Validating the double chain ladder stochastic claims reserving model

Double chain ladder, introduced by Martínez-Miranda et al. (2012), is a statistical model to predict outstanding claim reserve. Double chain ladder and Bornhuetter-Ferguson are extensions of the originally described double chain ladder model which gain more stability through including expert knowledge via an incurred claim amounts triangle. In this paper, we introduce a third method, the incurred double chain ladder, which replicates the popular results from the classical chain ladder on incurred data. We will compare and validate these three using two data sets from major property and casualty insurers

Establishing and augmenting views on the acceptability of a paediatric critical care randomised controlled trial (the FEVER trial): a mixed methods study

OBJECTIVE: To explore parent and staff views on the acceptability of a randomised controlled trial investigating temperature thresholds for antipyretic intervention in critically ill children with fever and infection (the FEVER trial) during a multi-phase pilot study. DESIGN: Mixed methods study with data collected at three time points: (1) before, (2) during and (3) after a pilot trial. SETTING: English, Paediatric Intensive Care Units (PICUs). PARTICIPANTS: (1) Pre-pilot trial focus groups with pilot site staff (n=56) and interviews with parents (n=25) whose child had been admitted to PICU in the last 3 years with a fever and suspected infection, (2) Questionnaires with parents of randomised children following pilot trial recruitment (n=48 from 47 families) and (3) post-pilot trial interviews with parents (n=19), focus groups (n=50) and a survey (n=48) with site staff. Analysis drew on Sekhon et al's theoretical framework of acceptability. RESULTS: There was initial support for the trial, yet some held concerns regarding the proposed temperature thresholds and not using paracetamol for pain or discomfort. Pre-trial findings informed protocol changes and training, which influenced views on trial acceptability. Staff trained by the FEVER team found the trial more acceptable than those trained by colleagues. Parents and staff found the trial acceptable. Some concerns about pain or discomfort during weaning from ventilation remained. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-trial findings and pilot trial experience influenced acceptability, providing insight into how challenges may be overcome. We present an adapted theoretical framework of acceptability to inform future trial feasibility studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ISRCTN16022198 and NCT03028818

Establishing and augmenting acceptability of the Fever trial: a mixed methods feasibility study

Introduction: Paediatric clinical trials in critical care settings are challenging to conduct. Establishing trial acceptability can help inform trial design and avoid research waste. This paper reports on how research with parents and staff established and augmented perspectives and the design of a trial investigating temperature thresholds in critically ill children with fever and infection (Fever trial). // Methods: We used a mixed methods approach to explore perspectives at three time points: 1) before, 2) during and 3) after a pilot trial. This included: 1) pre-trial focus groups with staff and interviews with parents; 2) questionnaires with parents of randomised children following trial recruitment; 3) post-trial interviews with parents and focus groups and a survey with staff. Data analysis drew on Sekhon et al (2017) theoretical framework of acceptability. // Results: 1) 25 parents were interviewed and 56 staff took part focus groups, 2) 60 parents of 57 randomised children took part in questionnaires, 3) 19 parents were interviewed and 50 staff took part in focus group and 48 in a survey. There was initial support for the trial, although both groups raised concerns regarding proposed thresholds and not using paracetamol for pain or discomfort. Pre-trial findings informed pilot trial protocol changes and training, which assisted practitioner ‘buy in’. However, concerns about children being in pain or discomfort when weaned from ventilation led to cases of withdrawal and protocol non-adherence. Nevertheless, 95% of parents provided consent and all supported the trial. Those trained by the Fever team found the trial more acceptable than those trained by colleagues. Trusting parent and staff relationships were linked to trial acceptability. // Conclusions: Pre-trial findings and pilot trial experience augmented perspectives, providing insight into how challenges may be overcome. The proposed trial was deemed feasible. We present an adapted theoretical framework of acceptability to inform the design of future trial feasibility studies

Protocol for a Randomized Multiple Center Trial of Conservative Versus Liberal Oxygenation Targets in Critically Ill Children (Oxy-PICU): Oxygen in Paediatric Intensive Care

