Asynchronous video messaging promotes family involvement and mitigates separation in neonatal care

From BMJ via Jisc Publications RouterVoR closed-deposited 2020-09-16; AM deposited OA 2020-12-01.Objective: To evaluate the parent and staff experience of a secure video messaging service as a component of neonatal care. Design: Multicentre evaluation incorporating quantitative and qualitative items. Setting: Level II and level III UK neonatal units. Population: Families of neonatal inpatients and neonatal staff. Intervention: Use of a secure, cloud-based asynchronous video messaging service to send short messages from neonatal staff to families. Evaluation undertaken July–November 2019. Main outcome measures: Parental experience, including anxiety, involvement in care, relationships between parents and staff, and breastmilk expression. Results: In pre-implementation surveys (n=41), families reported high levels of stress and anxiety and were receptive to use of the service. In post-implementation surveys (n=42), 88% perceived a benefit of the service on their neonatal experience. Families rated a positive impact of the service on anxiety, sleep, family involvement and relationships with staff. Qualitative responses indicated enhanced emotional closeness, increased involvement in care and a positive effect on breastmilk expression. Seventy-seven post-implementation staff surveys were also collected. Staff rated the service as easy to use, with minimal impact on workload. Seventy-one percent (n=55) felt the service had a positive impact on relationships with families. Staff identified the need to manage parental expectations in relation to the number of videos that could be sent. Conclusions: Asynchronous video messaging improves parental experience, emotional closeness to their baby and builds supportive relationships between families and staff. Asynchronous video supports models of family integrated care and can mitigate family separation, which could be particularly relevant during the COVID-19 pandemic.https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2020-319353106pubpub

Oral abstracts 3: RA Treatment and outcomesO13. Validation of jadas in all subtypes of juvenile idiopathic arthritis in a clinical setting

Background: Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score (JADAS) is a 4 variable composite disease activity (DA) score for JIA (including active 10, 27 or 71 joint count (AJC), physician global (PGA), parent/child global (PGE) and ESR). The validity of JADAS for all ILAR subtypes in the routine clinical setting is unknown. We investigated the construct validity of JADAS in the clinical setting in all subtypes of JIA through application to a prospective inception cohort of UK children presenting with new onset inflammatory arthritis. Methods: JADAS 10, 27 and 71 were determined for all children in the Childhood Arthritis Prospective Study (CAPS) with complete data available at baseline. Correlation of JADAS 10, 27 and 71 with single DA markers was determined for all subtypes. All correlations were calculated using Spearman's rank statistic. Results: 262/1238 visits had sufficient data for calculation of JADAS (1028 (83%) AJC, 744 (60%) PGA, 843 (68%) PGE and 459 (37%) ESR). Median age at disease onset was 6.0 years (IQR 2.6-10.4) and 64% were female. Correlation between JADAS 10, 27 and 71 approached 1 for all subtypes. Median JADAS 71 was 5.3 (IQR 2.2-10.1) with a significant difference between median JADAS scores between subtypes (p < 0.01). Correlation of JADAS 71 with each single marker of DA was moderate to high in the total cohort (see Table 1). Overall, correlation with AJC, PGA and PGE was moderate to high and correlation with ESR, limited JC, parental pain and CHAQ was low to moderate in the individual subtypes. Correlation coefficients in the extended oligoarticular, rheumatoid factor negative and enthesitis related subtypes were interpreted with caution in view of low numbers. Conclusions: This study adds to the body of evidence supporting the construct validity of JADAS. JADAS correlates with other measures of DA in all ILAR subtypes in the routine clinical setting. Given the high frequency of missing ESR data, it would be useful to assess the validity of JADAS without inclusion of the ESR. Disclosure statement: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest. Table 1Spearman's correlation between JADAS 71 and single markers DA by ILAR subtype ILAR Subtype Systemic onset JIA Persistent oligo JIA Extended oligo JIA Rheumatoid factor neg JIA Rheumatoid factor pos JIA Enthesitis related JIA Psoriatic JIA Undifferentiated JIA Unknown subtype Total cohort Number of children 23 111 12 57 7 9 19 7 17 262 AJC 0.54 0.67 0.53 0.75 0.53 0.34 0.59 0.81 0.37 0.59 PGA 0.63 0.69 0.25 0.73 0.14 0.05 0.50 0.83 0.56 0.64 PGE 0.51 0.68 0.83 0.61 0.41 0.69 0.71 0.9 0.48 0.61 ESR 0.28 0.31 0.35 0.4 0.6 0.85 0.43 0.7 0.5 0.53 Limited 71 JC 0.29 0.51 0.23 0.37 0.14 -0.12 0.4 0.81 0.45 0.41 Parental pain 0.23 0.62 0.03 0.57 0.41 0.69 0.7 0.79 0.42 0.53 Childhood health assessment questionnaire 0.25 0.57 -0.07 0.36 -0.47 0.84 0.37 0.8 0.66 0.4

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

Background: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. Methods: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. Findings: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96–1·28). Interpretation: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. METHODS: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. FINDINGS: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96-1·28). INTERPRETATION: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme