Katharina M. Ruhe

DSM-IV criteria for childhood separation anxiety disorder: informant, age, and sex differences.

BACKGROUND The present study examines frequency of DSM-IV symptom and diagnostic criteria for separation anxiety disorder (SAD) by informant, age, and sex. METHODS Children aged 4-15 years with a primary DSM-IV diagnosis of SAD (N=106) were assessed using structured diagnostic interviews (Kinder-DIPS; DSM-IV-TR Version). Frequency of DSM-IV symptom and diagnostic criteria were examined as a function of informant and child characteristics, along with impairment and distress ratings. RESULTS The most frequently reported symptoms were separation-related distress, avoidance of being alone/without an adult and sleeping away from caregivers or from home, with nightmares the least frequently endorsed criterion. Child report did not yield any significant sex or age differences. However, parent report revealed greater reluctance or avoidance of school attendance for girls than boys, and for younger children (<8 years). Parent report indicated greater symptom-related impairment than child report, and the number of symptoms was correlated with impairment based on parent report, and with distress based on child report. CONCLUSIONS The primary indicators of SAD appear to be separation distress, avoidance of being alone, and sleeping away from caregivers. Findings suggest that parents may be best placed to determine impairment, while children may be the most accurate reporters of more covert internal distress. Implications for clinicians are that reports from multiple informants should be used to gain the most comprehensive information about childhood SAD.

Decision-making capacity of children and adolescents—suggestions for advancing the concept's implementation in pediatric healthcare

AbstractWithin the frameworks of shared decision-making and participation in healthcare, children’s ability to understand and appreciate information pertaining to illness and treatment is important. Physicians are mainly responsible for assessing decision-making capacity (DMC) but may encounter difficulties arising from the limited basis of evidence with regard to this concept in pediatrics. Three issues contributing to this paucity of knowledge on DMC of children can be identified: (1) conceptual blurriness and absence of clear terminology, (2) lack of validated tools to reliably assess DMC in the pediatric population, and (3) a need to include a developmental framework to understand DMC in children and adolescents. The aim of this paper is to examine these three issues and provide practical recommendations to advance the concept and its assessment in pediatrics as a step to ensuring children’s developmentally appropriate participation in healthcare. Finally, the paper highlights the ethical dimension of assessing DMC emphasizing the importance of physicians’ attitudes for the assessment process. Conclusion: A detailed understanding of DMC is necessary to inform developmentally appropriate participation. In order to achieve this, pediatric practice needs to address challenges that are specific to providing healthcare for children, including conceptual issues, assessment, and aspects of child development.

Participation in pediatric oncology: views of child and adolescent patients

The aim of the present study is to explore patients perspectives in pediatric oncology on participation in discussions and decision‐making surrounding their cancer diagnosis.

Parents' Challenges and Physicians' Tasks in Disclosing Cancer to Children. A Qualitative Interview Study and Reflections on Professional Duties in Pediatric Oncology.

Professional guidelines encourage physicians to provide children with as much information regarding their health as deemed developmentally and emotionally appropriate. However, empirical research indicates that in clinical practice, an open discussion with children about cancer is often lacking. This study explores impeding factors to and possible strategies for open communication of cancer diagnosis to children from the perspectives of parents and physicians.

Better to know than to imagine: Including children in their health care

ABSTRACT Background: This article describes the overall attitudes of children, their parents, and attending physicians toward including or excluding pediatric patients in medical communication and health care decision-making processes. Methods: Fifty-two interviews were carried out with pediatric patients (n = 17), their parents (n = 19), and attending oncologists (n = 16) in eight Swiss pediatric oncology centers. The interviews were analyzed using thematic coding. Results: Parenting styles, the childs personality, and maturity are factors that have a great impact upon the inclusion of children in their health care processes. Children reported the desire to be heard and involved, but they did not want to dominate the decision-making process. Ensuring trust in the parent–child and physician–patient relationships and respecting the child as the affected person were important values determining childrens involvement. These two considerations were closely connected with the concern that fantasies are often worse than reality. Seeking childrens compliance with treatment was a practical but critical reason for informing them about their health care. The urge to protect them from upsetting news sometimes resulted in their (partial) exclusion. Conclusions: The ethical imperative for inclusion of children in their health care choices was not so much determined by the right for self-determination, but by the need to include them. If children are excluded, they imagine things, become more isolated, and are left alone with their fears. Nevertheless, the urge to protect children is innate, as adults often underestimate childrens coping capacities.

Relational Capacity: Broadening the Notion of Decision-Making Capacity in Paediatric Healthcare.

Problems arise when applying the current procedural conceptualization of decision-making capacity to paediatric healthcare: Its emphasis on content-neutrality and rational cognition as well as its implicit assumption that capacity is an ability that resides within a person jeopardizes children’s position in decision-making. The purpose of the paper is to challenge this dominant account of capacity and provide an alternative for how capacity should be understood in paediatric care. First, the influence of developmental psychologist Jean Piaget upon the notion of capacity is discussed, followed by an examination of Vygostky’s contextualist view on children’s development, which emphasizes social interactions and learning for decision-making capacity. In drawing parallels between autonomy and capacity, substantive approaches to relational autonomy are presented that underline the importance of the content of a decision. The authors then provide a relational reconceptualization of capacity that leads the focus away from the individual to include important social others such as parents and physicians. Within this new approach, the outcome of adults’ decision-making processes is accepted as a guiding factor for a good decision for the child. If the child makes a choice that is not approved by adults, the new conceptualization emphasizes mutual exchange and engagement by both parties.