OBJECTIVES: Oxygen administration is a fundamental part of pediatric critical care, with supplemental oxygen offered to nearly every acutely unwell child. However, optimal targets for systemic oxygenation are unknown. Oxy-PICU aims to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a conservative peripheral oxygen saturation (Spo2) target of 88-92% compared with a liberal target of more than 94%. DESIGN: Pragmatic, open, multiple-center, parallel group randomized control trial with integrated economic evaluation. SETTING: Fifteen PICUs across England, Wales, and Scotland. PATIENTS: Infants and children age more than 38 week-corrected gestational age to 16 years who are accepted to a participating PICU as an unplanned admission and receiving invasive mechanical ventilation with supplemental oxygen for abnormal gas exchange. INTERVENTION: Adjustment of ventilation and inspired oxygen settings to achieve an Spo2 target of 88-92% during invasive mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Randomization is 1:1 to a liberal Spo2 target of more than 94% or a conservative Spo2 target of 88-92% (inclusive), using minimization with a random component. Minimization will be performed on: age, site, primary reason for admission, and severity of abnormality of gas exchange. Due to the emergency nature of the treatment, approaching patients for written informed consent will be deferred to after randomization. The primary clinical outcome is a composite of death and days of organ support at 30 days. Baseline demographics and clinical status will be recorded as well as daily measures of oxygenation and organ support, and discharge outcomes. This trial received Health Research Authority approval on December 23, 2019 (reference: 272768), including a favorable ethical opinion from the East of England-Cambridge South Research Ethics Committee (reference number: 19/EE/0362). Trial findings will be disseminated in national and international conferences and peer-reviewed journals

Mortality and morbidity in community-acquired sepsis in European pediatric intensive care units: a prospective cohort study from the European Childhood Life-threatening Infectious Disease Study (EUCLIDS)

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is one of the main reasons for non-elective admission to pediatric intensive care units (PICUs), but little is known about determinants influencing outcome. We characterized children admitted with community-acquired sepsis to European PICUs and studied risk factors for mortality and disability. METHODS: Data were collected within the collaborative Seventh Framework Programme (FP7)-funded EUCLIDS study, which is a prospective multicenter cohort study aiming to evaluate genetic determinants of susceptibility and/or severity in sepsis. This report includes 795 children admitted with community-acquired sepsis to 52 PICUs from seven European countries between July 2012 and January 2016. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital death. Secondary outcome measures were PICU-free days censured at day 28, hospital length of stay, and disability. Independent predictors were identified by multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: Patients most commonly presented clinically with sepsis without a source (n = 278, 35%), meningitis/encephalitis (n = 182, 23%), or pneumonia (n = 149, 19%). Of 428 (54%) patients with confirmed bacterial infection, Neisseria meningitidis (n = 131, 31%) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (n = 78, 18%) were the main pathogens. Mortality was 6% (51/795), increasing to 10% in the presence of septic shock (45/466). Of the survivors, 31% were discharged with disability, including 24% of previously healthy children who survived with disability. Mortality and disability were independently associated with S. pneumoniae infections (mortality OR 4.1, 95% CI 1.1-16.0, P = 0.04; disability OR 5.4, 95% CI 1.8-15.8, P < 0.01) and illness severity as measured by Pediatric Index of Mortality (PIM2) score (mortality OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.3-6.1, P < 0.01; disability OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.8-6.4, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite widespread immunization campaigns, invasive bacterial disease remains responsible for substantial morbidity and mortality in critically ill children in high-income countries. Almost one third of sepsis survivors admitted to the PICU were discharged with some disability. More research is required to delineate the long-term outcome of pediatric sepsis and to identify interventional targets. Our findings emphasize the importance of improved early sepsis-recognition programs to address the high burden of disease

Establishing and augmenting views on the acceptability of a paediatric critical care randomised controlled trial (the FEVER trial) : a mixed methods study

