Cargando…
Establishing and augmenting views on the acceptability of a paediatric critical care randomised controlled trial (the FEVER trial): a mixed methods study
OBJECTIVE: To explore parent and staff views on the acceptability of a randomised controlled trial investigating temperature thresholds for antipyretic intervention in critically ill children with fever and infection (the FEVER trial) during a multi-phase pilot study. DESIGN: Mixed methods study wit...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7949453/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33692177 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041952 |
_version_ | 1783663515636072448 |
---|---|
author | Deja, Elizabeth Peters, Mark J Khan, Imran Mouncey, Paul R Agbeko, Rachel Fenn, Blaise Watkins, Jason Ramnarayan, Padmanabhan Tibby, Shane M Thorburn, Kentigern Tume, Lyvonne N Rowan, Kathryn M Woolfall, Kerry |
author_facet | Deja, Elizabeth Peters, Mark J Khan, Imran Mouncey, Paul R Agbeko, Rachel Fenn, Blaise Watkins, Jason Ramnarayan, Padmanabhan Tibby, Shane M Thorburn, Kentigern Tume, Lyvonne N Rowan, Kathryn M Woolfall, Kerry |
author_sort | Deja, Elizabeth |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To explore parent and staff views on the acceptability of a randomised controlled trial investigating temperature thresholds for antipyretic intervention in critically ill children with fever and infection (the FEVER trial) during a multi-phase pilot study. DESIGN: Mixed methods study with data collected at three time points: (1) before, (2) during and (3) after a pilot trial. SETTING: English, Paediatric Intensive Care Units (PICUs). PARTICIPANTS: (1) Pre-pilot trial focus groups with pilot site staff (n=56) and interviews with parents (n=25) whose child had been admitted to PICU in the last 3 years with a fever and suspected infection, (2) Questionnaires with parents of randomised children following pilot trial recruitment (n=48 from 47 families) and (3) post-pilot trial interviews with parents (n=19), focus groups (n=50) and a survey (n=48) with site staff. Analysis drew on Sekhon et al’s theoretical framework of acceptability. RESULTS: There was initial support for the trial, yet some held concerns regarding the proposed temperature thresholds and not using paracetamol for pain or discomfort. Pre-trial findings informed protocol changes and training, which influenced views on trial acceptability. Staff trained by the FEVER team found the trial more acceptable than those trained by colleagues. Parents and staff found the trial acceptable. Some concerns about pain or discomfort during weaning from ventilation remained. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-trial findings and pilot trial experience influenced acceptability, providing insight into how challenges may be overcome. We present an adapted theoretical framework of acceptability to inform future trial feasibility studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ISRCTN16022198 and NCT03028818. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7949453 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79494532021-03-28 Establishing and augmenting views on the acceptability of a paediatric critical care randomised controlled trial (the FEVER trial): a mixed methods study Deja, Elizabeth Peters, Mark J Khan, Imran Mouncey, Paul R Agbeko, Rachel Fenn, Blaise Watkins, Jason Ramnarayan, Padmanabhan Tibby, Shane M Thorburn, Kentigern Tume, Lyvonne N Rowan, Kathryn M Woolfall, Kerry BMJ Open Intensive Care OBJECTIVE: To explore parent and staff views on the acceptability of a randomised controlled trial investigating temperature thresholds for antipyretic intervention in critically ill children with fever and infection (the FEVER trial) during a multi-phase pilot study. DESIGN: Mixed methods study with data collected at three time points: (1) before, (2) during and (3) after a pilot trial. SETTING: English, Paediatric Intensive Care Units (PICUs). PARTICIPANTS: (1) Pre-pilot trial focus groups with pilot site staff (n=56) and interviews with parents (n=25) whose child had been admitted to PICU in the last 3 years with a fever and suspected infection, (2) Questionnaires with parents of randomised children following pilot trial recruitment (n=48 from 47 families) and (3) post-pilot trial interviews with parents (n=19), focus groups (n=50) and a survey (n=48) with site staff. Analysis drew on Sekhon et al’s theoretical framework of acceptability. RESULTS: There was initial support for the trial, yet some held concerns regarding the proposed temperature thresholds and not using paracetamol for pain or discomfort. Pre-trial findings informed protocol changes and training, which influenced views on trial acceptability. Staff trained by the FEVER team found the trial more acceptable than those trained by colleagues. Parents and staff found the trial acceptable. Some concerns about pain or discomfort during weaning from ventilation remained. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-trial findings and pilot trial experience influenced acceptability, providing insight into how challenges may be overcome. We present an adapted theoretical framework of acceptability to inform future trial feasibility studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ISRCTN16022198 and NCT03028818. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-03-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7949453/ /pubmed/33692177 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041952 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Intensive Care Deja, Elizabeth Peters, Mark J Khan, Imran Mouncey, Paul R Agbeko, Rachel Fenn, Blaise Watkins, Jason Ramnarayan, Padmanabhan Tibby, Shane M Thorburn, Kentigern Tume, Lyvonne N Rowan, Kathryn M Woolfall, Kerry Establishing and augmenting views on the acceptability of a paediatric critical care randomised controlled trial (the FEVER trial): a mixed methods study |
title | Establishing and augmenting views on the acceptability of a paediatric critical care randomised controlled trial (the FEVER trial): a mixed methods study |
title_full | Establishing and augmenting views on the acceptability of a paediatric critical care randomised controlled trial (the FEVER trial): a mixed methods study |
title_fullStr | Establishing and augmenting views on the acceptability of a paediatric critical care randomised controlled trial (the FEVER trial): a mixed methods study |
title_full_unstemmed | Establishing and augmenting views on the acceptability of a paediatric critical care randomised controlled trial (the FEVER trial): a mixed methods study |
title_short | Establishing and augmenting views on the acceptability of a paediatric critical care randomised controlled trial (the FEVER trial): a mixed methods study |
title_sort | establishing and augmenting views on the acceptability of a paediatric critical care randomised controlled trial (the fever trial): a mixed methods study |
topic | Intensive Care |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7949453/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33692177 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041952 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dejaelizabeth establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy AT petersmarkj establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy AT khanimran establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy AT mounceypaulr establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy AT agbekorachel establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy AT fennblaise establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy AT watkinsjason establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy AT ramnarayanpadmanabhan establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy AT tibbyshanem establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy AT thorburnkentigern establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy AT tumelyvonnen establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy AT rowankathrynm establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy AT woolfallkerry establishingandaugmentingviewsontheacceptabilityofapaediatriccriticalcarerandomisedcontrolledtrialthefevertrialamixedmethodsstudy |