Dataset Information

Protocol for mapping psychosocial screening to resources in pediatric oncology: a pilot randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

A pediatric cancer diagnosis and its treatment can have a detrimental effect on the mental health of children and their families. Screening to identify psychosocial risk in families has been recognized as a standard of care in pediatric oncology, but there has been limited clinical application of this standard thus far. A significant impediment to the implementation of psychosocial screening is the dearth of information on how to translate psychosocial screening to clinical practice, and specifically, how to follow-up from screening results. This manuscript aims to describe a protocol of a new intervention examining the feasibility and acceptability of mapping via a Psychosocial Navigator (PSN) psychosocial screening results to specific recommendations of resources for families based on measured risk for psychosocial distress and mental health symptoms.

Methods

The pilot randomized control trial (RCT) consists of dyads of youth (10-17 years) newly diagnosed with cancer and their primary caregiver. This RCT includes two arms (intervention and control group), with each group completing measurements near diagnosis and 1 year later. After the initial assessment, dyads in the intervention group receive monthly screening results and recommendations from the study PSN that are tailored to these results. The patient's primary healthcare team (nurse, social worker, oncologist) also receive the risk, distress, and mental health results as well as the recommendations from the PSN.

Discussion

This study addresses a significant barrier to the implementation of psychosocial screening in pediatric oncology: specifically, the limited knowledge of how to follow-up from screening results. Findings from this pilot will inform a future definitive RCT to test the effectiveness of the intervention on patient and family mental health outcomes. This project has implications for enhancing clinical care in pediatric oncology, as well as other pediatric populations.

Strengths and limitations of this study

This is the first study of screening and follow-up using a psychosocial navigator. This study involves both patient and caregiver report. The small sample size necessitates a future larger study to investigate the effects of intervention.

Trial registration

NCT04132856 , Registered 10 October 2019-retrospectively registered.

SUBMITTER: Desjardins L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8285781 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIncidence of and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC) can be effectively reduced by screening with the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or colonoscopy. Individual risk to develop CRC within 15 years varies from <1% to >15% among people aged 50 to 75 years. Communicating personalized CRC risk and appropriate screening recommendations could improve the risk-benefit balance of screening test allocations and optimize the use of limited colonoscopy resources. However, significant uncertainty exists regarding the feasibility and efficacy of risk-based screening.ObjectiveWe aim to study the effect of communicating individual CRC risk and a risk-based recommendation of the FIT or colonoscopy on participants' choice of screening test. We will also assess the feasibility of a larger clinical trial designed to evaluate the impact of personalized screening on clinical outcomes.MethodsWe will perform a pilot randomized controlled trial among 880 residents aged 50 to 69 years eligible to participate in the organized screening program of the Vaud canton, Switzerland. Participants will be recruited by mail by the Vaud CRC screening program. Primary and secondary outcomes will be self-assessed through questionnaires. The risk score will be calculated using the open-source QCancer calculator that was validated in the United Kingdom. Participants will be stratified into 3 groups-low (<3%), moderate (3% to <6%), and high (≥6%) risk-according to their 15-year CRC risk and randomized within each risk stratum. The intervention group participants will receive a newly designed brochure with their personalized risk and screening recommendations. The control group will receive the usual brochure of the Vaud CRC screening program. Our primary outcome, measured using a self-administered questionnaire, is appropriate screening uptake 6 months after the intervention. Screening will be defined as appropriate if participants at high risk undertake colonoscopy and participants at low risk undertake the FIT. We will also measure the acceptability of the risk score and screening recommendations and the psychological factors influencing screening behavior. We will also assess the feasibility of a full-scale randomized controlled trial.ResultsWe expect that a total sample of 880 individuals will allow us to detect a difference of 10% (α=5%) between groups. The main outcome will be analyzed using a 2-tailed chi-squared test. We expect that appropriate screening uptake will be higher in the intervention group. No difference in overall screening uptake is expected.ConclusionsWe will test the impact of personalized risk information and screening recommendations on participants' choice of screening test in an organized screening program. This study should advance our understanding of the feasibility of large-scale risk-based CRC screening. Our results may provide insights into the optimization of CRC screening by offering screening options with a better risk-benefit balance and optimizing the use of resources.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05357508; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05357508.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/46865.

Project description:BackgroundFever in children is a major problem in pediatric oncology. Usual management leads to immediate antibiotic and antipyretic therapy, although there is consensus that antipyretic therapy should not be utilized with the sole aim of reducing body temperature. Increased body temperature during fever appears to be an effective modifier in terms of viral replication and enhanced host defense mechanisms against pathogens. Therefore, it might be beneficial to support febrile patients by applying gentle heat during the onset of fever to help the body to reach its new thermoregulatory set point.MethodsA randomized pilot study over 6 months will be conducted in a pediatric oncology department in an academic hospital in Germany. This study is a preparation for a multicenter clinical trial with two parallel groups concerning the efficacy of heat application vs. treatment as usual. One of the inclusion criteria is body temperatures ≥ 38.0 °C in n = 24 cases of patients receiving chemotherapy aged 18 months to 17 years. The first intervention consists of gentle heat application with hot water bottles at any sign of illness and onset of fever. The aim is to achieve a warm periphery equilibrated to trunk temperature of less than 0.5 °C. The second intervention is the avoidance of antipyretics. The control group receives the standard antipyretic treatment from the participating hospital. The purposes of this pilot study are proof of principle of intervention, evaluation of safety, feasibility, definition of endpoints, and to receive basic data for sample size calculation and needed resources.DiscussionThe main goal is to improve the care of children with cancer by providing the best possible support for febrile episodes. If fever support by heat reduces discomfort, administration of antipyretics and maybe even antibiotics, this would be an advancement in oncological fever management. This pilot study is intended to provide a basis for a main, multicenter, randomized trial and demonstrate the practicability of heat application in febrile patients in pediatric oncology.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), DRKS00028273 . Registered on 14 April 2022.

