scholarly journals Towards a shared vision for measureable and meaningful health outcomes for children and young people with neurodisability: qualitative research, Delphi survey, systematic review, and stakeholder prioritisation

Trials ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Morris ◽  
Astrid Janssens ◽  
Amanda Allard ◽  
Joanne Thompson Coon ◽  
Valerie Shilling ◽  
...  
2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (15) ◽  
pp. 1-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Morris ◽  
Astrid Janssens ◽  
Amanda Allard ◽  
Joanne Thompson Coon ◽  
Valerie Shilling ◽  
...  

BackgroundThe identification of suitable outcome measures will improve the evaluation of integrated NHS care for the large number of children affected by neurodisability, and has the potential to encourage the provision of more appropriate and effective health care. This research sought to appraise the potential of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for children and young people with neurodisability.AimThis research aimed (i) to identify key outcomes of health care for children with neurodisability, beyond morbidity and mortality, from the perspectives of children, parents and professionals; (ii) to critically appraise existing generic multidimensional PROMs; and (iii) to examine whether or not the key outcomes might be measured by existing PROMs. We also sought agreement on a definition of neurodisability.MethodsData were gathered in three main ways, (i) a systematic review identified eligible generic multidimensional PROMs and peer-reviewed studies evaluating psychometric performance using English-language questionnaires. Studies were appraised for methodological quality and psychometric performance was appraised using standard criteria. (ii) Focus groups and interviews with children and young people with neurodisability, and separately with parents, sought to identify important outcomes of NHS care, and their feedback on example PROM questionnaires. (iii) An online Delphi survey was conducted with a multidisciplinary sample of health professionals to seek agreement on appropriate NHS outcomes. In addition, we convened a consensus meeting with a small nominal group of young people, parents and professionals; the group sought agreement on a core set of important health outcomes.ResultsFrom the systematic review, we identified 126 papers that reported eligible evidence regarding the psychometric performance of 25 PROMs. Evidence of psychometric robustness was more favourable for a small number of PROMs: KIDSCREEN (generic), DISABKIDS (chronic-generic) and Child Health Utility 9D (preference-based measure). The Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory and KINDL offer both self-report and a proxy report version for a range of age bands, but evidence of their psychometric performance was weaker. Evidence was lacking in one or more respects for all candidate PROMs, in both general populations and those with neurodisability. Proxy reporting was found generally to be poorly correlated with self-report. Focus groups and interviews included 54 children and young people, and 53 parents. The more important health outcomes were felt to be communication, emotional well-being, pain, mobility, independence/self-care, worry/mental health, social activities and sleep. In addition, parents of children with intellectual impairment identified behaviour, toileting and safety as important outcomes. Participants suggested problems with the face validity of example PROM questionnaires for measuring NHS care. In the Delphi survey, 276 clinicians from a wide range of professions contributed to at least one of four rounds. Professionals rated pain, hearing, seeing, sleep, toileting, mobility and communication as key goals for the NHS but also identified treating neurological symptoms as important. Professionals in the Delphi survey and parents working with the research team agreed a proposed definition for neurodisability. The consensus meeting confirmed overlap between the outcomes identified as important by young people, parents and professionals, but not complete agreement.ConclusionsThere was agreement between young people, parents and professionals regarding a core suite of more important health outcomes: communication, emotional well-being, pain, mobility, independence/self-care, worry/mental health, social activities and sleep. In addition, behaviour, toileting and safety were identified as important by parents. This research suggests that it would be appropriate to measure these constructs using PROMs to assess health care. None of the candidate PROMs in the review adequately captures all of the identified constructs, and there is inadequate evidence that candidate PROMs are psychometrically robust for use across children with neurodisability. Further consultation with young people, families and professionals is warranted to support the use of PROMs to measure NHS outcomes. Research to test potential PROMs with different age groups and conditions would be valuable.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.


