Objectives Platform trials were used successfully in adult populations during the COVID-19 pandemic. By testing multiple treatments within a single trial, platform trials can help identify the most effective treatments (and any interactions between treatments) for patients more quickly and with less burden for patients and their families. The aim of this qualitative research was to inform the design of the first adaptive platform trial for paediatric intensive care in the UK with young people, parents/carers and paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) staff.Design Qualitative semistructured focus group study. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.Participants Young people, parents/carers, and PICU medical, nursing and research staff.Setting The UK.Results A total of 86 participants (18 young people; 15 parents/carers; 53 PICU staff) took part in 1 of 10 focus groups between May and September 2023. Participants viewed the proposed PICU platform trial and use of research without prior consent to be acceptable. Findings provide insight into how the PICU platform trial should be designed and operationalised, including having a broad and inclusive population eligible for inclusion onto the platform trial, with different inclusion and exclusion criteria for each domain; starting the trial with no more than three domains and prioritising the outcomes of Child quality of life and Survival (all participants). Optimal governance structure and suggestions about how any challenges to the success of the full trial can be overcome are also presented.Conclusions Young people, parents/carers and PICU staff viewed the proposed PICU platform trial to be acceptable. These key stakeholders supported us with the design of an adaptive platform trial for PICU that has a rigorous methodology, yet can be operationalised in a family-centred way, to provide high-quality evidence that can support clinical decision-making and guide the treatment of critically ill children. Our findings have informed the PICU platform trial protocol.

OBJECTIVES:As part of the FERN feasibility study, this qualitative research aimed to explore parents' and clinicians' views on the acceptability, feasibility and design of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of active intervention versus expectant management in monochorionic (MC) diamniotic twin pregnancies with early-onset (prior to 24 weeks) selective fetal growth restriction (sFGR). Interventions could include laser treatment or selective termination which could lead to the death or serious disability of one or both twins. DESIGN:Qualitative semi-structured interviews with parents and clinicians. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and considered against the Principles of Biomedical Ethics. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING:We interviewed 19 UK parents experiencing (six mothers, two partners) or had recently experienced (eight mothers, three partners) early-onset sFGR in MC twin pregnancy and 14 specialist clinicians from the UK and Europe. RESULTS:Participants viewed the proposed RCT as 'ethically murky' because they believed that the management of sFGR in MC twin pregnancy should be individualised according to the type and severity of sFGR. Clinicians prioritised the gestational age, size, decrease in growth velocity, access to the placental vessels and acceptability of intervention for parents. Discussions and decision-making about selective termination appeared to cause long-term harm (maleficence). The most important outcome for parents and clinicians was 'live birth'. For clinicians, this was the live birth of at least one twin. For parents, this meant the live birth of both twins, even if this meant that their babies had neurodevelopmental impairment or disabilities. CONCLUSIONS:All three pregnancy management approaches for sFGR in MC twin pregnancy carry risks and benefits, and the ultimate goal for parents is to receive individualised care to achieve the best possible outcome for both twins. An RCT was not acceptable to parents or clinicians or seen as ethically appropriate. Alternative study designs should be considered to answer this important research question.

