Exploring Australian intensive care physicians clinical judgement during donation after cardiac death : an exploratory qualitative study

BACKGROUND: Donation after Cardiac Death (DCD) is one possible solution to the world wide organ shortage. Intensive care physicians are central to DCD becoming successful since they are responsible for making the clinical judgements and decisions associated with DCD. Yet international evidence shows health care professionals have not embraced DCD and are often reluctant to consider it as an option for patients. PURPOSE: To explore intensive care physicians' clinical judgements when selecting a suitable DCD candidate. METHODS: Using interpretative exploratory methods six intensive care physicians were interviewed from three hospital sites in Australia. Following verbatim transcription, data was subjected to thematic analysis. FINDINGS: Three distinct themes emerged. Reducing harm and increasing benefit was a major focus of intensive care physicians during determination of DCD. There was an acceptance of DCD if there was clear evidence that donation was what the patient and family wanted. Characteristics of a defensible decision reflected the characteristics of sequencing, separation and isolation, timing, consensus and collaboration, trust and communication to ensure that judgements were robust and defensible. The final theme revealed the importance of minimising uncertainty and discomfort when predicting length of survival following withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment. CONCLUSION: DCD decisions are made within an environment of uncertainty due to the imprecision associated with predicting time of death. Lack of certainty contributed to the cautious and collaborative strategies used by intensive care physicians when dealing with patients, family members and colleagues around end-of-life decisions, initiation of withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment and the discussion about DCD. This study recommends that nationally consistent policies are urgently needed to increase the degree of certainty for intensive care staff concerning the DCD processes.

A systematic review of instruments for assessment of capacity in activities of daily living in children with developmental co-ordination disorder

Children with developmental co-ordination disorder (DCD) face evident motor difficulties in activities of daily living (ADL). Assessment of their capacity in ADL is essential for diagnosis and intervention, in order to limit the daily consequences of the disorder. The aim of this study is to systematically review potential instruments for standardized and objective assessment of children's capacity in ADL, suited for children with DCD. As a first step, databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched to identify studies that described instruments with potential for assessment of capacity in ADL. Second, instruments were included for review when two independent reviewers agreed that the instruments: (1) are standardized and objective; (2) assess at activity level and comprise items that reflect ADL, and; (3) are applicable to school-aged children that can move independently. Out of 1507 publications, 66 publications were selected, describing 39 instruments. Seven of these instruments were found to fulfil the criteria and were included for review: the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Performance-2 (BOT2); the Do-Eat (Do-Eat); the Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2 (MABC2); the school-Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (schoolAMPS); the Tuffts Assessment of Motor Performance (TAMP); the Test of Gross Motor Development (TGMD); and the Functional Independence Measure for Children (WeeFIM). As a third step, for the included instruments, suitability for children with DCD was discussed based on the ADL comprised, ecological validity and other psychometric properties. We concluded that current instruments do not provide comprehensive and ecologically valid assessment of capacity in ADL as required for children with DCD.

Psychometric properties of the DCDDaily-Q: A new parental questionnaire on children's performance in activities of daily living

Difficulties in the performance of activities of daily living (ADL) are a key feature of developmental coordination disorder (DCD). The DCDDaily-Q was developed to address children's motor performance in a comprehensive range ADL. The aim of this study was to investigate the psychometric properties of this parental questionnaire. Parents of 218 five to eight year-old children (DCD group: N=25; reference group: N=193) completed the research version of the new DCDDaily-Q and the Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2 (MABC2) Checklist and Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire (DCDQ). Children were assessed with the MABC2 and DCDDaily. Item reduction analyses were performed and reliability (internal consistency and factor structure) and concurrent, discriminant, and incremental validity of the DCDDaily-Q were investigated. The final version of the DCDDaily-Q comprises 23 items that cover three underlying factors and shows good internal consistency (Cronbach's α>.80). Moderate correlations were found between the DCDDaily-Q and the other instruments used (p<.001 for the reference group; p>.05 for the DCD group). Discriminant validity of the DCDDaily-Q was good for DCDDaily-Q total scores (p<.001) and all 23 item scores (p<.01), indicating poorer performance in the DCD group. Sensitivity (88%) and specificity (92%) were good. The DCDDaily-Q better predicted DCD than currently used questionnaires (R2=.88). In conclusion, the DCDDaily-Q is a valid and reliable questionnaire to address children's ADL performance.

Activities of daily living in children with developmental coordination disorder: Performance, learning, and participation

Background Children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD) face evident motor difficulties in daily functioning. Little is known, however, about their difficulties in specific activities of daily living (ADL). Objective The purposes of this study were: (1) to investigate differences between children with DCD and their peers with typical development for ADL performance, learning, and participation, and (2) to explore the predictive values of these aspects. Design. This was a cross-sectional study. Methods In both a clinical sample of children diagnosed with DCD (n=25 [21 male, 4 female], age range=5-8 years) and a group of peers with typical development (25 matched controls), the children’s parents completed the DCDDaily-Q. Differences in scores between the groups were investigated using t tests for performance and participation and Pearson chi-square analysis for learning. Multiple regression analyses were performed to explore the predictive values of performance, learning, and participation. Results Compared with their peers, children with DCD showed poor performance of ADL and less frequent participation in some ADL. Children with DCD demonstrated heterogeneous patterns of performance (poor in 10%-80% of the items) and learning (delayed in 0%-100% of the items). In the DCD group, delays in learning of ADL were a predictor for poor performance of ADL, and poor performance of ADL was a predictor for less frequent participation in ADL compared with the control group. Limitations A limited number of children with DCD were addressed in this study. Conclusions This study highlights the impact of DCD on children’s daily lives and the need for tailored intervention.

Development and psychometric properties of the DCDDaily: a new test for clinical assessment of capacity in activities of daily living in children with developmental coordination disorder

Objective To develop the DCDDaily, an instrument for objective and standardized clinical assessment of capacity in activities of daily living (ADL) in children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD), and to investigate its usability, reliability, and validity. Subjects Five to eight-year-old children with and without DCD. Main measures The DCDDaily was developed based on thorough review of the literature and extensive expert involvement. To investigate the usability (assessment time and feasibility), reliability (internal consistency and repeatability), and validity (concurrent and discriminant validity) of the DCDDaily, children were assessed with the DCDDaily and the Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2 Test, and their parents filled in the Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2 Checklist and Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire. Results 459 children were assessed (DCD group, n = 55; normative reference group, n = 404). Assessment was possible within 30 minutes and in any clinical setting. For internal consistency, Cronbach’s α = 0.83. Intraclass correlation = 0.87 for test–retest reliability and 0.89 for inter-rater reliability. Concurrent correlations with Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2 Test and questionnaires were ρ = −0.494, 0.239, and −0.284, p < 0.001. Discriminant validity measures showed significantly worse performance in the DCD group than in the control group (mean (SD) score 33 (5.6) versus 26 (4.3), p < 0.001). The area under curve characteristic = 0.872, sensitivity and specificity were 80%. Conclusions The DCDDaily is a valid and reliable instrument for clinical assessment of capacity in ADL, that is feasible for use in clinical practice.