MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3076815232 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxaa068.099

100 Just how long does it take? Using parental surveys documenting time required to provide care at home to children with medical complexity as a tool for advocacy

2020· article· en· W3076815232 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Audrey Lafontaine, Hema Patel, Isabelle St-Sauveur

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingMultidisciplinary approachMedical homeMedicinePopulationHealth careMedical educationPsychologyFamily medicinePrimary care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Children with medical complexity (CMC) constitute a growing population here and everywhere. CMC are fragile, complex, and dependent on technology. Sustainable, safe and effective care at home requires a high level of parental dedication, in knowledge, skills and time. While children thrive in the home setting, the demands on caregivers are substantial. As part of a larger advocacy project, a collaboration between healthcare professionals looking after CMC in Quebec was formed with a primary goal to create evidence-based standardized guidelines for homecare practices. During this process, wide disparities in actual care support received were noted as was the paucity of publication quantifying the time it takes to care for CMC at home. This innovative survey was planned to better describe families’ experiences and to further advocacy efforts with the development of data-driven care support recommendations. Objectives The objectives of this prospective survey were: a) to quantify daily parental expenditure of time to provide care at home to their child requiring i) parenteral nutrition (TPN), ii) peritoneal dialysis (PD), iii) noninvasive ventilation (BIPAP) or iv) tracheostomy care (TC) and b) to qualitatively explore the perceptions of parents regarding existing and desired homecare supports. Design/Methods Quebec CMC were identified through collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from each pediatric university hospital center and the provincial home ventilation program. The daily care required for CMC was described step-by-step with input from CMC’s parents with either TPN, PD, BIPAP or TC. A survey was developed to estimate time required by parents for care completion related to technology, medication, enteral feeding, maintenance of equipment and care organization. Open ended questions on parental perceptions of existing and desired homecare supports were included. The surveys were sent to all eligible families by their primary pediatrician or nurse. Data were entered into a database. For each care intervention, descriptive analyses were performed to determine the median (interquartile range) time required. Thematic analyses were used to evaluate open ended responses. Summary data was used by the expert collaboration to draft data-driven homecare support recommendations for CMC in Quebec and create request template to translate the recommendations into a practical tool for advocacy. Results A total of 87 parents of CMC were surveyed and 78 with complete quantitative data were available for analysis. For TPN, 14 surveys were available. The median (interquartile range) of total daily time dedicated to medical care was 259 (180) minutes a day, with care distributed through TPN administration and preparation (62 (49) minutes/day), enteral nutrition when indicated (42 (34) minutes/day), medication (48 (70) minutes/day) and meal (135(98) minutes/day). For PD, 12 surveys were available. Total daily time dedicated to medical care was 160 (111) minutes/day, with care distributed through dialysis administration and preparation (58 (19) minutes/day), enteral nutrition when indicated (35 (25) minutes/day), medication (35 (28) minutes/day) and other medical care (46 (24) minutes/day). For BIPAP, 39 surveys were available. Total daily time dedicated to care directly associated with BIPAP use was 18 (15) minutes/day. Total daily time dedicated to medical care was 55 (77) minutes/day when well, and 83 (180) minutes/day when sick. Respiratory care was 31 (42) minutes/day when well, and 48 (125) minutes/day when sick. Medication administration was 20 (22) minutes/day when well and 28 (60) minutes/day when sick. Personnel and equipment management was reported to take a median of 55 (interquartile range 119) minutes/week. For TC, 13 surveys were available. Total daily time dedicated to medical care was 109 (239) minutes/day, with 87 (111) minutes/days of direct tracheostomy care. Parents of CMC asked for further support in those categories: financial help, help with home task, respite, nighttime help and specialized support. Conclusion Parents provide substantial care at home for CMC. This study provides a first look at the actual time required to perform care. Although widely distributed, those time data give a first and unique overview of the task for parents taking care of CMC. Data driven recommendations for care support at home were created, along with standardized care request templates which are now in regular use in Quebec, demonstrating a powerful tool for advocacy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→