OBJECTIVE:To identify current practices in the management of selective fetal growth restriction (sFGR) in monochorionic diamniotic (MCDA) twin pregnancies. DESIGN:Cross-sectional survey. SETTING:International. POPULATION:Clinicians involved in the management of MCDA twin pregnancies with sFGR. METHODS:A structured, self-administered survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Clinical practices and attitudes to diagnostic criteria and management strategies. RESULTS:Overall, 62.8% (113/180) of clinicians completed the survey; of which, 66.4% (75/113) of the respondents reported that they would use an estimated fetal weight (EFW) of <10th centile for the smaller twin and an inter-twin EFW discordance of >25% for the diagnosis of sFGR. For early-onset type I sFGR, 79.8% (75/94) of respondents expressed that expectant management would be their routine practice. On the other hand, for early-onset type II and type III sFGR, 19.3% (17/88) and 35.7% (30/84) of respondents would manage these pregnancies expectantly, whereas 71.6% (63/88) and 57.1% (48/84) would refer these pregnancies to a fetal intervention centre or would offer fetal intervention for type II and type III cases, respectively. Moreover, 39.0% (16/41) of the respondents would consider fetoscopic laser surgery (FLS) for early-onset type I sFGR, whereas 41.5% (17/41) would offer either FLS or selective feticide, and 12.2% (5/41) would exclusively offer selective feticide. For early-onset type II and type III sFGR cases, 25.9% (21/81) and 31.4% (22/70) would exclusively offer FLS, respectively, whereas 33.3% (27/81) and 32.9% (23/70) would exclusively offer selective feticide. CONCLUSIONS:There is significant variation in clinician practices and attitudes towards the management of early-onset sFGR in MCDA twin pregnancies, especially for type II and type III cases, highlighting the need for high-level evidence to guide management.

Introduction Selective fetal growth restriction (sFGR) in monochorionic twin pregnancy, defined as an estimated fetal weight (EFW) of one twin <10th centile and EFW discordance ≥25%, is associated with stillbirth and neurodisability for both twins. The condition poses unique management difficulties: on the one hand, continuation of the pregnancy carries a risk of death of the smaller twin, with a high risk of co-twin demise (40%) or co-twin neurological sequelae (30%). On the other, early delivery to prevent the death of the smaller twin may expose the larger twin to prematurity, with the associated risks of long-term physical, emotional and financial costs from neurodisability, such as cerebral palsy.When there is severe and early sFGR, before viability, delivery is not an option. In this scenario, there are currently three main management options: (1) expectant management, (2) selective termination of the smaller twin and (3) placental laser photocoagulation of interconnecting vessels. These management options have never been investigated in a randomised controlled trial (RCT). The best management option is unknown, and there are many challenges for a potential RCT. These include the rarity of the condition resulting in a small number of eligible pregnancies, uncertainty about whether pregnant women will agree to participate in such a trial and whether they will agree to be randomised to expectant management or active fetal intervention, and the challenges of robust and long-term outcome measures. Therefore, the main objective of the FERN study is to assess the feasibility of conducting an RCT of active intervention vs expectant management in monochorionic twin pregnancies with early-onset (prior to 24 weeks) sFGR.Methods and analysis The FERN study is a prospective mixed-methods feasibility study. The primary objective is to recommend whether an RCT of intervention vs expectant management of sFGR in monochorionic twin pregnancy is feasible by exploring women’s preference, clinician’s preference, current practice and equipoise and numbers of cases. To achieve this, we propose three distinct work packages (WPs). WP1: A Prospective UK Multicentre Study, WP2A: a Qualitative Study Exploring Parents’ and Clinicians’ Views and WP3: a Consensus Development to Determine Feasibility of a Trial. Eligible pregnancies will be recruited to WP1 and WP2, which will run concurrently. The results of these two WPs will be used in WP3 to develop consensus on a future definitive study. The duration of the study will be 53 months, composed of 10 months of setup, 39 months of recruitment, 42 months of data collection, and 5 months of data analysis, report writing and recommendations. The pragmatic sample size for WP1 is 100 monochorionic twin pregnancies with sFGR. For WP2, interviews will be conducted until data saturation and sample variance are achieved, that is, when no new major themes are being discovered. Based on previous similar pilot studies, this is anticipated to be approximately 15–25 interviews in both the parent and clinician groups. Engagement of at least 50 UK clinicians is planned for WP3.Ethics and dissemination This study has received ethical approval from the Health Research Authority (HRA) South West—Cornwall and Plymouth Ethics Committee (REC reference 20/SW/0156, IRAS ID 286337). All participating sites will undergo site-specific approvals for assessment of capacity and capability by the HRA. The results of this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences. The results from the FERN project will be used to inform future studies.Trial registration number This study is included in the ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN16879394) and the NIHR Central Portfolio Management System (CPMS), CRN: Reproductive Health and Childbirth Specialty (UKCRN reference 47201).

