Monica Lakhanpaul

How well do clinical prediction rules perform in identifying serious infections in acutely ill children across an international network of ambulatory care datasets

BackgroundDiagnosing serious infections in children is challenging, because of the low incidence of such infections and their non-specific presentation early in the course of illness. Prediction rules are promoted as a means to improve recognition of serious infections. A recent systematic review identified seven clinical prediction rules, of which only one had been prospectively validated, calling into question their appropriateness for clinical practice. We aimed to examine the diagnostic accuracy of these rules in multiple ambulatory care populations in Europe.MethodsFour clinical prediction rules and two national guidelines, based on signs and symptoms, were validated retrospectively in seven individual patient datasets from primary care and emergency departments, comprising 11,023 children from the UK, the Netherlands, and Belgium. The accuracy of each rule was tested, with pre-test and post-test probabilities displayed using dumbbell plots, with serious infection settings stratified as low prevalence (LP; <5%), intermediate prevalence (IP; 5 to 20%), and high prevalence (HP; >20%) . In LP and IP settings, sensitivity should be >90% for effective ruling out infection.ResultsIn LP settings, a five-stage decision tree and a pneumonia rule had sensitivities of >90% (at a negative likelihood ratio (NLR) of < 0.2) for ruling out serious infections, whereas the sensitivities of a meningitis rule and the Yale Observation Scale (YOS) varied widely, between 33 and 100%. In IP settings, the five-stage decision tree, the pneumonia rule, and YOS had sensitivities between 22 and 88%, with NLR ranging from 0.3 to 0.8. In an HP setting, the five-stage decision tree provided a sensitivity of 23%. In LP or IP settings, the sensitivities of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence guideline for feverish illness and the Dutch College of General Practitioners alarm symptoms ranged from 81 to 100%.ConclusionsNone of the clinical prediction rules examined in this study provided perfect diagnostic accuracy. In LP or IP settings, prediction rules and evidence-based guidelines had high sensitivity, providing promising rule-out value for serious infections in these datasets, although all had a percentage of residual uncertainty. Additional clinical assessment or testing such as point-of-care laboratory tests may be needed to increase clinical certainty. None of the prediction rules identified seemed to be valuable for HP settings such as emergency departments.

The Predictive Value of the NICE "Red Traffic Lights" in Acutely Ill Children

Objective Early recognition and treatment of febrile children with serious infections (SI) improves prognosis, however, early detection can be difficult. We aimed to validate the predictive rule-in value of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) most severe alarming signs or symptoms to identify SI in children. Design, Setting and Participants The 16 most severe (“red”) features of the NICE traffic light system were validated in seven different primary care and emergency department settings, including 6,260 children presenting with acute illness. Main Outcome Measures We focussed on the individual predictive value of single red features for SI and their combinations. Results were presented as positive likelihood ratios, sensitivities and specificities. We categorised “general” and “disease-specific” red features. Changes in pre-test probability versus post-test probability for SI were visualised in Fagan nomograms. Results Almost all red features had rule-in value for SI, but only four individual red features substantially raised the probability of SI in more than one dataset: “does not wake/stay awake”, “reduced skin turgor”, “non-blanching rash”, and “focal neurological signs”. The presence of ≥3 red features improved prediction of SI but still lacked strong rule-in value as likelihood ratios were below 5. Conclusions The rule-in value of the most severe alarming signs or symptoms of the NICE traffic light system for identifying children with SI was limited, even when multiple red features were present. Our study highlights the importance of assessing the predictive value of alarming signs in clinical guidelines prior to widespread implementation in routine practice.

Information needs of parents for acute childhood illness: determining 'what, how, where and when' of safety netting using a qualitative exploration with parents and clinicians

Objective To explore the views of parents and clinicians regarding the optimal content, format and delivery of safety netting information for acute childhood illness. Design Qualitative study including semistructured focus groups and interviews. Setting First contact care settings, community centres, childrens centres and nurseries in the Midlands, UK. Participants 27 parents from a travelling community, Asian British community and white British community. Sixteen clinicians including 10 doctors and 6 nurses from a general practice surgery, an out-of-hours service and two emergency departments (paediatric and combined adult and paediatric). Results Participants described a need for safety netting to contain information on signs and symptoms of serious and common illnesses, illness management and where and when to seek help. Resources should be basic, simple to use and contain simple symbols. A key criterion was professional endorsement of resources. Internet-based information was desired which is reliable, consistent and up-to-date. Participants described a need for different types of information: that which could be delivered during consultations, as well as more general information for parents to access before consulting a healthcare professional. Face-to-face education, written materials and digital media were suggested delivery mechanisms. Audiovisual material was preferred by families with low literacy. Participants commonly suggested internet-based and phone-based resources, but the travelling community was less comfortable with these approaches. Conclusions A multifaceted and tailored approach to safety netting is needed so that effective resources are available for parents with varying information needs, literacy levels and ability to use information technology. We have identified key aspects of content, quality criteria, format and delivery mechanisms for safety netting information from the perspectives of clinicians and parents. Resources should be coproduced with parents and clinicians to ensure that they are valued and utilised by both groups.

