Search

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had an important psychological impact on children and their families. This study aims to explore paediatric health services users' perceptions of quality of care (QOC) and COVID-19-related fears, and their evolution over time in relation to COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: In a multicentre cross-sectional study involving 11 public hospitals providing paediatric care across the Italian territory, we collected data from services users through a validated questionnaire. We analysed four indicators-(1) QOC perceived in relation to COVID-19; (2) overall QOC perceived; (3) fear of accessing health services due to COVID-19; (4) fear of contracting COVID-19 in hospital-and calculated Spearman's correlation indexes (ρ) with the number of COVID-19 new cases over time. Subgroup analyses were conducted by macroregions and single facility., Results: Data from 956 services users were analysed. QOC indicators were stable over time at values close to the maximum (range 77-100 and median 100 for COVID-19 QOC, range 74-98 and median 80 for overall QOC), and no correlations were found with the COVID-19 new cases (ρ=-0.073 and -0.016, respectively). Fear of accessing care and fear of contracting the infection varied over time in between 0%-52% and 0%-53%, respectively, but did not correlate directly with number of COVID-19 new cases (ρ=0.101, 0.107 and 0.233, 0.046, respectively). At subgroup analyses, significantly higher frequencies of fear (p values <0.05) and lower QOC (p values <0.001) were reported in South Italy, and three facilities showed moderate correlation between these indicators., Conclusions: COVID-19-related fears and perceived QOC may be mediated by more complex cultural and facility/regional-level factors, than simply by epidemic peaks. Subgroup analyses can help unpack major differences within the same country., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: There is little experience on the use of the WHO Standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children. We describe the use of four prioritised WHO Standard-based Quality Measures to assess the provision of care for children with pain in emergency departments (EDs)., Methods: In a multicentre observational study in 10 EDs with different characteristics in Italy, we collected data on 3355 children accessing the EDs between January 2019 and December 2020. The association between children and facility characteristics and quality measures was analysed through multivariate analyses., Results: The proportion of children whose pain was measured was 68.7% (n=2305), with extreme variations across different centres (from 0.0% to 99.8%, p<0.001). The proportion of children treated for pain was 28.9% (n=970) again with a wide range (5.3%-56.3%, p<0.001). The difference between the frequency of children with pain measured and pain treated varied widely between the facilities (ranging from -24.3 to 82). Children with moderate and severe pain were more frequently treated (48.9% and 62.9% of cases, respectively), although with large variations across centres (ranges: 0%-74.8% and 0%-100% respectively, p<0.001). After correction for children's characteristics, the variable more strongly associated with analysed outcomes was the facility which the child accessed for care. Being a facility in Northern Italy was associated with a higher rate of pain measurement (67.3%-95% CI: 39.9% to 94.6%, p<0.001) compared with facilities in South Italy (-22.1% lower (95% CI: -41.7% to -2.50%, p=0.03)., Conclusions: The use of few WHO Standard-based measures related to pain can help identifying priority gaps in QOC for children and in monitoring it over time. There is a need for more implementation research to establish which are the most sustainable and effective interventions to improve the QOC for acute pain in children., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: There is little experience in the use of the WHO Standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children at the facility level. We describe the use of 75 WHO Standard based Quality Measures to assess paediatric QOC, using service users as a source of data, in Italy., Study Design: In a cross-sectional study including 12 hospitals, parents/caregivers of admitted children completed a validated questionnaire including 75 Quality Measures: 40 pertinent to the domain of experience of care; 25 to physical/structural resources; 10 to COVID-19 reorganisational changes. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted., Results: Answers from 1482 service users were analysed. Physical resources was the domain with the higher frequency of reported gaps in QOC, with key gaps (higher rates of responders reporting need for improvement and low variability across centres) being: (1) quality of meals (48.1%; range across facilities: 35.3%-61.7%); (2) presence of cooking areas (50.9%; range: 34.6%-70.0%); (3) spaces for family/friends (51.3%; range: 31.8%-77.4%). For experience of care , the most critical gap was the information on the rights of the child (76.6%; range: 59.9%-90.4%), with most other Quality Measures showing an overall frequency of reported need for improvement ranging between 5% and 35%. For reorganisational changes due to COVID-19 an improvement was felt necessary by <25% of responders in all Quality Measures, with low variability across centres. At the multivariate analyses, factors significantly associated with the QOC Index largely varied by QOC domain., Conclusions: The use of the 75 prioritised Quality Measures, specific to service users' perspective, enabled the identification of both general and facility-specific gaps in QOC. Based on these findings, quality improvement initiatives shall focus on a core list of selected Quality Measures common to all facilities, plus on an additional list of Quality Measures as more relevant in each facility., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: There is little experience in implementing the WHO Standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children. We describe the use of 75 WHO-Standard based Quality Measures to assess paediatric QOC, using health workers (HWs) as data sources., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: 12 Italian hospitals., Participants: The minimum target of 75% of HWs was reached in all facilities; answers from 598 HWs were analysed., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: 75 prioritised WHO Quality Measures were collected using a validated, and Italian-language questionnaire exploring views of HWs providing care to children. A QOC index was also calculated based on the assessed Quality Measures., Results: In both the domain of resources and work organisation, most Quality Measures showed a high overall frequency of reported 'need for improvement', with high variability across hospitals. Key needs for improvement included: availability of clear and complete protocols (eg, on paediatric emergencies: 44.6%; range 10.6%-92.6%); clear hospitalisation criteria for diarrhoea (50.5%; range 30.3%-71.7%); number of hand-washing stations (13.2%; range 3.4%-37.0%); equipped working rooms with computers for HWs (66.1%; range: 32.1%-97.0%); training (eg, on pain management: 43.5%; range 17.9%-76.7%), periodic discussion of clinical cases (43.5%; range 8.1%-83.7%) audits (48.8%; range 29.7%-76.7%); and all indicators related to system to improve QOC. Factors significantly associated with a lower QOC Index included HWs working in facilities in Southern Italy (p=0.001) and absence of a paediatric emergency department (p=0.011)., Conclusions: The use of the 75 prioritised Quality Measures, specific to HWs provide valuable data on paediatric QOC, which can be used to drive a quality improvement process., Competing Interests: Competing interests: No, there are no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Experience is lacking on the implementation of the WHO standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children at facility level. We describe the use of 10 prioritised WHO standard-based quality measures to assess provision of care for children with acute respiratory infections (ARI) in Italy., Methods: In a multicentre observational study across 11 emergency departments with different characteristics, we collected 10 WHO standard-based quality measures related to case management of children with ARI and no emergency/priority signs. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted., Results: Data from 3145 children were collected. Major differences in QOC across facilities were observed: documentation of saturation level and respiratory rate varied from 34.3% to 100% and from 10.7% to 62.7%, respectively (p<0.001); antibiotic prescription rates ranged from 22.6% to 80.0% (p<0.001), with significant differences in the pattern of prescribed antibiotic; hospitalisations rates ranged between 2.3% and 30.6% (p<0.001). When corrected for children's individual sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, the variable more consistently associated with each analysed outcome was the individual facility where the child was managed. Higher rates of antibiotics prescription (+33.1%, p<0.001) and hospitalisation (+24.7%, p<0.001) were observed for facilities in Southern Italy, while university centres were associated with lower hospitalisation rates (-13.1%, p<0.001), independently from children's characteristics., Conclusions: The use of 10 WHO standard-based measures can help quickly assess QOC for children with ARI. There is an urgent need to invest more in implementation research to identify sustainable and effective interventions to ensure that all children receive high QOC., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: There is no documented experience in the use of the WHO standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children at the facility level. We describe the use of 10 prioritised WHO-Standard-based Quality Measures to assess QOC for children with acute diarrhoea (AD) in Italy., Methods: In a multicentre observational study in 11 paediatric emergency departments with different characteristics and geographical location, we collected data on 3061 children aged 6 months to 15 years with AD and no complications. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted., Results: Study findings highlighted both good practices and gaps in QoC, with major differences in QOC across facilities. Documentation of body weight and temperature varied from 7.7% to 98.5% and from 50% to 97.7%, respectively (p<0.001); antibiotic and probiotic prescription rates ranged from 0% to 10.1% and from 0% to 80.8%, respectively (p<0.001); hospitalisations rates ranged between 8.5% and 62.8% (p<0.001); written indications for reassessment were provided in 10.4%-90.2% of cases (p<0.001). When corrected for children's individual characteristics, the variable more consistently associated with each analysed outcome was the individual facility. Higher rates of antibiotics prescription (+7.6%, p=0.04) and hospitalisation (+52.9%, p<0.001) were observed for facilities in Southern Italy, compared with university centres (-36%, p<0.001), independently from children characteristics. Children's clinical characteristics in each centre were not associated with either hospitalisation or antibiotic prescription rates., Conclusions: The 10 prioritised WHO-Standard-based Quality Measures allow a rapid assessment of QOC in children with AD. Action is needed to identify and implement sustainable and effective interventions to ensure high QOC for all children., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Benefits of different types of family-centred care (FCC) interventions in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) have been reported. However, a comprehensive review of existing FCC intervention studies was lacking., Objective: This review aimed at synthesising the characteristics of FCC interventions, related outcomes and measurement methods in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in NICU, and providing menus