3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Implementing neurodevelopmental follow‐up care for children with congenital heart disease: A scoping review with evidence mapping

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aim

          To identify and map evidence describing components of neurodevelopmental follow‐up care for children with congenital heart disease (CHD).

          Method

          This was a scoping review of studies reporting components of neurodevelopmental follow‐up programmes/pathways for children with CHD. Eligible publications were identified through database searches, citation tracking, and expert recommendations. Two independent reviewers screened studies and extracted data. An evidence matrix was developed to visualize common characteristics of care pathways. Qualitative content analysis identified implementation barriers and enablers.

          Results

          The review included 33 studies. Twenty‐one described individual care pathways across the USA ( n = 14), Canada ( n = 4), Australia ( n = 2), and France ( n = 1). The remainder reported surveys of clinical practice across multiple geographical regions. While heterogeneity in care existed across studies, common attributes included enrolment of children at high‐risk of neurodevelopmental delay; centralized clinics in children's hospitals; referral before discharge; periodic follow‐up at fixed ages; standardized developmental assessment; and involvement of multidisciplinary teams. Implementation barriers included service cost/resourcing, patient burden, and lack of knowledge/awareness. Multi‐level stakeholder engagement and integration with other services were key drivers of success.

          Interpretation

          Defining components of effective neurodevelopmental follow‐up programmes and care pathways, along with enhancing and expanding guideline‐based care across regions and into new contexts, should continue to be priorities.

          What this paper adds

          • Twenty‐two different neurodevelopmental follow‐up care pathways/programmes were published, originating from four countries.

          • Twelve additional publications described broad practices for neurodevelopmental follow‐up across regions

          • Common attributes across eligibility, service structure, assessment processes, and care providers were noted.

          • Studies reported programme acceptability, uptake, cost, and effectiveness.

          • Implementation barriers included service cost/resourcing, patient burden, and lack of knowledge/awareness.

          What this paper adds

          • Twenty‐two different neurodevelopmental follow‐up care pathways/programmes were published, originating from four countries.

          • Twelve additional publications described broad practices for neurodevelopmental follow‐up across regions

          • Common attributes across eligibility, service structure, assessment processes, and care providers were noted.

          • Studies reported programme acceptability, uptake, cost, and effectiveness.

          • Implementation barriers included service cost/resourcing, patient burden, and lack of knowledge/awareness.

          Related collections

          Most cited references91

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

          Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The qualitative content analysis process.

              This paper is a description of inductive and deductive content analysis. Content analysis is a method that may be used with either qualitative or quantitative data and in an inductive or deductive way. Qualitative content analysis is commonly used in nursing studies but little has been published on the analysis process and many research books generally only provide a short description of this method. When using content analysis, the aim was to build a model to describe the phenomenon in a conceptual form. Both inductive and deductive analysis processes are represented as three main phases: preparation, organizing and reporting. The preparation phase is similar in both approaches. The concepts are derived from the data in inductive content analysis. Deductive content analysis is used when the structure of analysis is operationalized on the basis of previous knowledge. Inductive content analysis is used in cases where there are no previous studies dealing with the phenomenon or when it is fragmented. A deductive approach is useful if the general aim was to test a previous theory in a different situation or to compare categories at different time periods.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                bridget.abell@qut.edu.au
                Journal
                Dev Med Child Neurol
                Dev Med Child Neurol
                10.1111/(ISSN)1469-8749
                DMCN
                Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0012-1622
                1469-8749
                08 July 2023
                February 2024
                : 66
                : 2 ( doiID: 10.1111/dmcn.v66.2 )
                : 161-175
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health Queensland University of Technology Brisbane QLD Australia
                [ 2 ] Queensland Paediatric Cardiac Service Queensland Children's Hospital Brisbane QLD Australia
                [ 3 ] Faculty of Medicine The University of Queensland Brisbane QLD Australia
                [ 4 ] University Hospitals Rainbow Babies & Children's Hospital Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine Cleveland OH USA
                [ 5 ] Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital Metro North Health Brisbane QLD Australia
                [ 6 ] Digital Health and Informatics Directorate, Metro South Health Brisbane QLD Australia
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Bridget Abell, Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Q Block, 60 Musk Avenue, Kelvin Grove, Brisbane, QLD, 4059, Australia.

                Email: bridget.abell@ 123456qut.edu.au

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1324-4536
                Article
                DMCN15698 DMCN-SRE-23-01-0027.R1
                10.1111/dmcn.15698
                10953404
                37421232
                3a145530-78e2-4a13-818e-cb0ff1b0c36f
                © 2023 The Authors. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Mac Keith Press.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 04 May 2023
                : 16 January 2023
                : 07 June 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 2, Pages: 15, Words: 11174
                Funding
                Funded by: National Health and Medical Research Council , doi 10.13039/501100000925;
                Award ID: ARGCHDG0035
                Categories
                Scoping Review
                Reviews
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                February 2024
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.3.9 mode:remove_FC converted:20.03.2024

                Neurology
                Neurology

                Comments

                Comment on this article