Improvement and implementation of a national individual care plan in paediatric palliative care: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION: Paediatric palliative care (PPC) is care for children with life-threatening or life-limiting conditions, and can involve complex high-tech care, which can last for months or years. In 2015, the National Individual Care Plan (ICP) for PPC was developed and has shown to be successful. The ICP can be seen as an instrument to facilitate coordination, quality and continuity of PPC. However, in practice, an ICP is often completed too late and for too few children. We aim to improve the coordination, quality and continuity of care for every child with a life-threatening or life-limiting condition and his/her family by further developing and implementing the ICP in the Netherlands. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: To evaluate the original ICP, ICP 1.0, interviews and questionnaires will be held among parents of children who have or have had an ICP 1.0 and healthcare professionals (HCPs) who used ICP 1.0. Based on the results, ICP 1.0 will be further developed. An implementation strategy will be written and the renewed ICP, ICP 2.0, will be nationally tested in an implementation period of approximately 7 months. During the implementation period, ICP 2.0 will be used for all children who are registered with Children’s Palliative Care teams. After the implementation period, ICP 2.0 will be evaluated using interviews and questionnaires among parents of children who received ICP 2.0 and HPCs who worked with ICP 2.0. Based on these results, ICP 2.0 will be further optimised into the final version: ICP 3.0. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study received ethical approval. The ICP 3.0 will be disseminated through the Dutch Centre of Expertise in Children’s Palliative Care, to ensure wide availability for the general public and HCPs within PPC. Additionally, we aim to publish study results in open-access, peer-reviewed journals and to present results at national and international scientific meetings

Development of the Dutch Structure for Integrated Children's Palliative Care

Children’s palliative care (CPC) is gaining attention worldwide, facilitated by the exchange of knowledge during regular specialised congresses. This article describes the developments in the Netherlands over the past 15 years. The Foundation for Children’s Palliative Expertise (PAL) was established as a nationwide initiative committed to improving palliative care for children countrywide. This led to the development of the first hospital-based CPC team in 2012, which expanded to a total of seven teams adjacent to children’s university hospitals. Regional networks for CPC were developed in parallel to these teams from 2014 onwards. The networks are a collaboration of professionals from different disciplines and organisations, from hospital to homecare, and have covered the aspects of CPC nationally from 2019 onwards. They are connected through the Dutch Knowledge Centre for CPC. This centre was established in 2018 by the PAL Foundation in collaboration with the Dutch Association for Pediatrics. In 2013, the first evidence-based guideline, ‘palliative care for children’, provided access to knowledge for parents and healthcare providers, and in 2017, a format for an individual palliative care plan was established. Within the Knowledge Centre for CPC, a physician’s support centre for dilemma’s regarding the end of life of children was set up. The efforts to have children’s palliative care embedded in the regular Dutch health care insurance are ongoing

The clinical practice guideline palliative care for children and other strategies to enhance shared decision-making in pediatric palliative care; pediatricians' critical reflections

BACKGROUND: Because of practice variation and new developments in palliative pediatric care, the Dutch Association of Pediatrics decided to develop the clinical practice guideline (CPG) palliative care for children. With this guideline, the association also wanted to precipitate an attitude shift towards shared decision-making (SDM) and therefore integrated SDM in the CPG Palliative care for children. The aim was to gain insight if integrating SDM in CPGs can potentially encourage pediatricians to practice SDM. Its objectives were to explore pediatricians' attitudes and thoughts regarding (1) recommendations on SDM in CPGs in general and the guideline Palliative care for children specifically; (2) other SDM enhancing strategies or tools linked to CPGs. METHODS: Semi-structured face-to-face interviews. Pediatricians (15) were recruited through purposive sampling in three university-based pediatric centers in the Netherlands. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, coded by at least two authors and analyzed with NVivo. RESULTS: Some pediatricians considered SDM a skill or attitude that cannot be addressed by clinical practice guidelines. According to others, however, clinical practice guidelines could enhance SDM. In case of the guideline Palliative care for children, the recommendations needed to focus more on how to practice SDM, and offer more detailed recommendations, preferring a recommendation stating multiple options. Most interviewed pediatricians felt that patient decisions aids were beneficial to patients, and could ensure that all topics relevant to the patient are covered, even topics the pediatrician might not consider him or herself, or deems less important. Regardless of the perceived benefit, some pediatricians preferred providing the information themselves instead of using a patient decision aid. CONCLUSIONS: For clinical practice guidelines to potentially enhance SDM, guideline developers should avoid blanket recommendations in the case of preference sensitive choices, and SDM should not be limited to recommendations on non-treatment decisions. Furthermore, preference sensitive recommendations are preferably linked with patient decision aids

High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous haematopoietic cell transplantation for children, adolescents, and young adults with first recurrence of Ewing sarcoma

BACKGROUND Ewing sarcoma is a solid tumour, which is the second most common primary bone malignancy in children, often occurring in the long bones and pelvis. An incidence rate of 4.5 per million a year is reported, with a peak incidence of 11 per million at the age of 12 years. Despite more intensive chemotherapy, 30% to 40% of young people with Ewing sarcoma will have recurrence of the disease. Less than 30% of young people with a recurrence of Ewing sarcoma are alive at 24 months, and less than 10% are alive at 48 months. High-dose chemotherapy (HDC), followed by autologous haematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT), is used in a variety of paediatric groups with diverse solid tumours. The hypothesis is that HDC regimens may overcome resistance to standard polychemotherapy, and this way may eradicate minimal residual disease, leading to improved survival after a first recurrence of disease. OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy of HDC with AHCT versus conventional chemotherapy in improving event-free survival, overall survival, quality-adjusted survival, and progression-free survival in children, adolescents, and young adults with first recurrence of Ewing sarcoma, and to determine the toxicity of the treatment. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, conference proceedings from the SIOP, ASPHO, CTOS, ASBMT, EBMT, and EMSOS, and two trial registries in January 2020. We also searched reference lists of relevant articles and review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA We planned to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or (historical) controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing the effectiveness of HDC plus AHCT with conventional chemotherapy for children, adolescents, and young adults (up to 30 years old at the date of diagnostic biopsy) with a first recurrence of Ewing sarcoma. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS We did not identify any eligible studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Since we did not identify any eligible studies, we are unable to draw any conclusions about the efficacy and toxicity of HDC with AHCT versus conventional chemotherapy in children, adolescents, and young adults with a first recurrence of Ewing sarcoma. Further high-quality research is urgently needed