of options to favour implementation and further research., Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library up to 31 January 2022. Interventions were mapped according to five categories as defined by a previous Cochrane review. We described outcome types, measurement populations, measurement methods and timelines. Subgroup analyses were also performed., Results: Out of 6583 studies identified, 146 met eligibility criteria. Overall, 52 (35.6%) RCTs tested more than one category of intervention, with a large variety of combinations, with the most frequent category of intervention being the educational (138 RCTs, 94.5%). We identified a total of 77 different intervention packages, and RCTs comparing the same interventions were lacking. The 146 RCTs reported on 425 different outcomes, classified in 13 major categories with parental mental health (61 RCTs, 41.8% of total RCTs) being the most frequent category in parents, and neurobehavioural/developmental outcomes being the most frequent category in newborns (62 RCTs, 42.5%). For several categories of outcomes almost every RCT used a different measurement method. Educational interventions targeting specifically staff, fathers, siblings and other family members were lacking or poorly described. Only one RCT measured outcomes in health workers, two in siblings and none considered other family members., Conclusions: A large variety of interventions, outcomes and measurement methods were used in FCC studies in NICU. The derived menus of options should be helpful for researchers and policy makers to identify interventions most suitable in each setting and to further standardise research methods., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Studies comparing the frequency of different mental health conditions across different settings and evaluating their association with parental participation in newborn care are lacking. We aimed at evaluating the frequency of parental stress, anxiety and depression, along with the level of participation in newborn care, among parents of newborns in Italy, Brazil and Tanzania., Methods: Parental stress, anxiety, depression and participation in care were assessed prospectively in parents of newborns in eight neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) utilising: the Parental Stressor Scale in NICU (PSS:NICU); the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and EPDS-Anxiety subscale (EPDS-A); the Index of Parental Participation in NICU (IPP-NICU). Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted., Results: Study outcomes were assessed on 742 parents (Brazil=327, Italy=191, Tanzania=224). Observed scores suggested a very high frequency of stress, anxiety and depression, with an overall estimated frequency of any of the mental health condition of 65.1%, 52.9% and 58.0% in Brazil, Italy, Tanzania, respectively (p<0.001). EPDS scores indicating depression (cut-off: ≥13 for Brazil and Tanzania, ≥12 for Italy) were significantly more frequent in Tanzania (52.3%) when compared with either Brazil (35.8%) and Italy (33.3%) (p<0.001). Parental participation in care was also significantly higher in Tanzania (median IPP-NICU=24) than in the other two countries (median=21 for Brazil, 18 for Italy, p<0.001). Severe stress (PSS:NICU ≥4) was significantly more frequently reported in Brazil (22.6%), compared with Italy (4.7%) and Tanzania (0%, p<0.001). Factors independently associated with either parental stress, anxiety or depression varied by country, and a significant association with parental participation in care was lacking., Conclusions: Study findings suggest that parental stress, anxiety and depression are extremely frequent in NICUs in all countries despite diversity in the setting, and requiring immediate action. Further studies should explore the appropriate level of parental participation in care in different settings., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Different definitions of family-centred care (FCC) exist in the newborn setting, and many FCC interventions have been tested, while a comprehensive review synthesising characteristics of existing intervention studies is still lacking., Objective: This review aims at summarising the characteristics of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on FCC interventions in neonatal intensive care units., Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library up to 31 January 2022, and reference lists of included studies and other reviews. Interventions were grouped into five categories according to a previous Cochrane review: (1) family support, (2) educational, (3) communication, (4) environmental interventions and (5) family-centred policies. Subgroup analyses by time period (RCTs published before vs after 2016) and by country income (based on the World Bank Classification) were conducted., Results: Out of 6583 retrieved studies, 146 RCTs met the eligibility criteria, with 53 (36.3%) RCTs published after 2016. Overall, 118 (80.8%) RCTs were conducted in high-income countries, 28 (19.1%) in middle-income countries and none in low-income countries. Only two RCTs were multicountry. Although mothers were the most frequent caregiver involved, fathers were included in 41 RCTs (28.1%). Very few studies were conducted in at-term babies (nine RCTs); siblings (two RCTs) and other family members (two RCTs), maternity care units (two RCTs). The role of health professionals was unclear in 65 (44.5%) RCTs. A large variety of intervention combinations was tested, with 52 (35.6%) RCTs testing more than 1 category of interventions, and 24 (16.4%) RCTs including all 5 categories., Conclusion: There is a large and rising number of RCTs on FCC interventions in neonatal intensive care units, with specific research gaps. The large variety of FCC interventions, their high complexity, the need to tailor them to the local context and major gaps in implementation suggest that implementation research is the current priority., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: This study aimed at documenting the levels of