Search

ObjectivesTo describe the experiences, priorities, and needs of patients with rheumatic disease and their parents during transition from paediatric to adult healthcare.SettingFace-to-face and telephone semistructured interviews were conducted from December 2018 to September 2019 recruited from five hospital centres in Australia.ParticipantsFourteen young people and 16 parents were interviewed. Young people were included if they were English speaking, aged 14–25 years, diagnosed with an inflammatory rheumatic disease (eg, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, juvenile dermatomyositis, systemic lupus erythematosus, panniculitis, familial Mediterranean fever) before 18 years of age. Young people were not included if they were diagnosed in the adult setting.ResultsWe identified four themes with respective subthemes: avoid repeat of past disruption (maintain disease stability, preserve adjusted personal goals, protect social inclusion); encounter a daunting adult environment (serious and sombre mood, discredited and isolated identity, fear of a rigid system); establish therapeutic alliances with adult rheumatology providers (relinquish a trusting relationship, seek person-focused care, redefine personal–professional boundaries, reassurance of alternative medical supports, transferred trust to adult doctor) and negotiate patient autonomy (confidence in formerly gained independence, alleviate burden on patients, mediate parental anxiety).ConclusionsDuring transition, patients want to maintain disease stability, develop a relationship with their adult provider centralised on personal goals and access support networks. Strategies to comprehensively communicate information between providers, support self-management, and negotiate individualised goals for independence during transition planning may improve satisfaction, and health and treatment outcomes.

BackgroundChronic conditions are the leading cause of mortality, morbidity and disability in children. However, children and caregivers are rarely involved in identifying research priorities, which may limit the value of research in supporting patient-centred practice and policy.ObjectiveTo identify priorities of patients, caregivers and health professionals for research in childhood chronic conditions and describe the reason for their choices.SettingAn Australian paediatric hospital and health consumer organisations.MethodsRecruited participants (n=73) included patients aged 8 to 14 years with a chronic condition (n=3), parents/caregivers of children aged 0 to 18 years with a chronic condition (n=19), representatives from consumer organisations (n=13) and health professionals including clinicians, researches (n=38) identified and discussed research priorities. Transcripts were thematically analysed.ResultsSeventy-eight research questions were identified. Five themes underpinned participants’ priorities: maintaining a sense of normality (enabling participation in school, supporting social functioning, promoting understanding and acceptance), empowering self-management and partnership in care (overcoming communication barriers, gaining knowledge and skills, motivation for treatment adherence, making informed decisions, access and understanding of complementary and alternative therapies),strengthening ability to cope (learning to have a positive outlook, preparing for home care management, transitioning to adult services), broadening focus to family (supporting sibling well-being, parental resilience and financial loss, alleviating caregiver burden), and improving quality and scope of health and social care (readdressing variability and inequities, preventing disease complications and treatment side effects, identifying risk factors, improving long-term outcomes, harnessing technology, integrating multidisciplinary services).ConclusionResearch priorities identified by children, caregivers and health professionals emphasise a focus on life participation, psychosocial well-being, impact on family and quality of care. These priorities may be used by funding and policy organisations in establishing a paediatric research agenda.

ObjectivesModifying lifestyle can prevent the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) but the specific elements which lead to favourable behaviour change are not well understood. We aimed to identify and evaluate behaviour change techniques and functions in lifestyle interventions for preventing the progression of CKD.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO.Eligibility criteriaTrials of lifestyle behaviour change interventions (including diet, physical activity, smoking and/or alcohol) published to September 2018 in adults with CKD stages 1–5.Data extraction and synthesisTrial characteristics including population, sample size, study setting, intervention, comparator, outcomes and study duration, were extracted. Study quality was independently assessed by two reviewers using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy v1 was used to identify behaviour change techniques (eg, goal setting) and the Health Behaviour Change Wheel was used to identify intervention functions (eg, education). Both were independently assessed by three reviewers.ResultsIn total, 26 studies involving 4263 participants were included. Risk of bias was high or unclear in most studies. Interventions involved diet (11), physical activity (8) or general lifestyle (7). Education was the most frequently used function (21 interventions), followed by enablement (18), training (12), persuasion (4), environmental restructuring (4), modelling (2) and incentivisation (2). The most common behaviour change techniques were behavioural instruction (23 interventions), social support (16), behavioural demonstration (13), feedback on behaviour (12) and behavioural practice/rehearsal (12). Eighteen studies (69%) showed a significant improvement in at least one primary outcome, all of which included education, persuasion, modelling and incentivisation.ConclusionLifestyle behaviour change interventions for CKD patients frequently used education, goal setting, feedback, monitoring and social support. The most promising interventions included education and used a variety of intervention functions (persuasion, modelling and incentivisation).PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019106053.

ObjectiveCardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally, and prevention of CVD is a public health priority. This paper aims to describe the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) on the prevention of CVD across different contexts.DesignSystematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies using the Enhancing Transparency of Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative research (ENTREQ) framework.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL from database inception to April 2018.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesWe included qualitative studies on the perspectives of GPs on CVD prevention.Data extraction and synthesisWe used HyperRESEARCH to code the primary papers and identified themes.ResultsWe selected 34 studies involving 1223 participants across nine countries. We identified six themes: defining own primary role (duty to prescribe medication, refraining from risking patients’ lives, mediating between patients and specialists, delegating responsibility to patients, providing holistic care); trusting external expertise (depending on credible evidence and opinion, entrusting care to other health professionals, integrating into patient context); motivating behavioural change for prevention (highlighting tangible improvements, negotiating patient acceptance, enabling autonomy and empowerment, harnessing the power of fear, disappointment with futility of advice); recognising and accepting patient capacities (ascertaining patient’s drive for lifestyle change, conceding to ingrained habits, prioritising urgent comorbidities, tailoring to patient environment and literacy); avoiding overmedicalisation (averting long-term dependence on medications, preventing a false sense of security, minimising stress of sickness) and minimising economic burdens (avoiding unjustified costs to patients, delivering practice within budget, alleviating healthcare expenses).ConclusionsGPs sought to empower patients to prevent CVD, but consideration of patients’ individual factors was challenging. Community-based strategies for assessing CVD risk involving other health professionals, and decision aids that address the individuality of the patient’s health and environment, may support GPs in their decisions regarding CVD prevention.