Objective: To explore parent and staff views on the acceptability of a randomised controlled trial investigating temperature thresholds for antipyretic intervention in critically ill children with fever and infection (the FEVER trial) during a multi-phase pilot study. Design: Mixed methods study with data collected at three time points: (1) before, (2) during and (3) after a pilot trial. Setting: English, Paediatric Intensive Care Units (PICUs). Participants: (1) Pre-pilot trial focus groups with pilot site staff (n=56) and interviews with parents (n=25) whose child had been admitted to PICU in the last 3 years with a fever and suspected infection, (2) Questionnaires with parents of randomised children following pilot trial recruitment (n=48 from 47 families) and (3) post-pilot trial interviews with parents (n=19), focus groups (n=50) and a survey (n=48) with site staff. Analysis drew on Sekhon et al’s theoretical framework of acceptability. Results: There was initial support for the trial, yet some held concerns regarding the proposed temperature thresholds and not using paracetamol for pain or discomfort. Pre-trial findings informed protocol changes and training, which influenced views on trial acceptability. Staff trained by the FEVER team found the trial more acceptable than those trained by colleagues. Parents and staff found the trial acceptable. Some concerns about pain or discomfort during weaning from ventilation remained. Conclusions: Pre-trial findings and pilot trial experience influenced acceptability, providing insight into how challenges may be overcome. We present an adapted theoretical framework of acceptability to inform future trial feasibility studies. Trial registration numbers: ISRCTN16022198 and NCT03028818

Permissive versus restrictive temperature thresholds in critically ill children with fever and infection: A multicentre randomized clinical pilot trial

Background: Fever improves pathogen control at a significant metabolic cost. No randomized clinical trials (RCT) have compared fever treatment thresholds in critically ill children. We performed a pilot RCT to determine whether a definitive trial of a permissive approach to fever in comparison to current restrictive practice is feasible in critically ill children with suspected infection. Methods: An open, parallel-group pilot RCT with embedded mixed methods perspectives study in four UK paediatric intensive care units (PICUs) and associated retrieval services. Participants were emergency PICU admissions aged > 28 days to < 16 years receiving respiratory support and supplemental oxygen. Subjects were randomly assigned to permissive (antipyretic interventions only at ≥ 39.5 °C) or restrictive groups (antipyretic interventions at ≥ 37.5 °C) whilst on respiratory support. Parents were invited to complete a questionnaire or take part in an interview. Focus groups were conducted with staff at each unit. Outcomes were measures of feasibility: recruitment rate, protocol adherence and acceptability, between group separation of temperature and safety. Results: One hundred thirty-eight children met eligibility criteria of whom 100 (72%) were randomized (11.1 patients per month per site) without prior consent (RWPC). Consent to continue in the trial was obtained in 87 cases (87%). The mean maximum temperature (95% confidence interval) over the first 48 h was 38.4 °C (38.2-38.6) in the restrictive group and 38.8 °C (38.6-39.1) in the permissive group, a mean difference of 0.5 °C (0.2-0.8). Protocol deviations were observed in 6.8% (99/1438) of 6-h time periods and largely related to patient comfort in the recovery phase. Length of stay, duration of organ support and mortality were similar between groups. No pre-specified serious adverse events occurred. Staff (n = 48) and parents (n = 60) were supportive of the trial, including RWPC. Suggestions were made to only include invasively ventilated children for the duration of intubation. Conclusion: Uncertainty around the optimal fever threshold for antipyretic intervention is relevant to many emergency PICU admissions. A more permissive approach was associated with a modest increase in mean maximum temperature. A definitive trial should focus on the most seriously ill cases in whom antipyretics are rarely used for their analgesic effects alone. Trial registration: ISRCTN16022198. Registered on 14 August 2017

Parents' prioritised outcomes for trials investigating treatments for paediatric severe infection:A qualitative synthesis

Objective To identify parents' prioritised outcomes by combining qualitative findings from two trial feasibility studies of interventions for paediatric suspected severe infection. Design Qualitative synthesis combining parent interview data from the Fluids in Shock (FiSh) and Fever feasibility studies. Parents had experience of their child being admitted to a UK emergency department or intensive care unit with a suspected infection. Participants n=: 85 parents. FiSh study: n=41 parents, 37 mothers, 4 fathers, 7 were bereaved. Fever study: n=44 parents, 33 mothers, 11 fathers, 7 were bereaved. Results In addition to survival, parents prioritised short-term outcomes including: organ and physiological functioning (eg, heart rate, breathing rate and temperature); their child looking and/or behaving more like their normal self; and length of time on treatments or mechanical support. Longer term prioritised outcomes included effects of illness on child health and development. We found that parents' prioritisation of outcomes was influenced by their experience of their child's illness, survival and the point at which they are asked about outcomes of importance in the course of their child's illness. Conclusions Findings provide insight into parent prioritised outcomes to inform the design of future trials investigating treatments for paediatric suspected or proven severe infection as well as core outcome set development work.</p