stress, depression, anxiety and participation in care among mothers versus fathers of newborns hospitalised in a third-level neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) in Northern Italy., Methods: Parental stress, depression and anxiety were assessed by the Parental Stressor Scale in NICU (PSS:NICU), the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Participation in care was evaluated with the Index of Parental Participation. Differences between mothers and fathers were assessed with the Mood's median test and z-test, respectively for continuous and discrete variables. Multivariate analyses controlling for potential confounders were performed to confirm gender differences., Results: 191 parents (112 mothers and 79 fathers) were enrolled. Mothers reported significantly higher median scores for stress (2.9 vs 2.2, p<0.001) and trait anxiety (37 vs 32, p=0.004) and higher depression rates (EPDS ≥12: 43.8% vs 19.0%, p<0.001). 'High stress' (PSS:NICU ≥3) was reported by 45.5% of mothers compared with 24.1% of fathers (p=0.004). The frequency of the three conditions simultaneously was significantly higher among mothers (20.0% vs 3.8%, p=0.016), with the vast majority of mothers (76.0%) suffering from at least one condition compared with less than half of fathers (45.3%, p<0.001). Participation in care was more frequent in mothers (median score: 19 vs 15, p<0.001), with the exception of activities related to advocacy (median 5 vs 4, p=0.053). In a multivariate analysis, gender differences in mental health outcomes did not change., Conclusions: Routine screening of mental distress among parents of infants in NICU is warranted, and gender differences need to be acknowledged in order to deliver tailored support and to promote collaboration with the family of vulnerable newborns. Knowledge and skills on how to prevent and cope with mental distress of parents should be part of the core curriculum of staff working in NICU., Competing Interests: Competing interests: No, there are no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Existing literature suggest frequent gaps in the quality of care (QoC) provided to children with malnutrition in low-income and middle-income countries. Beira is the second largest city in Mozambique. This study included two phases: phase 1 was a systematic assessment of the QoC provided to malnourished children in Beira; phase 2 aimed at using findings of the assessment to develop recommendations, with a participatory approach, to improve QoC., Methods: In phase 1, all facilities offering nutritional care to children in Beira were included, and exit health outcomes were reviewed against international SPHERE standards. A sample of four (66%) facilities was randomly selected for a comprehensive assessment of all areas contributing to QoC using an adapted WHO tool. In phase 2, key stakeholders were identified, and using a participatory approach, a list of actions for improving the QoC for malnourished children was agreed., Results: In phase 1, outcomes of 1428 children with either severe acute malnutrition or moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) were reviewed. In-hospital recovery rate (70.1%) was almost in line with the SPHERE standard (75%), while at outpatient level, it was significantly lower (48.2%, risk ratio (RR) 0.68, p<0.0001). Recovery rate was significantly lower in HIV seropositive compared with seronegative (39.2% vs 52.8%, RR 1.34, p=0.005). High heterogeneity in MAM recovery rate was detected among facilities (range 32.5%-61.0%). Overall, out of all domains contributing to QoC in the sample, 28/46 (60.8%) indicated suboptimal care with significant health hazards and 13/46 (28.2%) indicated totally inadequate care with severe health hazards. In phase 2, a list of 38 actions to improve QoC for malnourished children was agreed among 33 local and national stakeholders., Conclusions: Large heterogeneity in QoC for malnourished children in Beria was detected. The study documents a concrete example of using data proactively, for agreeing actions to improve QoC., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: WHO developed a list of standards for improving maternal and newborn hospital care. However, there is little experience on their use, and no precise guidance on their implementation. This study aimed at documenting the use of the WHO standards for improving the quality of maternal and neonatal care (QMNC) in a tertiary hospital, Northeast Italy., Methods: The study was conducted between May 2016 and May 2018, in three phases: phase I-sensitisation and training of health professionals; phase II-data collection on the WHO standards through a survey among service users and providers; phase III-based on the findings of phase II, development of recommendations for improving the QMNC., Results: Overall, 101 health professionals were successfully trained. 1050 mothers and 105 hospital staff participated in the survey. Key indicators of QMNC (and related prevalence) from the mothers survey included: caesarean section (23.1%); episiotomy (18.3%); restrictions to free movements during labour (46.5%), lithotomy position for staff choice (69.3%); skin to skin (80.8%); early breast feeding (67.2%); information on newborn danger signs (47.2%); high satisfaction with QMNC (68.8%). Only 1.2% and 0.7% of women respectively reported discrimination or abuse. Key indicators (and prevalence) reported from staff included: availability of clinical protocols (37%); regular training (14%); health information system used for quality improvement (16.3%); training on effective communication (9.7%) and on emotional support (19.6%); protocols to prevent mistreatment and abuse (6.9%). On several indicators, the opinions of mothers on QMNC was better than those of staff. Overall, 55 quality improvement recommendations were agreed., Conclusions: Information on the WHO standards can be collected from both services users and providers and can be proactively used for planning improvements on QMNC., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.