OBJECTIVES:This mixed-methods feasibility study aimed to explore parents' and medical practitioners' views on the acceptability and design of a clinical trial to determine whether routine prophylactic proton pump inhibitors (PPI) reduce the incidence of anastomotic stricture in infants with oesophageal atresia (OA).DESIGN:Semi-structured interviews with UK parents of an infant with OA and an online survey, telephone interviews and focus groups with clinicians. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and descriptive statistics.PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING:We interviewed 18 parents of infants with OA. Fifty-one clinicians (49 surgeons, 2 neonatologists) from 20/25 (80%) units involved in OA repair completed an online survey and 10 took part in 1 of 2 focus groups. Interviews were conducted with two clinicians whose survey responses indicated they had concerns about the trial.OUTCOME MEASURES:Parents and clinicians ranked the same top four outcomes ('Severity of anastomotic stricture', 'Incidence of anastomotic stricture', 'Need for treatment of reflux' and 'Presence of symptoms of reflux') as important to measure for the proposed trial.RESULTS:All parents and most clinicians found the use, dose and duration of omeprazole as the intervention medication, and the placebo control, as acceptable. Parents stated they would hypothetically consent to their child's participation in the trial. Concerns of a few parents and clinicians about infants suffering with symptomatic reflux, and the impact of this for study retention, appeared to be alleviated through the symptomatic reflux treatment pathway. Hesitant clinician views appeared to change through discussion of parental support for the study and by highlighting existing research that questions current practice of PPI treatment.CONCLUSIONS:Our findings indicate that parents and most clinicians view the proposed Treating Oesophageal Atresia with prophylactic proton pump inhibitors to prevent STricture (TOAST) trial to be feasible and acceptable so long as infants can be given PPI if clinicians deem it clinically necessary. This insight into parent and clinician views and concerns will inform pilot phase trial monitoring, staff training and the development of the trial protocol.

Technology-dependent children are a sub-population of seriously ill children with life-limiting conditions who are being cared for at home by their families. Although home-based care has been the model of care for these children since the late 1980s, there is a paucity of literature about parents' experiences of having home adaptations made to enable their home to be a place of care for their child. Using the findings from auto-driven photo-elicitation interviews conducted between August 2017 and June 2018 with 12 parents (10 mothers and 2 fathers) who have a technology-dependent child (aged 5-25 years) living in England, Scotland and Wales and David Seamon's five concepts of at-homeness (appropriation, at-easeness, regeneration, rootedness and warmth) as a conceptual framework, this paper addresses how parents' experienced home adaptations. Thematic analysis generated a meta-theme of 'Home needs to be a home for all family members' and the three key themes: (1) 'You just get told' and 'you're not involved'; (2) It's just the 'cheapest', 'quickest', 'short-term' approach; (3) Having 'control' and 'thinking things through.' The need to involve parents in decision-making about adaptations that are made to their home (family-informed design) is clear, not only from a cost-saving perspective for the state, but for creating an aesthetic and functional home that optimises health, well-being and feelings of at-homeness for the entire family.

The study aimed to identify how medical technology impacts upon the home and life at home. Inductive auto-driven photo-elicitation or semi-structured interviews were conducted with technology-dependent children/young people (n = 2) and their family members (n = 15) from 10 families. Thematic analysis generated three themes: Altered physicality and look of the home; Altered sounds in the home; and 'It's worth it! Technology enables us to stay as a family'. Fundamentally, the detrimental impacts of living with medical technology were perceived as worth it as these enabled their child to be at home. Home was not home, and families were incomplete without their child at home.