The safety netting behaviour of first contact clinicians: a qualitative study

BackgroundAcute illness is common in childhood, and it is difficult for healthcare professionals to distinguish seriously ill children from the vast majority with minor or self-limiting illnesses. Safety netting provides parents with advice on when and where to return if their child deteriorates, and it is widely recommended that parents of acutely sick young children should be given safety netting advice. Yet little is known about how and when this is given. We aimed to understand what safety netting advice first contact clinicians give parents of acutely sick young children, how, when, and why.MethodsThis was a qualitative study. Interviews and focus groups were held with doctors and nurses in a general practice surgery, a District General Hospital emergency department, a paediatric emergency department, and an out-of-hours service. Data were analysed using the method of constant comparison.ResultsSixteen clinicians participated. They described that safety netting advice includes advising parents what to look for, when and where to seek help. How safety netting was delivered and whether it was verbal or written was inconsistent, and no participants described being trained in this area. Safety netting appeared to be rarely documented, and was left to individual preference. Limitations of written materials, and structural barriers to the provision of safety netting, were perceived. Participants described that safety netting was influenced by clinicians’ experience, confidence, time and knowledge; and perceived parental anxiety, experience, and competence. Participants noted several limitations to safety netting including not knowing if it has been understood by parents or been effective; parental difficulty interpreting information and desire for face-to-face reassurance; and potential over-reassurance.ConclusionFirst contact clinicians employ a range of safety netting techniques, with inconsistencies within and between organisations. Structural changes, clinician training, and documentation in patient notes may improve safety netting provision. Research is needed into the optimal components of safety netting advice so that clinicians can consistently deliver the most effective advice for parents.

Safety netting in healthcare settings: what it means, and for whom?

Everyday thousands of children are presented to health care practitioners by concerned parents with the vast majority being simple self-limiting illness. However serious bacterial illness, chronic inflammatory conditions and mental health problems are repeatedly missed with significant morbidity, mortality, financial and social implications. A conceptual framework detailing the mechanism of effective Safety Netting has yet to be described however and there is increasing evidence parents want guidance on when to seek medical advice (a key part of safety netting) prior to initial consultation. This article explores current understanding of safety netting in relation to child health and argues there is a need to develop a more standardised approach.

Why collaborate with children in health research: an analysis of the risks and benefits of collaboration with children

Involvement of service users in decision making, in both clinical and research settings, has become a central feature of many health and research funding policies in the last 15 years. Over the same timeframe, there has been an increasing focus on childrens rights, promoted by the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, which gives children a right to be involved in decisions that affect their lives. In a research setting, this has resulted in increased engagement of children in research, as opposed to relying on parents or carers to represent their children, and a shift from research on children to research with children. In this article, we discuss collaboration with children under the age of 16 years in health research: what this means and why (or why not) to do it. The definition of collaboration is discussed and the lines among collaboration, involvement, participation and participatory research considered. The risks and benefits of collaboration are reviewed, both theoretical and evidence based, where evidence exists. The review ends with a look towards the future including the need for agreed definitions, better reporting of collaboration and other patient and public involvement activities with children to build up the much needed evidence base, the need for cost–benefit evaluations and, most importantly, the need for careful consideration as to whether collaborating with children is appropriate in each circumstance.

A systematic review of explanatory factors of barriers and facilitators to improving asthma management in South Asian children

BackgroundSouth Asian children with asthma are less likely to receive prescriptions and more likely to suffer uncontrolled symptoms and acute asthma admissions compared with White British children. Understanding barriers are therefore vital in addressing health inequalities. We undertook a systematic review identifying explanatory factors for barriers and facilitators to asthma management in South Asian children. South Asians were defined as individuals of Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi descent.MethodsData Sources - Medline, HMIC, EMBASE, ASSIA, Web of Science, BNI, CINAHL, PsycINFO, OpenSIGLE, CRD, Scopus, NHS Evidence, Cochrane Library, Campbell Collaboration, RCPCH, ATS, ERS, Asthma UK, Google Scholar & Asthma Guidelines (BTS, GINA, ATS, Monash, NAEPP, Singapore & New Zealand) to August 2013.Inclusion Criteria – Qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods research with primary focus on identifying explanations for barriers and/or facilitators to asthma management in South Asian children aged 0–18 years with diagnosed/suspected asthma and/or carers and/or healthcare professionals.Data Extraction – Three authors independently reviewed, selected & extracted eligible articles with disagreements resolved by research team discussion.Results15 studies encompassing 25,755 children, 18,483 parents/carers and 239 healthcare professionals were included. Barriers and explanatory factors identified were:1. Lack of asthma knowledge in families and healthcare professionals.2. Under-use of preventer medications.3. Non-acceptance/denial of asthma.4. Over-reliance on Emergency Department management.5. Communication problems.6. Non-adherence to medication.7. Use of complementary therapies.Little facilitators regarding asthma management were identified.ConclusionsSeveral key issues were identified as likely to be ethnic-specific to South Asian families, rather than a reflection of minority status: impact of parental and professional knowledge and beliefs, health service utilisation pattern explanations and the impact of prejudice and stigmatisation. Other explanations such as language barriers are not strictly ethnic specific but instead reflect a minority position.Further research is required to identify why barriers exist, the mechanisms by which they impact on asthma management and how they can be overcome. Furthermore, understanding the difference between barriers and explanations that are ethnic-specific and those that are related to being a minority will enable the application of generic system-wide interventions where ethnicity is not the issue and ethnically-tailored interventions where needed.

