Voices of experience: insights from Dutch parents on periviability guidelines and personalisation.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS
Lien De Proost, Angret de Boer, Eduard Verhagen, Marije Hogeveen, Rosa Geurtzen, E J T Joanne Verweij
{"title":"Voices of experience: insights from Dutch parents on periviability guidelines and personalisation.","authors":"Lien De Proost, Angret de Boer, Eduard Verhagen, Marije Hogeveen, Rosa Geurtzen, E J T Joanne Verweij","doi":"10.1136/archdischild-2024-327398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the perspectives of experienced parents regarding guidelines and personalisation for managing imminent extremely premature births (22-26 weeks gestational age (GA)) . The study examined four scenarios: no guideline, a guideline based on GA, a guideline based on GA plus other factors and a guideline based on a calculated prognosis.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Nineteen semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with Dutch parents who experienced (imminent) extremely premature births between 23+5 and 26+2 weeks of gestation. Diversity was aimed for through purposive sampling from a database created prior to this study. Four of the parents opted for palliative care. Among the parents who chose intensive care, in nine cases the infant(s) survived.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All participants acknowledged the necessity of having a periviability guideline because it would provide valuable decision-making support, and counterbalance decisions solely based on parental instincts to save their infant. Parents preferred guidelines that considered multiple prognostic factors beyond GA alone, without overwhelming parents with information, because more information would not necessarily make the decision easier for parents. Personalisation was defined by parents mainly as 'being seen and heard' and associated with building relationships with healthcare professionals and effective communication between them and professionals.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results underscore the importance of having a periviability guideline including multiple prognostic factors to assist parents in making decisions at the limit of viability, and the importance of a personalised care approach to meet parental needs in the context of imminent extremely preterm birth.</p>","PeriodicalId":8177,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal and Neonatal Edition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal and Neonatal Edition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2024-327398","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the perspectives of experienced parents regarding guidelines and personalisation for managing imminent extremely premature births (22-26 weeks gestational age (GA)) . The study examined four scenarios: no guideline, a guideline based on GA, a guideline based on GA plus other factors and a guideline based on a calculated prognosis.

Design: Nineteen semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with Dutch parents who experienced (imminent) extremely premature births between 23+5 and 26+2 weeks of gestation. Diversity was aimed for through purposive sampling from a database created prior to this study. Four of the parents opted for palliative care. Among the parents who chose intensive care, in nine cases the infant(s) survived.

Results: All participants acknowledged the necessity of having a periviability guideline because it would provide valuable decision-making support, and counterbalance decisions solely based on parental instincts to save their infant. Parents preferred guidelines that considered multiple prognostic factors beyond GA alone, without overwhelming parents with information, because more information would not necessarily make the decision easier for parents. Personalisation was defined by parents mainly as 'being seen and heard' and associated with building relationships with healthcare professionals and effective communication between them and professionals.

Conclusions: The results underscore the importance of having a periviability guideline including multiple prognostic factors to assist parents in making decisions at the limit of viability, and the importance of a personalised care approach to meet parental needs in the context of imminent extremely preterm birth.

经验之谈:荷兰家长对可持续发展指南和个性化的见解。
目的调查有经验的父母对即将发生的极早产(胎龄 22-26 周)管理指南和个性化的看法。研究考察了四种情况:无指南、基于胎龄的指南、基于胎龄和其他因素的指南以及基于计算预后的指南:设计:对妊娠 23+5 周至 26+2 周之间经历过(即将发生)极早产的荷兰父母进行了 19 次半结构式定性访谈。通过从本研究之前建立的数据库中进行有目的的抽样,旨在实现多样性。其中四名父母选择了姑息治疗。在选择重症监护的父母中,有 9 例婴儿存活下来:结果:所有参与者都认为有必要制定围产期指南,因为它能提供宝贵的决策支持,并抵消父母仅凭本能做出的抢救婴儿的决定。家长们更倾向于制定考虑多种预后因素的指南,而不仅仅是考虑GA,同时又不会给家长们带来过多的信息,因为更多的信息并不一定会让家长们更容易做出决定。家长对个性化的定义主要是 "被看到和听到",并与医护人员建立关系以及家长与专业人员之间的有效沟通有关:研究结果强调了制定包括多种预后因素在内的围产期指南的重要性,以帮助父母在胎儿存活极限时做出决定,同时也强调了在极早产即将发生的情况下,采取个性化护理方法以满足父母需求的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
4.50%
发文量
90
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Archives of Disease in Childhood is an international peer review journal that aims to keep paediatricians and others up to date with advances in the diagnosis and treatment of childhood diseases as well as advocacy issues such as child protection. It focuses on all aspects of child health and disease from the perinatal period (in the Fetal and Neonatal edition) through to adolescence. ADC includes original research reports, commentaries, reviews of clinical and policy issues, and evidence reports. Areas covered include: community child health, public health, epidemiology, acute paediatrics, advocacy, and ethics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信