AIM:The aim of this study was to seek views of UK children's and adult hospices on the availability and challenges of providing services for young adults with life-limiting conditions.BACKGROUND:Internationally, there are a growing number of young adults with life-limiting conditions and/or complex needs which are degenerative, progressive and diverse and involve complex life-long symptom, medication management as well as palliative care. There are 55,721 young adults, aged 18-40 in England, which continues to increase. The hospice sector is experiencing demands to extend services for this population despite concerns about the appropriateness of adult hospices and their nursing staff to provide care for the complex and unfamiliar conditions of this patient group. Evidence is needed of hospices' views and the main challenges faced providing services for young adults.DESIGN:Descriptive cross-sectional survey.METHODS:xChildren and adult hospices completed an online survey exploring service provision and their views of respite care for young adults with life-limiting conditions from 18 years old and onward. Data were collected between October 2015 - February 2016.FINDINGS:Respondents (N = 76 hospices) reported that children's hospices predominantly provided short breaks and end-of-life care; adult hospices provided mainly symptom management, end-of-life care and day services. Main challenges were lack of existing adult respite services; lack of funding and capacity; lack of a skilled workforce in adult hospices; and the need for better integrated service provision.CONCLUSION:Examples of good collaborative working were reported. With an increasing population of young adults and pressure on families, it is vital that services work together to find sustainable solutions to the challenges.

Good end-of-life care planning is vital to ensure optimal care is provided for patients and their families. Two key factors are open and honest advance care planning conversations between the patient (where possible), family, and health care professionals, focusing on exploring what their future wishes are; and the development of an advance care plan document. However, in paediatric and neonatal settings, there has been little research to demonstrate how advance care planning conversations take place. This study explored health care professionals’ views and experiences of paediatric advance care planning in hospitals, community settings and hospices.

BACKGROUND:Service providers face difficult decisions about how best to develop services for the increasing numbers of young people with life-limiting conditions who require palliative care.OBJECTIVE:To explore alternative short break and emergency respite care options to children's hospice care.METHODS:A two-phase evaluation with young people, families and professionals. Phase 1: qualitative semi-structured interviews and focus groups (n=53). Phase 2: mixed-method survey (n=82), qualitative findings only.RESULTS:There were few, or no, appropriate short break and emergency respite care alternatives when children's hospice care was not available that can meet the need of young people with life-limiting conditions, creating anxiety for children's hospice users and those leaving the service as a result of reaching transition age or through no longer meeting the children's hospice eligibility criteria.CONCLUSION:Access to appropriate short break and emergency respite care is required to prevent lifelong negative consequences for young people with life-limiting conditions, their family and society. Research is undoubtedly required to explore the impact and outcomes of children's hospice discharge for young people and their family. Particular attention should be paid to the lack of services for an increasing population making the transition from children's hospices.

Aim. To explore patients' and family caregivers' experiences and perceptions of Hospice at Home care.Background. The public indicate a preference to be cared for and to die at home. This has inherent challenges, with a key factor being the family caregiver. Supporting end-of-life care at home has resulted in the expansion of Hospice at Home services. A wide configuration of services exists with a lack of robust evidence as to what is valued by recipients, particularly those who are older people.Design. A prospective descriptive qualitative study.Methods. Recruitment was purposive. Eligible participants were in receipt of Hospice at Home service on at least three occasions and were deemed to have a life expectancy measured in weeks rather than days. Digitally recorded semistructured interviews with 41 participants (16 patients and 25 family caregivers) were undertaken between October 2014 - July 2015. Data were analysed and organized thematically.Results. Several subthemes: 'Talking about'; 'Knowing and Doing'; 'Caring for the Caregivers'; and 'Promoting Choice' contributed to the overall theme of Embracing Holism. A positive impact on emotional, psychological, social and physical well-being was apparent.Conclusions. This study has provided additional insights as to the value of Hospice at Home care where Hospice Nurses are helping to bring Hospice care into the home. This is helping to support older people who are dying and their caregivers, to live as well as possible and facilitate their wish to be cared for and die in their own home.