The under reporting of recruitment strategies in research with children with life-threatening illnesses: A systematic review

Background: Researchers report difficulties in conducting research with children and young people with life-limiting conditions or life-threatening illnesses and their families. Recruitment is challenged by barriers including ethical, logistical and clinical considerations. Aim: To explore how children and young people (aged 0–25 years) with life-limiting conditions or life-threatening illnesses and their families were identified, invited and consented to research published in the last 5 years. Design: Systematic review. Data sources: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Sciences Citation Index and SCOPUS were searched for original English language research published between 2009 and 2014, recruiting children and young people with life-limiting conditions or life-threatening illness and their families. Results: A total of 215 studies – 152 qualitative, 54 quantitative and 9 mixed methods – were included. Limited recruitment information but a range of strategies and difficulties were provided. The proportion of eligible participants from those screened could not be calculated in 80% of studies. Recruitment rates could not be calculated in 77%. A total of 31% of studies recruited less than 50% of eligible participants. Reasons given for non-invitation included missing clinical or contact data, or clinician judgements of participant unsuitability. Reasons for non-participation included lack of interest and participants’ perceptions of potential burdens. Conclusion: All stages of recruitment were under reported. Transparency in reporting of participant identification, invitation and consent is needed to enable researchers to understand research implications, bias risk and to whom results apply. Research is needed to explore why consenting participants decide to take part or not and their experiences of research recruitment.

Parents' help-seeking behaviours during acute childhood illness at home: A contribution to explanatory theory.

Uncertainty and anxiety surround parents’ decisions to seek medical help for an acutely ill child. Consultation rates for children are rising, yet little is known about factors that influence parents’ help-seeking behaviours. We used focus groups and interviews to examine how 27 parents of children under five years, from a range of socioeconomic groups in the East Midlands of England, use information to make decisions during acute childhood illness at home. This article reports findings elucidating factors that influence help-seeking behaviours. Parents reported that decision-making during acute childhood illness was influenced by a range of personal, social and health service factors. Principal among these was parents’ concern to do the right thing for their child. Their ability to assess the severity of the illness was influenced by knowledge and experience of childhood illness. When parents were unable to access their general practitioner (GP), feared criticism from or had lost trust in their GP, some parents reported using services elsewhere such as Accident and Emergency. These findings contribute to explanatory theory concerning parents’ help-seeking behaviours. Professional and political solutions have not reduced demand; therefore, collaborative approaches involving the public and professionals are now needed to improve parents’ access to information.

Information resources to aid parental decision-making on when to seek medical care for their acutely sick child: a narrative systematic review

Objective To identify the effectiveness of information resources to help parents decide when to seek medical care for an acutely sick child under 5 years of age, including the identification of factors influencing effectiveness, by systematically reviewing the literature. Methods 5 databases and 5 websites were systematically searched using a combination of terms on children, parents, education, acute childhood illness. A narrative approach, assessing quality via the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, was used due to non-comparable research designs. Results 22 studies met the inclusion criteria: 9 randomised control trials, 8 non-randomised intervention studies, 2 qualitative descriptive studies, 2 qualitative studies and 1 mixed method study. Consultation frequency (15 studies), knowledge (9 studies), anxiety/reassurance (7 studies), confidence (4 studies) satisfaction (4 studies) and antibiotic prescription (4 studies) were used as measures of effectiveness. Quality of the studies was variable but themes supported information needing to be relevant and comprehensive to enable parents to manage an episode of minor illness Interventions addressing a range of symptoms along with assessment and management of childhood illness, appeared to have the greatest impact on the reported measures. The majority of interventions had limited impact on consultation frequencies, No conclusive evidence can be drawn from studies measuring other outcomes. Conclusions Findings confirm that information needs to be relevant and comprehensive to enable parents to manage an episode of minor illness. Incomplete information leaves parents still needing to seek help and irrelevant information appears to reduce parents’ trust in the intervention. Interventions are more likely to be effective if they are also delivered in non-stressful environments such as the home and are coproduced with parents.