Background: While the populations of children who can benefit from paediatric palliative care (PPC) have been broadly defined, identifying individual patients to receive PPC has been problematic in practice. The Paediatric Palliative Screening scale (PaPaS) is a multi-dimensional tool that assesses palliative care needs in children and families to facilitate timely referrals. This study evaluates its use to manage new referrals and ongoing review of patients receiving home-based PPC in Singapore.Methods: Using a retrospective cohort study design, 199 patients admitted to receive PPC via clinician screening were scored using PaPaS. Eighty-four patients in two groups were scored again at one of two following milestones: one-year service continuation mark or point of discharge before a year. Accuracy measures were compared against clinical assessment.Results: 96.98% of patients scored 15 and above on admission (indicating need for PPC). Patients assessed at following milestones were effectively stratified; those who continued to receive service after 1 year scored significantly higher (M = 19.23) compared to those who were discharged within a year (M = 7.86). Sensitivity and specificity for PaPaS were calculated at 82.54 and 100% respectively. Overall congruence with clinician-based decisions supports the utility of PaPaS as a screening tool in PPC. Recommendations to improve the scale further are proposed.Conclusion: The PaPaS is a practical screening tool that signposts PPC needs within the clinical setting. This facilitates early referrals to PPC, without having to specify individual prognoses that are often uncertain. Other benefits include optimised continuity of care and implications for resource allocation.

Background: Uncertainties related to COVID-19 have strained the mental health of healthcare workers (HCWs) worldwide. Gaining the ability to adapt and thrive under pressure will be key to addressing this. We explore what characterises risk, vulnerability and resilient responses of HCWs during the early stages of the outbreak in Singapore. Methods: We undertook qualitative theory-guided thematic analysis of e-diary entries from HCWs who navigated the outbreak from June–August 2020. Data were extracted from a subset of an online survey of n = 3616 participants collected across 9 institutions, including restructured hospitals, hospices and affiliated primary care partners. Results: N = 663 or 18% submitted qualitative journal entries included for analyses. All professional cadres, local as well as foreign HCWs participated. Themes are reported according to the Loads–Levers–Lifts model of resilience and highlighted in italics. The model assumes that resilience is a dynamic process. Key factors threatening mental health (loading) risk included a notable rise in anxiety, the effects of being separated from loved ones, and experiencing heightened emotions and emotional overload. Bad situations were made worse, prompting vulnerable outcomes when HCWs experienced stigma in the community and effects of “public paranoia”; or under conditions where HCWs ended up feeling like a prisoner with little control or choice when either confined to staff accommodation or placed on quarantine/Stay Home Notices. Those with strife in their place of residence also described already difficult situations at work being aggravated by home life. Protection (lifts) came from being able to muster a sense of optimism about the future or feeling grateful for the pace of life slowing down and having the space to reprioritise. In contrast, when risk factors were present, balancing these in the direction of resilient outcomes was achieved by choosing to re-direct stress into positive narratives, drawing on inner agency, uptake of therapeutic activities, social support as well as faith and prayer and drawing comfort from religious community among other factors. Conclusion: The Loads–Levers–Lifts model is used to guide analysis to inform intervention designs. Levers promoting resilience through targeting therapies, workplace policies and awareness campaigns accounting for identified loads are proposed.

(1) Background: As COVID-19 transmission continues despite vaccination programs, healthcare workers (HCWs) face an ongoing pandemic response. We explore the effects of this on (1) Heartware, by which we refer to morale and commitment of HCWs; and identify how to improve (2) Hardware, or ways of enabling operational safety and functioning. (2) Methods: Qualitative e-diary entries were shared by HCWs during the early phases of the outbreak in Singapore from June to August 2020. Data were collected via an online survey of n = 3616 HCWs of all cadres. Nine institutions—restructured hospitals (n = 5), affiliated primary partners (n = 2) and hospices (n = 2)—participated. Applied thematic analysis was undertaken and organized according to Heartware and Hardware. Major themes are in italics (3) Results: n = 663 (18%) HCWs submitted a qualitative entry. Dominant themes undermining (1) Heartware consisted of burnout from being overworked and emotional exhaustion and at times feeling a lack of appreciation or support at work. The most common themes overriding morale breakers were a stoic acceptance to fight, adjust and hold the line, coupled with motivation from engaging leadership and supportive colleagues. The biggest barrier in (2) Hardware analysis related to sub-optimal segregation strategies within wards and designing better protocols for case detection, triage, and admissions criteria. Overall, the most cited enabler was the timely and well-planned provision of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for front-liners, though scope for scale-up was called for by those not considered frontline. Analysis maps internal organizational functioning to wider external public and policy-related narratives. (4) Conclusions: COVID-19 surges are becoming endemic rather than exceptional events. System elasticity needs to build on known pillars coupling improving safety and care delivery with improving HCW morale. Accordingly, a model capturing such facets of Adaptive Pandemic Response derived from our data analyses is described. HCW burnout must be urgently addressed, and health systems moved away from reactive “wartime” response configurations.

Objectives This study aims to explore the lived experience of young adults with life-limiting conditions (YALLC) and how they perceive and navigate adulthood, to identify challenges and opportunities for improved care and support. Methods A qualitative study using interpretative phenomenological analysis to understand how young adults who survived childhood serious illness make sense of current circumstances. Seven YALLC with different diagnoses ranging from 19 to 39 years were recruited through purposive sampling in a specialist paediatric palliative care service/adult hospice. In-depth, semistructured interviews were conducted, and verbatim transcripts analysed iteratively. Results Four major themes emerged: (1) living with limitations and in limbo—compressed timelines and confusion, triggered by dissonance between age-expected versus developmentally appropriate aspirations and goals; (2) experiencing identity crises, confronting existential concerns and chasing the elusive goal of enduring connection—struggle between public versus self-identities, including issues around self-worth and purpose; (3) striving for autonomy while tolerating interdependence/codependence—tensions arising from their desire for independence against the need to rely on others and (4) accepting and appreciating LLC as integral to one’s existence—demonstrating adaptability, creativity and resilience. Themes highlight a complex interplay of push-pull factors encountered by YALLC at multiple levels as they strive for a normative or negotiated life course. Conclusion YALLC face an intricate web of physical, psychoemotional, social and financial challenges compounded by underlying, persistent or progressive illnesses. Contextual understanding and identified gaps from this study will guide affirmative strategies to improve quality of life among a growing cohort.