Timing of Stoma Closure in Neonates: the ToSCiN mixed-methods study.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Nick Lansdale, Kerry Woolfall, Elizabeth Deja, Tracy Mitchell, Graciaa Singhal, Raphael Goldacre, Rema Ramakrishnan, Nigel Hall, Cheryl Battersby, Chris Gale, Gareth Penman, Marian Knight, Kayleigh Stanbury, Madeleine Hurd, David Murray, Louise Linsell, Pollyanna Hardy
{"title":"Timing of Stoma Closure in Neonates: the ToSCiN mixed-methods study.","authors":"Nick Lansdale, Kerry Woolfall, Elizabeth Deja, Tracy Mitchell, Graciaa Singhal, Raphael Goldacre, Rema Ramakrishnan, Nigel Hall, Cheryl Battersby, Chris Gale, Gareth Penman, Marian Knight, Kayleigh Stanbury, Madeleine Hurd, David Murray, Louise Linsell, Pollyanna Hardy","doi":"10.3310/JFBC1893","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Neonates undergoing emergency abdominal surgery frequently require a stoma; closing this stoma with a second operation is an essential part of recovery. Timing of closure varies. Optimal timing is unclear and would be best resolved through a randomised controlled trial; such a trial is likely to be challenging.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To determine if it is feasible to conduct a clinical trial comparing 'early' versus 'late' stoma closure in neonates.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Mixed methods comprising three parallel workstreams incorporating: a clinician survey, prospective observational cohort study, parent interviews, focus groups, database analyses and consensus meeting.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Specialist neonatal surgical centres across the United Kingdom.</p><p><strong>Participants and data sources: </strong>Neonatologists, neonatal surgeons, neonatal dietitians and neonatal nurses who care for neonates with stomas. Neonates with recent stoma, their parents and the clinicians looking after them. Three existing, overlapping clinical databases.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and sixty-six professionals from all 27 neonatal surgical centres completed the survey: 6 weeks was the most common target time for stoma closure across clinical scenarios, although there was wide variation. Timing of closure was influenced by nutrition, growth and stoma complications. The prospective cohort study enrolled 56 infants from 8 centres. Infants were mostly preterm with necrotising enterocolitis or intestinal perforation. Clinicians identified extreme preterm gestation and clinical conditions as reasons for not randomising babies into a hypothetical trial comparing early and late stoma closure. Parents and healthcare professionals identified that comparator arms needed more clinical flexibility in relation to timing of stoma closure. Analysis of existing databases revealed wide variation in current timing of stoma closure in neonates and identified approximately 300 eligible infants for a trial per annum in the United Kingdom.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A trial of 'early' compared to 'late' stoma closure in neonates is feasible and is important to families and health professionals. The population of eligible babies in the United Kingdom is sufficient for such a trial. Challenges centre around lack of equipoise in certain scenarios, specifically: extremely preterm infants; infants waiting too long for stoma closure in the 'late' comparator; and logistical issues in closing a stoma at a trial-allocated time. These challenges are addressable by incorporating flexibility based on gestation at birth, communicating that both trial arms are standard practice and valid treatment options, and providing resources, for example, for operating lists.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>We recommend the following population, intervention, comparator and outcome as a starting point to inform future trial design. Population: neonates with stomas (excluding those with a fixed treatment pathway). Intervention: stoma closure at 6 weeks and after 32 weeks post conceptual age. Comparator: expectant management with stoma closure undertaken when the clinical team determines is best for the infant. Primary outcomes: weight gain/growth or length of hospital stay.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>This study is registered as IRAS Project ID 278331, REC Reference 20/LO/1227.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR128617) and is published in full in <i>Health Technology Assessment</i>; Vol. 28, No. 71. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":"28 71","pages":"1-130"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11590118/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/JFBC1893","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Neonates undergoing emergency abdominal surgery frequently require a stoma; closing this stoma with a second operation is an essential part of recovery. Timing of closure varies. Optimal timing is unclear and would be best resolved through a randomised controlled trial; such a trial is likely to be challenging.

Aim: To determine if it is feasible to conduct a clinical trial comparing 'early' versus 'late' stoma closure in neonates.

Design: Mixed methods comprising three parallel workstreams incorporating: a clinician survey, prospective observational cohort study, parent interviews, focus groups, database analyses and consensus meeting.

Setting: Specialist neonatal surgical centres across the United Kingdom.

Participants and data sources: Neonatologists, neonatal surgeons, neonatal dietitians and neonatal nurses who care for neonates with stomas. Neonates with recent stoma, their parents and the clinicians looking after them. Three existing, overlapping clinical databases.

