A qualitative feasibility study to inform a randomised controlled trial of fluid bolus therapy in septic shock

被引:40
作者
O'Hara, Caitlin B. [1 ]
Canter, Ruth R. [2 ]
Mouncey, Paul R. [2 ]
Carter, Anjali [3 ]
Jones, Nicola [3 ]
Nadel, Simon [4 ]
Peters, Mark J. [5 ,6 ]
Lyttle, Mark D. [7 ,8 ]
Harrison, David A. [2 ]
Rowan, Kathryn M. [2 ]
Inwald, David [4 ]
Woolfall, Kerry [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Liverpool, Inst Psychol Hlth & Soc, Block B,Room B112,Waterhouse Bldg, Liverpool L69 3GL, Merseyside, England
[2] Intens Care Natl Audit & Res Ctr ICNARC, Clin Trials Unit, London, England
[3] Patient & Publ Involvement Partner, Watford, England
[4] Imperial Coll Healthcare NHS Trust, St Marys Hosp, Paediat Intens Care Unit, London, England
[5] UCL, Inst Child Hlth, London, England
[6] Great Ormond St Hosp NHS Fdn Trust, London, England
[7] Univ West England, Fac Hlth & Appl Sci, Bristol, Avon, England
[8] Bristol Royal Hosp Children, Emergency Dept, Upper Maudlin St, Bristol, Avon, England
关键词
EMERGENCY RESEARCH; DEFERRED CONSENT; MEDICAL-RESEARCH; CARE RESEARCH; CHILDREN; PATIENT; HEALTH; PARTICIPATION; CONSULTATION; INTERVIEWS;
D O I
10.1136/archdischild-2016-312515
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
Objective The Fluids in Shock (FiSh) Trial proposes to evaluate whether restrictive fluid bolus therapy (10 mL/kg) is more beneficial than current recommended practice (20 mL/kg) in the resuscitation of children with septic shock in the UK. This qualitative feasibility study aimed to explore acceptability of the FiSh Trial, including research without prior consent (RWPC), potential barriers to recruitment and participant information for a pilot trial. Design Qualitative interview study involving parents of children who had presented to a UK emergency department or been admitted to a paediatric intensive care unit with severe infection in the previous 3 years. Participants Twenty-one parents (seven bereaved) were interviewed 16 (median) months since their child's hospital admission (range: 1-41). Results All parents said they would have provided consent for the use of their child's data in the FiSh Trial. The majority were unfamiliar with RWPC, yet supported its use. Parents were initially concerned about the change from currently recommended treatment, yet were reassured by explanations of the current evidence base, fluid bolus therapy and monitoring procedures. Parents made recommendations about the timing of the research discussion and content of participant information. Bereaved parents stated that recruiters should not discuss research immediately after a child's death, but supported a personalised postal 'opt-out' approach to consent. Conclusions Findings show that parents whose child has experienced severe infection supported the proposed FiSh Trial, including the use of RWPC. Parents' views informed the development of the pilot trial protocol and site staff training.
引用
收藏
页码:28 / 32
页数:5
相关论文
共 46 条
[1]  
Baker S.E., 2012, Expert voices and early career reflections on sampling and cases in qualitative research, P1
[2]  
Braun V., 2006, QUAL RES PSYCHOL, V3, P77, DOI [10.1191/1478088706qp063oa, DOI 10.1191/1478088706QP063OA]
[3]   What can "thematic analysis" offer health and wellbeing researchers? [J].
Braun, Virginia ;
Clarke, Victoria .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF QUALITATIVE STUDIES ON HEALTH AND WELL-BEING, 2014, 9
[4]   Emergency research in children: options for ethical recruitment [J].
Brierley, Joe ;
Larcher, Vic .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2011, 37 (07) :429-432
[5]   Clinical practice parameters for hemodynamic support of pediatric and neonatal septic shock: 2007 update from the American College of Critical Care Medicine [J].
Brierley, Joe ;
Carcillo, Joseph A. ;
Choong, Karen ;
Cornell, Tim ;
DeCaen, Allan ;
Deymann, Andreas ;
Doctor, Allan ;
Davis, Alan ;
Duff, John ;
Dugas, Marc-Andre ;
Duncan, Alan ;
Evans, Barry ;
Feldman, Jonathan ;
Felmet, Kathryn ;
Fisher, Gene ;
Frankel, Lorry ;
Jeffries, Howard ;
Greenwald, Bruce ;
Gutierrez, Juan ;
Hall, Mark ;
Han, Yong Y. ;
Hanson, James ;
Hazelzet, Jan ;
Hernan, Lynn ;
Kiff, Jane ;
Kissoon, Niranjan ;
Kon, Alexander ;
Irazusta, Jose ;
Lin, John ;
Lorts, Angie ;
Mariscalco, Michelle ;
Mehta, Renuka ;
Nadel, Simon ;
Nguyen, Trung ;
Nicholson, Carol ;
Peters, Mark ;
Okhuysen-Cawley, Regina ;
Poulton, Tom ;
Relves, Monica ;
Rodriguez, Agustin ;
Rozenfeld, Ranna ;
Schnitzler, Eduardo ;
Shanley, Tom ;
Skache, Sara ;
Skippen, Peter ;
Torres, Adalberto ;
von Dessauer, Bettina ;
Weingarten, Jacki ;
Yeh, Timothy ;
Zaritsky, Arno .
CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2009, 37 (02) :666-688
[6]   Standard 1: Consent and Recruitment [J].
Caldwell, Patrina H. Y. ;
Dans, Leonila ;
de Vries, Martine C. ;
Newman, Jenny ;
Sammons, Helen ;
Spriggs, Merle ;
Tambe, Parag ;
Van't Hoff, William ;
Woolfall, Kerry ;
Young, Bridget ;
Offringa, Martin .
PEDIATRICS, 2012, 129 :S118-S123
[7]   Good practice in consent [J].
Cooke, RWI .
SEMINARS IN FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE, 2005, 10 (01) :63-71
[8]  
Department of Health, 2004, MED HUM US REG 2004
[9]   Quality improvement report - Improving design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: ProtecT (prostate testing for cancer and treatment) study [J].
Donovan, J ;
Mills, N ;
Smith, M ;
Brindle, L ;
Jacoby, A ;
Peters, T ;
Frankel, S ;
Neal, D ;
Hamdy, F .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 325 (7367) :766-769
[10]   Impact of patient involvement in mental health research: longitudinal study [J].
Ennis, Liam ;
Wykes, Til .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2013, 203 (05) :381-386