Jackelyn Y Boyden1,2, Chris Feudtner3,4, Janet A Deatrick5, Kimberley Widger6,7, Gwenn LaRagione3, Blyth Lord8, Mary Ersek5,4,9. 1. School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, 418 Curie Blvd, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. boydenj@chop.edu. 2. Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 3401 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA, USA. boydenj@chop.edu. 3. Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 3401 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 4. Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 5. School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, 418 Curie Blvd, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. 6. Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 7. Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 8. Courageous Parents Network, Newton, MA, USA. 9. Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, 21 S University Ave, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many children with serious illnesses are receiving palliative and end-of-life care from pediatric palliative and hospice care teams at home (PPHC@Home). Despite the growth in PPHC@Home, no standardized measures exist to evaluate whether PPHC@Home provided in the U.S. meets the needs and priorities of children and their families. METHODS: We developed and conducted a preliminary evaluation of a family-reported measure of PPHC@Home experiences using a multi-method, multi-stakeholder approach. Our instrument development process consisted of four phases. Item identification and development (Phase 1) involved a comprehensive literature search of existing instruments, guidelines, standards of practice, and PPHC@Home outcome studies, as well as guidance from a PPHC stakeholder panel. Phase 2 involved the initial item prioiritization and reduction using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) with PPHC professionals and parent advocates. Phase 3 involved a second DCE with bereaved parents and parents currently receiving care for their child to further prioritize and winnow the items to a set of the most highly-valued items. Finally, we conducted cognitive interviews with parents to provide information about the content validity and clarity of the newly-developed instrument (Phase 4). RESULTS: Items were compiled predominantly from three existing instruments. Phase 2 participants included 34 PPHC providers, researchers, and parent advocates; Phase 3 participants included 47 parents; and Phase 4 participants included 11 parents. At the completion of Phase 4, the Experiences of Palliative and Hospice Care for Children and Caregivers at Home (EXPERIENCE@Home) Measure contains 22 of the most highly-valued items for evaluating PPHC@Home. These items include "The care team treats my child's physical symptoms so that my child has as good a quality of life as possible", "I have regular access to on-call services from our care team", and "The nurses have the knowledge, skills, and experience to support my child's palliative or hospice care at home." CONCLUSIONS: The EXPERIENCE@Home Measure is the first known to specifically measure family-reported experiences with PPHC@Home in the U.S. Future work will include formal psychometric evaluation with a larger sample of parents, as well as evaluation of the clinical utility of the instrument with PPHC@Home teams.
BACKGROUND: Many children with serious illnesses are receiving palliative and end-of-life care from pediatric palliative and hospice care teams at home (PPHC@Home). Despite the growth in PPHC@Home, no standardized measures exist to evaluate whether PPHC@Home provided in the U.S. meets the needs and priorities of children and their families. METHODS: We developed and conducted a preliminary evaluation of a family-reported measure of PPHC@Home experiences using a multi-method, multi-stakeholder approach. Our instrument development process consisted of four phases. Item identification and development (Phase 1) involved a comprehensive literature search of existing instruments, guidelines, standards of practice, and PPHC@Home outcome studies, as well as guidance from a PPHC stakeholder panel. Phase 2 involved the initial item prioiritization and reduction using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) with PPHC professionals and parent advocates. Phase 3 involved a second DCE with bereaved parents and parents currently receiving care for their child to further prioritize and winnow the items to a set of the most highly-valued items. Finally, we conducted cognitive interviews with parents to provide information about the content validity and clarity of the newly-developed instrument (Phase 4). RESULTS: Items were compiled predominantly from three existing instruments. Phase 2 participants included 34 PPHC providers, researchers, and parent advocates; Phase 3 participants included 47 parents; and Phase 4 participants included 11 parents. At the completion of Phase 4, the Experiences of Palliative and Hospice Care for Children and Caregivers at Home (EXPERIENCE@Home) Measure contains 22 of the most highly-valued items for evaluating PPHC@Home. These items include "The care team treats my child's physical symptoms so that my child has as good a quality of life as possible", "I have regular access to on-call services from our care team", and "The nurses have the knowledge, skills, and experience to support my child's palliative or hospice care at home." CONCLUSIONS: The EXPERIENCE@Home Measure is the first known to specifically measure family-reported experiences with PPHC@Home in the U.S. Future work will include formal psychometric evaluation with a larger sample of parents, as well as evaluation of the clinical utility of the instrument with PPHC@Home teams.
Entities:
Keywords:
Experience with care; Home-based care; Instrument development; Pediatric hospice care; Pediatric palliative care
Authors: Ana Milena Sanchez Varela; Allison M Deal; Laura C Hanson; Julie Blatt; Stuart Gold; Elisabeth P Dellon Journal: Am J Hosp Palliat Care Date: 2011-06-28 Impact factor: 2.500
Authors: Renee D Boss; Erin P Williams; Carrie M Henderson; Rebecca R Seltzer; Miriam C Shapiro; Emily Hahn; Nancy Hutton Journal: Hosp Pediatr Date: 2017-07-27
Authors: Rebecca Anhang Price; Brian Stucky; Layla Parast; Marc N Elliott; Ann Haas; Melissa Bradley; Joan M Teno Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2018-03-20 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Lisa M Verberne; Marijke C Kars; Antoinette Y N Schouten-van Meeteren; Diederik K Bosman; Derk A Colenbrander; Martha A Grootenhuis; Johannes J M van Delden Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2017-01-11 Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: Catriona R Mayland; Katy A Sunderland; Matthew Cooper; Paul Taylor; Philip A Powell; Lucy Zeigler; Vicki Cox; Constance Gilman; Nicola Turner; Kate Flemming; Lorna K Fraser Journal: Palliat Med Date: 2022-08-01 Impact factor: 5.713
Authors: Julia Wager; Larissa Alice Kubek; Maria Brenner; Sara Calmanti; Carmel Doyle; Malin Lövgren; Ulrika Kreicbergs; Leontien Kremer; Philippe Le Moine; Guillaume Robert; Meggi Schuiling-Otten; Peter Schröder-Bäck; Eduard Verhagen; Boris Zernikow Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2022-10-17 Impact factor: 3.113