BMJ Open ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. e004611 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Allard ◽  
Andrew Fellowes ◽  
Valerie Shilling ◽  
Astrid Janssens ◽  
Bryony Beresford ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. e031362
Author(s):  
Emma Galvin ◽  
Renée O'donnell ◽  
Helen Skouteris ◽  
Nick Halfpenny ◽  
Aya Mousa

IntroductionChildren and young people placed in out-of-home care (OoHC) are often affected by a history of trauma and adverse childhood experiences. Trauma in early childhood can impact on children’s health and psychosocial development, whereas early interventions can improve children’s development and placement stability. Although several interventions and practice models have been developed to improve health and psychosocial outcomes for children and young people in OoHC, there remains a lack of rigorous research examining the impact of these interventions in OoHC settings, as there are no systematic reviews examining the impact these interventions and practice models have on the children and young people they serve. We aim to conduct a comprehensive systematic review to examine the effectiveness of interventions and practice models for improving health and psychosocial outcomes in children and young people living in OoHC and to identify relevant knowledge gaps.Methods and analysisMajor electronic databases including Medline, Medline in-process and other non-indexed citations, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycInfo, Sociological Abstracts and all Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews incorporating: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, American College of PhysiciansJournal Club, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects,Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CochraneMethodology Register, Health Technology Assessment and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, will be systematically searched for any studies published between 2008 and 2018 of interventions and practice models developed to improve health and psychosocial outcomes for children and young people in OoHC. Two independent reviewers will assess titles and abstracts for eligibility according to prespecified selection criteria and will perform data extraction and quality appraisal. Meta-analyses and/or metaregression will be conducted where appropriate.Ethics and disseminationThis study will not collect primary data and formal ethical approval is therefore not required. Findings from this systematic review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019115082.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sei Yon Sohn ◽  
Philippa Rees ◽  
Bethany Wildridge ◽  
Nicola J. Kalk ◽  
Ben Carter

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Sohn ◽  
Philippa Rees ◽  
Bethany Wildridge ◽  
Nicola J. Kalk ◽  
Ben Carter

Abstract Background Over the past decade, smartphone use has become widespread amongst today’s children and young people (CYP) which parallels increases in poor mental health in this group. Simultaneously, media concern abounds about the existence of ‘smartphone addiction’ or problematic smartphone use. There has been much recent research concerning the prevalence of problematic smartphone use is in children and young people who use smartphones, and how this syndrome relates to mental health outcomes, but this has not been synthesized and critically evaluated. Aims To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the prevalence of PSU and quantify the association with mental health harms. Methods A search strategy using Medical Subject Headings was developed and adapted for eight databases between January 1, 1st 2011 to October 15th 2017. No language restriction was applied. Of 924 studies identified, 41 were included in this review, three of which were cohort studies and 38 were cross sectional studies. The mental health outcomes were self-reported: depression; anxiety; stress; poor sleep quality; and decreased educational attainment, which were synthesized according to an a priori protocol. Results The studies included 41,871 CYP, and 55% were female. The median prevalence of PSU amongst CYP was 23.3% (14.0–31.2%). PSU was associated with an increased odds of depression (OR = 3.17;95%CI 2.30–4.37;I2 = 78%); increased anxiety (OR = 3.05 95%CI 2.64–3.53;I2 = 0%); higher perceived stress (OR = 1.86;95%CI 1.24–2.77;I2 = 65%); and poorer sleep quality (OR = 2.60; 95%CI; 1.39–4.85, I2 = 78%). Conclusions PSU was reported in approximately one in every four CYP and accompanied by an increased odds of poorer mental health. PSU is an evolving public health concern that requires greater study to determine the boundary between helpful and harmful technology use. Policy guidance is needed to outline harm reduction strategies.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Sohn ◽  
Philippa Rees ◽  
Bethany Wildridge ◽  
Nicola J. Kalk ◽  
Ben Carter

After publication of our article [1] we were notified that one of the author names was misspelled.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document