Project description:BackgroundChildren presenting to emergency departments of community hospitals may require transfer to a children's hospital for more definitive care, but the transfer process can be distressing and burdensome to patients, families, and the healthcare system. Using telehealth to bring the children's hospital nurse virtually to the bedside of the child in the emergency department has the potential to promote family-centered care and minimize triage issues and other transfer-associated burdens. To explore the feasibility of the nurse-to-family telehealth intervention, we are conducting a pilot study.MethodsThis parallel cluster randomized controlled feasibility and pilot trial will randomize six community emergency departments to use either nurse-to-family telehealth (intervention) or usual care (control) for pediatric inter-facility transfers. All eligible children presenting to a participating site during the study period who require inter-facility transfer will be included. Eligibility requires that there be an English-speaking adult parent or guardian at the emergency department bedside. We will examine feasibility objectives that assess protocol assignment adherence, fidelity, and survey response rates. We will measure subject-level exploratory outcome data to test feasibility of data collection and to obtain effect size estimates; exploratory outcomes include family-centered care, family experience, parent acute stress, parent distress, and change in level of care. Additionally, we will conduct a mixed methods implementation evaluation using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework.DiscussionThe findings from this trial will increase our understanding about nurse-to-family telehealth during pediatric transfers. The mixed methods implementation evaluation will provide relevant insight about the contextual factors that influence the implementation and rigorous evaluation of our intervention.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05593900. First Posted: October 26, 2022. Last Update Posted: December 5, 2022.

Project description:BackgroundClinical significance in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) can be determined using the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), which should inform the delta value used to determine sample size. The primary objective was to assess clinical significance in the pediatric oncology randomized controlled trial (RCT) treatment literature by evaluating: (1) the relationship between the treatment effect and the delta value as reported in the sample size calculation, and (2) the concordance between statistical and clinical significance. The secondary objective was to evaluate the reporting of methodological attributes related to clinical significance.MethodsRCTs of pediatric cancer treatments, where a sample size calculation with a delta value was reported or could be calculated, were systematically reviewed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Childhood Cancer Group Specialized Register through CENTRAL were searched from inception to July 2016.ResultsRCTs (77 overall; 11 and 66), representing 95 (13 and 82) randomized questions were included for non-inferiority and superiority RCTs (herein, respectively). The minority (22.1% overall; 76.9 and 13.4%) of randomized questions reported conclusions based on clinical significance, and only 4.2% (15.4 and 2.4%) explicitly based the delta value on the MCID. Over half (67.4% overall; 92.3 and 63.4%) reported a confidence interval or standard error for the primary outcome experimental and control values and 12.6% (46.2 and 7.3%) reported the treatment effect, respectively. Of the 47 randomized questions in superiority trials that reported statistically non-significant findings, 25.5% were possibly clinically significant. Of the 24 randomized questions in superiority trials that were statistically significant, only 8.3% were definitely clinically significant.ConclusionsA minority of RCTs in the pediatric oncology literature reported methodological attributes related to clinical significance and a notable portion of statistically insignificant studies were possibly clinically significance.

Project description:BackgroundVirtual reality (VR) has shown promise in reducing children's pain and anxiety during venipuncture, but studies on VR lack objective observations of pediatric coping. Notably, the process of capturing objective behavioral coping data can be labor- and personnel-intensive.ObjectiveThe primary aims of this pilot trial were to assess the feasibility of conducting a trial of VR in a pediatric emergency department and the feasibility of documenting observed coping behaviors during pediatric procedures. Secondarily, this study examined whether VR affects child and caregiver coping and distress during venipuncture in the pediatric emergency department.MethodsThis stratified, randomized, controlled pilot trial compared coping and distress between child life-supported VR engagement and child life specialist support without VR during painful procedures in children aged 7-22 years in the pediatric emergency department. An external control (reference group) received no standardized support. Primary feasibility outcomes included rates of recruitment, rates of withdrawal from VR, and rates of completed Child Adult Medical Procedure Interaction Scale-Short Form (CAMPIS-SF) observations. Secondary clinical outcomes were applied to venipuncture procedures and included CAMPIS-SF coping and distress (range 0-1.0), pain and anxiety on a visual analog scale (range 0-10), and cybersickness symptoms.ResultsOverall recruitment was 93% (66/71), VR withdrawal rate was 27% (4/15), and of the completed procedures, 100% (63/63) CAMPIS-SF observations were completed. A total of 55 patients undergoing venipuncture in the pediatric emergency department were included in the analyses of clinical outcomes: 15 patients (15 caregivers) randomized to VR, 20 patients (15 caregivers) randomized to child life specialist support, and 20 patients (17 caregivers) in the reference group. Patient coping differed across groups with higher coping in the VR group and child life specialist group than in the reference group (P=.046). There were no significant differences in the distress and pain ratings for patients and caregivers between the groups. Caregivers rated the lowest perceived anxiety in the child life specialist group (P=.03). There was no apparent change in cybersickness symptoms before and after VR use (P=.37).ConclusionsReal-time documentation of observed behaviors in patients and caregivers was feasible during medical procedures in which VR was utilized, particularly with the availability of research staff. VR and child life specialists improved coping in children during venipuncture procedures. Given the high participation rate, future studies to evaluate the efficacy of VR are recommended to determine whether an off-the-shelf VR headset can be a low-cost and low-risk tool to improve children's coping during venipuncture or other related procedures.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03686176; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03686176.