| Literature DB >> 35193919 |
Andrea J Chow1, Ryan Iverson2, Monica Lamoureux2, Kylie Tingley1, Isabel Jordan3, Nicole Pallone4, Maureen Smith5, Zobaida Al-Baldawi1, Pranesh Chakraborty2,6, Jamie Brehaut1,7, Alicia Chan8, Eyal Cohen9,10,11, Sarah Dyack12, Lisa Jane Gillis13, Sharan Goobie12, Ian D Graham1,7, Cheryl R Greenberg14,15, Jeremy M Grimshaw7,16, Robin Z Hayeems10,17, Shailly Jain-Ghai8, Ann Jolly1,18, Sara Khangura1, Jennifer J MacKenzie19, Nathalie Major2,6, John J Mitchell20, Stuart G Nicholls7,21, Amy Pender19, Murray Potter19,22, Chitra Prasad23, Lisa A Prosser24, Andreas Schulze9,25,26, Komudi Siriwardena8, Rebecca Sparkes27, Kathy Speechley23, Sylvia Stockler28, Monica Taljaard1,7, Mari Teitelbaum2, Yannis Trakadis29, Clara van Karnebeek30,31, Jagdeep S Walia32,33, Brenda J Wilson34, Kumanan Wilson1,7,16,35, Beth K Potter36.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Children with inherited metabolic diseases (IMDs) often have complex and intensive healthcare needs and their families face challenges in receiving high-quality, family centred health services. Improvement in care requires complex interventions involving multiple components and stakeholders, customised to specific care contexts. This study aims to comprehensively understand the healthcare experiences of children with IMDs and their families across Canada. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A two-stage explanatory sequential mixed methods design will be used. Stage 1: quantitative data on healthcare networks and encounter experiences will be collected from 100 parent/guardians through a care map, 2 baseline questionnaires and 17 weekly diaries over 5-7 months. Care networks will be analysed using social network analysis. Relationships between demographic or clinical variables and ratings of healthcare experiences across a range of family centred care dimensions will be analysed using generalised linear regression. Other quantitative data related to family experiences and healthcare experiences will be summarised descriptively. Ongoing analysis of quantitative data and purposive, maximum variation sampling will inform sample selection for stage 2: a subset of stage 1 participants will participate in one-on-one videoconference interviews to elaborate on the quantitative data regarding care networks and healthcare experiences. Interview data will be analysed thematically. Qualitative and quantitative data will be merged during analysis to arrive at an enhanced understanding of care experiences. Quantitative and qualitative data will be combined and presented narratively using a weaving approach (jointly on a theme-by-theme basis) and visually in a side-by-side joint display. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol and procedures were approved by the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario's Research Ethics Board, the University of Ottawa Research Ethics Board and the research ethics boards of each participating study centre. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific conferences. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Entities:
Keywords: epidemiology; genetics; paediatrics; quality in health care; statistics & research methods
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35193919 PMCID: PMC8867352 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055664
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Figure 1Study design overview: mixed methods explanatory sequential design.
Eligibility criteria
| Inclusion | Exclusion |
|
The designated parent and designated child are Canadian residents The designated child is ≤12 years at prescreening The designated child is receiving healthcare from one of 11 participating paediatric metabolic clinics across Canada: Alberta’s Children Hospital, British Columbia Children’s Hospital, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Health Sciences Centre Winnipeg Children’s Hospital, The Hospital for Sick Children, IWK Health Centre, Kingston General Hospital, London Health Sciences Centre, McMaster Children’s Hospital, Montreal Children’s Hospital, Stollery Children’s Hospital The designated child has an IMD that is identified in the following list (these conditions were the focus of an existing cohort study; most have a typical clinical course that aligns with what we call trajectory a or trajectory b): β-Ketothiolase deficiency Arginase deficiency Argininosuccinic aciduria Carbamoyl phosphate synthetase deficiency Carnitine uptake defect Citrin deficiency Citrullinemia Farber disease Galactosemia Glycogen storage disease type 1 Glutaric acidemia type I Guanidinoacetate methyltransferase deficiency HMG-CoA lyase deficiency Homocystinuria Hyperornithinemia-hyperammonemia-homocitrullinuria syndrome Isovaleric acidemia Long-chain 3-hydroxyacyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency Maple syrup urine disease Medium chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency Methylmalonic acidemias Mucopolysaccharidosis type I Multiple carboxylase/biotinidase deficiency N-acetylglutamate synthetase deficiency Ornithine transcarbamylase deficiency Phenylalanine hydroxylase deficiency Propionic acidemia Pyridoxine-dependent epilepsy Trifunctional protein deficiency Tyrosinemia type I Very long-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency involves at least three organ systems chronic complications of the disease get progressively worse over time, even with available treatment | Designated parents who cannot speak, write and read English comfortably |
HMG-CoA, 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A; IMD, inherited metabolic disease.
Data collection instruments
| Data collection period | Data type | Instrument completion time* (min) | Instrument and data details |
|
| |||
| Care map | Quantitative | 40 | Participant creation of a care map of their perceptions regarding their child’s network of care providers, which providers are perceived to work together to coordinate their child’s care, and which providers are considered ‘key providers’ (maximum 10). |
| Care Map Questionnaire | Quantitative | 5 | Participant perceptions about: Coordination of their child’s care. Familiarity with their child by identified key healthcare providers. |
| Baseline Questionnaire | Quantitative | 20–40 | Demographics and potential predictors of healthcare encounter satisfaction ratings, for example, child health status, child and family characteristics, family resources in IMD management and effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on child health and healthcare since March 2020. |
| Pre-Questionnaire for the Weekly Logs | Quantitative | 5–20 | Data will be used to tailor the healthcare diaries, to reduce repetition of questions where responses are anticipated to remain constant over the study period. |
|
| |||
| Healthcare diaries† | Quantitative, qualitative | 5–60 | Descriptive data on healthcare encounters including: the mode of interaction, the care setting if applicable, the healthcare providers involved, the date of the encounter, financial costs, time inputs and any parent-perceived effects of the COVID-19 pandemic (eg, on scheduling or delivery of care). |
| Interviews | Qualitative | (a) 30–60 | (a) Map interviews: seek to understand and elaborate on the care map, including how the participant selected providers to include on the map, the roles and relationships with the family for the providers designated on the map as ‘key providers’, the meaning of connections drawn between providers and how the participant feels about the effectiveness of the care network, including what improvements they see as potentially important. |
*Estimated.
†All elements are completed once except the healthcare diaries, which are completed weekly ×17 weeks.
Figure 2Healthcare encounter definitions/eligibility.