommended to ensure palliative services. The purpose of this scoping review was to provide an overview of PROMs relevant for CAYAs living with LL/LT conditions eligible for pediatric palliative care (PPC).

METHODS

Arksey and O'Malley's 6-stage scoping review framework was used to guide the review. The identified citations had to report on PROMs in any context including CAYAs with LL/LT conditions up to 25 years of age. A systematic search of Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, APA PsycInfo, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, and AMED took place in January 2021 and was updated in June 2022. Citations were screened independently by pairs of researchers. The scoping review protocol was registered, and peer-review published.

RESULTS

Of 3690 identified citations, 98 reports were included, of which the majority were from Western countries and about PROMs in CAYAs living with cancer or organ failure. A total of 80 PROMs were identified, assessing a range of phenomena, where quality of life and symptoms (especially pain) during the stage of ongoing care were the most frequent. There were only a few reports about outcome measures at time of diagnosis or in end-of-life care. CAYAs self-reported on the PROMs or collaborated with their parents in about half of the reports, while the remaining had proxies answering on behalf of the CAYAs. In the identified reports, PROMs were used to characterize a sample through cross-sectional or longitudinal research, and less often to assess effects of interventions.

CONCLUSION

The identified PROMs in the CAYA population eligible for PPC is characterized by studies in high-income countries during ongoing care, primarily in patients with cancer or organ failure. More research is needed in patients living with other LL/LT conditions, and during different stages of the disease course, especially at time of diagnosis, during transition to adulthood, and in end-of-life care. This scoping review of PROMs relevant for young patients eligible for PPC may inform future research about patient-/proxy-reported or patient-centered outcome measures in PPC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Review registration: ( https://osf.io/yfch2/ ) and published protocol (Holmen et al. Syst Rev. 10:237, 2021).

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.