Stakeholders’ perspectives on clinical trial acceptability and approach to consent within a limited timeframe: a mixed methods study

Objectives The Bronchiolitis Endotracheal Surfactant Study (BESS) is a randomised controlled trial to determine the efficacy of endo-tracheal surfactant therapy for critically ill infants with bronchiolitis. To explore acceptability of BESS, including approach to consent within a limited time frame, we explored parent and staff experiences of trial involvement in the first two bronchiolitis seasons to inform subsequent trial conduct.Design A mixed-method embedded study involving a site staff survey, questionnaires and interviews with parents approached about BESS.Setting Fourteen UK paediatric intensive care units.Participants Of the 179 parents of children approached to take part in BESS, 75 parents (of 69 children) took part in the embedded study. Of these, 55/69 (78%) completed a questionnaire, and 15/69 (21%) were interviewed. Thirty-eight staff completed a questionnaire.Results Parents and staff found the trial acceptable. All constructs of the Adapted Theoretical Framework of Acceptability were met. Parents viewed surfactant as being low risk and hoped their child’s participation would help others in the future. Although parents supported research without prior consent in studies of time critical interventions, they believed there was sufficient time to consider this trial. Parents recommended that prospective informed consent should continue to be sought for BESS. Many felt that the time between the consent process and intervention being administered took too long and should be ‘streamlined’ to avoid delays in administration of trial interventions. Staff described how the training and trial processes worked well, yet patients were missed due to lack of staff to deliver the intervention, particularly at weekends.Conclusion Parents and staff supported BESS trial and highlighted aspects of the protocol, which should be refined, including a streamlined informed consent process. Findings will be useful to inform proportionate approaches to consent in future paediatric trials where there is a short timeframe for consent discussions.Trial registration number ISRCTN11746266

Morbidity and mortality after anaesthesia in early life: results of the European prospective multicentre observational study, neonate and children audit of anaesthesia practice in Europe (NECTARINE)

Background: Neonates and infants requiring anaesthesia are at risk of physiological instability and complications, but triggers for peri-anaesthetic interventions and associations with subsequent outcome are unknown. Methods: This prospective, observational study recruited patients up to 60 weeks' postmenstrual age undergoing anaesthesia for surgical or diagnostic procedures from 165 centres in 31 European countries between March 2016 and January 2017. The primary aim was to identify thresholds of pre-determined physiological variables that triggered a medical intervention. The secondary aims were to evaluate morbidities, mortality at 30 and 90 days, or both, and associations with critical events. Results: Infants (n=5609) born at mean (standard deviation [sd]) 36.2 (4.4) weeks postmenstrual age (35.7% preterm) underwent 6542 procedures within 63 (48) days of birth. Critical event(s) requiring intervention occurred in 35.2% of cases, mainly hypotension (>30% decrease in blood pressure) or reduced oxygenation (SpO2 <85%). Postmenstrual age influenced the incidence and thresholds for intervention. Risk of critical events was increased by prior neonatal medical conditions, congenital anomalies, or both (relative risk [RR]=1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.28) and in those requiring preoperative intensive support (RR=1.27; 95% CI, 1.15-1.41). Additional complications occurred in 16.3% of patients by 30 days, and overall 90-day mortality was 3.2% (95% CI, 2.7-3.7%). Co-occurrence of intraoperative hypotension, hypoxaemia, and anaemia was associated with increased risk of morbidity (RR=3.56; 95% CI, 1.64-7.71) and mortality (RR=19.80; 95% CI, 5.87-66.7). Conclusions: Variability in physiological thresholds that triggered an intervention, and the impact of poor tissue oxygenation on patient's outcome, highlight the need for more standardised perioperative management guidelines for neonates and infants