Psychosocial support for families of children with neurodisability who have or are considering a gastrostomy: the G-PATH mixed-methods study

Background: Evidence reviews recommend consistent and structured support for children with neurodisability and their caregivers in care pathways in which professionals recommend a gastrostomy feeding tube. To date, and to our knowledge, no research has shown how these recommendations have been imple...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Health services and delivery research 2020-10, Vol.8 (38), p.1-126
Hauptverfasser: Craig, Gillian M, Hajdukova, Eva Brown, Harding, Celia, Flood, Chris, McCourt, Christine, Sellers, Diane, Townsend, Joy, Moss, Dawn, Tuffrey, Catherine, Donaldson, Bryony, Cole, Maxime, Gill, Anna
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background: Evidence reviews recommend consistent and structured support for children with neurodisability and their caregivers in care pathways in which professionals recommend a gastrostomy feeding tube. To date, and to our knowledge, no research has shown how these recommendations have been implemented. Objectives: The objectives were to describe different exemplar models of psychosocial support and provide an estimate of their resources and costs. Design: This was a mixed-methods study involving (1) a web-based survey, (2) a qualitative, collective case study of psychosocial support provision in four services and (3) an estimate of costs and preference through a willingness-to-pay study. Setting: Four service configurations in different locations in England and Scotland. Participants: Participants were staff who responded to a survey (n = 67) and interviewees (staff, n = 58; parents/children, n = 29). Findings: Psychosocial support was rarely formalised or documented; it was delivered by different members of the multidisciplinary team, rather than by designated staff, and it was often integrated into appointments dominated by clinical care. Parents expressed different needs for support but reported little opportunity to discuss emotional aspects. Psychologists were not routinely involved and, in general, families were underserved by psychosocial services. Professionals constructed families’ need for psychosocial support in terms of their own roles and the management of risk. Mechanisms for integrating and delivering support were identified, including models of care that linked community and tertiary health services and integrated health and education through pooled budgets. Although generally valued by both staff and parents, peer-to-peer parent support was not consistently offered. Barriers included concerns about confidentiality and appropriately matching parents. Parents participated as members of a feeding committee at one site. Three analytical constructs described the provision of psychosocial support: ‘hidden work’, expressing emotional vulnerability and negotiations around risks and values. The cost-of-support study found that there was a mean of 2.25 appointments (n = 8 parents or carers) over the previous 12 months. The cost of health-care professionals’ time spent on providing psychosocial support ranged from £0.00 to £317.37 per child per year, with an average cost of £76.42, at 2017 prices. In the willingness-to-pay study the median rank o
ISSN:2050-4349
2050-4357
DOI:10.3310/hsdr08380