Putting patient participation into practice in pediatrics—results from a qualitative study in pediatric oncology

AbstractAdequate participation of children and adolescents in their healthcare is a value underlined by several professional associations. However, little guidance exists as to how this principle can be successfully translated into practice. A total of 52 semi-structured interviews were carried out with 19 parents, 17 children, and 16 pediatric oncologists. Questions pertained to participants’ experiences with patient participation in communication and decision-making. Applied thematic analysis was used to identify themes with regard to participation. Three main themes were identified: (a) modes of participation that captured the different ways in which children and adolescents were involved in their healthcare; (b) regulating participation, that is, regulatory mechanisms that allowed children, parents, and oncologists to adapt patient involvement in communication and decision-making; and (c) other factors that influenced patient participation. This last theme included aspects that had an overall impact on how children participated. Patient participation in pediatrics is a complex issue and physicians face considerable challenges in facilitating adequate involvement of children and adolescents in this setting. Nonetheless, they occupy a central role in creating room for choice and guiding parents in involving their child. Conclusion: Adequate training of professionals to successfully translate the principle of patient participation into practice is required.What is Known:•Adequate participation of pediatric patients in communication and decision-making is recommended by professional guidelines but little guidance exists as to how to translate it into practice.What is New:•The strategies used by physicians, parents, and patients to achieve participation are complex and serve to both enable and restrict children’s and adolescents’ involvement.

End-of-Life Decision Making in Pediatrics: Literature Review on Children's and Adolescents’ Participation

Background: Pediatric guidelines recommend that children and adolescents participate in a developmentally appropriate way in end-of-life decision making. Shared decision making in pediatrics is unique because of the triadic relationship of patient, parents, and physician. The involvement of the patient may vary on a continuum from no involvement to being the sole decision maker. However, the effects of child participation have not been thoroughly studied. The aims of this literature review are to identify studies on end-of-life decision making in pediatrics, to explore patient participation, and to assess the effects of such participation. Methods: Five databases—PubMed, PsycInfo, Medline, CINAHL, and Sociological Abstract—were searched for empirical studies on end-of-life decision making in pediatrics. Selected articles fulfilling the criteria were assessed for type of decision, participants’ characteristics, reports on participation of the minor patient, and outcome. Results: Fifty-seven articles on end-of-life decision making in pediatrics were identified. The majority of papers (n = 43, 75%) investigated parents’ and clinicians’ perspectives, while only 14 articles (25%) included perspectives of children and adolescents. Twenty-two articles (39%) reported some details on various forms of childrens participation (e.g., receive information, plan care details, consulted before or after a decision was made). Positive (e.g., respect for patients preferences) and negative (e.g., conflict due to diverging opinions) effects of childrens participation in end-of-life decision making were reported. Conclusions: This systematic review highlights the need for research to identify factors that contribute to a favorable participation of minors in decision-making processes, as well as strategies to solve possible conflicts. More research should take into account the dynamics in the triadic process of decision making and emphasize children and adolescents’ perspectives. A better understanding of how to meaningfully involve children and adolescents in end-of-life decision making could facilitate the practice of patient participation in pediatrics.

Implementation status of error disclosure standards reported by Swiss hospitals

QUESTION UNDER STUDY To establish at what stage Swiss hospitals are in implementing an internal standard concerning communication with patients and families after an error that resulted in harm. METHODS Hospitals were identified via the Swiss Hospital Associations website. An anonymous questionnaire was sent during September and October 2011 to 379 hospitals in German, French or Italian. Hospitals were asked to specify their hospital type and the implementation status of an internal hospital standard that decrees that patients or their relatives are to be promptly informed about medical errors that result in harm. RESULTS Responses from a total of 205 hospitals were received, a response rate of 54%. Most responding hospitals (62%) had an error disclosure standard or planned to implement one within 12 months. The majority of responding university and acute care (75%) hospitals had introduced a disclosure standard or were planning to do so. In contrast, the majority of responding psychiatric, rehabilitation and specialty (53%) clinics had not introduced a standard. CONCLUSION It appears that Swiss hospitals are in a promising state in providing institutional support for practitioners disclosing medical errors to patients. This has been shown internationally to be one important factor in encouraging the disclosure of medical errors. However, many hospitals, in particular psychiatric, rehabilitation and specialty clinics, have not implemented an error disclosure policy. Further research is needed to explore the underlying reasons.

Is decision-making capacity an “essentially contested” concept in pediatrics?

Key legislations in many countries emphasize the importance of involving children in decisions regarding their own health at a level commensurate with their age and capacities. Research is engaged in developing tools to assess capacity in children in order to facilitate their responsible involvement. These instruments, however, are usually based on the cognitive criteria for capacity assessment as defined by Appelbaum and Grisso and thus ill adapted to address the life-situation of children. The aim of this paper is to revisit and critically reflect upon the current definitions of decision-making capacity. For this purpose, we propose to see capacity through the lens of essential contestability as it warns us against any reification of what it means to have capacity. Currently, capacity is often perceived of as a mental or cognitive ability which somehow resides within the person, obscuring the fact that capacity is not just an objective property which can be assessed, but always operates within a dominant cultural framework that “creates” that same capacity and defines the threshold between capable and incapable in a specific situation. Defining capacity as an essentially contested concept means using it in a questioning mode and giving space to alternative interpretations that might inform and advance the debate surrounding decision-making.