Results: One hundred and sixty-six professionals from all 27 neonatal surgical centres completed the survey: 6 weeks was the most common target time for stoma closure across clinical scenarios, although there was wide variation. Timing of closure was influenced by nutrition, growth and stoma complications. The prospective cohort study enrolled 56 infants from 8 centres. Infants were mostly preterm with necrotising enterocolitis or intestinal perforation. Clinicians identified extreme preterm gestation and clinical conditions as reasons for not randomising babies into a hypothetical trial comparing early and late stoma closure. Parents and healthcare professionals identified that comparator arms needed more clinical flexibility in relation to timing of stoma closure. Analysis of existing databases revealed wide variation in current timing of stoma closure in neonates and identified approximately 300 eligible infants for a trial per annum in the United Kingdom.

Conclusions: A trial of 'early' compared to 'late' stoma closure in neonates is feasible and is important to families and health professionals. The population of eligible babies in the United Kingdom is sufficient for such a trial. Challenges centre around lack of equipoise in certain scenarios, specifically: extremely preterm infants; infants waiting too long for stoma closure in the 'late' comparator; and logistical issues in closing a stoma at a trial-allocated time. These challenges are addressable by incorporating flexibility based on gestation at birth, communicating that both trial arms are standard practice and valid treatment options, and providing resources, for example, for operating lists.

Future work: We recommend the following population, intervention, comparator and outcome as a starting point to inform future trial design. Population: neonates with stomas (excluding those with a fixed treatment pathway). Intervention: stoma closure at 6 weeks and after 32 weeks post conceptual age. Comparator: expectant management with stoma closure undertaken when the clinical team determines is best for the infant. Primary outcomes: weight gain/growth or length of hospital stay.

Study registration: This study is registered as IRAS Project ID 278331, REC Reference 20/LO/1227.

Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR128617) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 71. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

新生儿造口关闭时机:ToSCiN 混合方法研究。
背景:接受急诊腹部手术的新生儿经常需要造口;通过第二次手术关闭造口是恢复过程中必不可少的一部分。关闭造口的时机各不相同。最佳时机尚不明确,最好通过随机对照试验来解决;这样的试验可能具有挑战性。目的:确定在新生儿中比较 "早期 "和 "晚期 "造口关闭是否可行:混合方法,包括三个并行的工作流:临床医生调查、前瞻性观察队列研究、家长访谈、焦点小组、数据库分析和共识会议:地点:英国各地的新生儿外科专科中心:新生儿科医生、新生儿外科医生、新生儿营养师和护理造口新生儿的新生儿护士。近期造口的新生儿、他们的父母和照顾他们的临床医生。三个现有的、相互重叠的临床数据库:来自全部 27 个新生儿外科中心的 166 名专业人员完成了调查:在各种临床情况下,6 周是最常见的造口关闭目标时间,但差异很大。造口关闭的时间受到营养、生长和造口并发症的影响。这项前瞻性队列研究从 8 个中心招募了 56 名婴儿。婴儿大多是早产儿,患有坏死性小肠结肠炎或肠穿孔。临床医生认为,极度早产和临床条件是不将婴儿随机纳入造口早期关闭和晚期关闭比较假设试验的原因。家长和医护人员认为,在造口闭合时间方面,参照组需要更大的临床灵活性。对现有数据库的分析表明,目前新生儿造口关闭的时间差异很大,英国每年约有 300 名符合试验条件的婴儿:新生儿造口关闭 "早期 "与 "晚期 "的对比试验是可行的,而且对家庭和医疗专业人员非常重要。英国符合条件的婴儿数量足以开展此类试验。挑战主要集中在某些情况下缺乏均衡性,特别是:极早产儿;在 "晚期 "比较者中等待造口关闭时间过长的婴儿;以及在试验分配时间关闭造口的后勤问题。这些挑战都可以通过以下方式解决:根据婴儿出生时的妊娠情况灵活处理;宣传两个试验组都是标准做法和有效的治疗方案;提供资源,例如手术清单:我们建议将以下人群、干预措施、参照物和结果作为起点,为今后的试验设计提供参考。人群:有造口的新生儿(不包括有固定治疗路径的新生儿)。干预措施:在概念年龄后 6 周和 32 周后关闭造口。比较者:预期管理,在临床团队认为最适合婴儿时进行造口缝合。主要结果:体重增加/生长或住院时间:本研究注册为 IRAS 项目编号 278331,REC 编号 20/LO/1227:该奖项由美国国家健康与护理研究所(NIHR)健康技术评估计划资助(NIHR奖项编号:NIHR128617),全文发表于《健康技术评估》(Health Technology Assessment)第28卷第71期。如需了解更多奖项信息,请参阅 NIHR Funding and Awards 网站。
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
Health technology assessment
Health technology assessment 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Technology Assessment (HTA) publishes research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS.
×
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