Information on family health-related quality of life (FHRQoL) among families of children with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. This qualitative study explores the impact of pediatric COVID-19 on FHRQoL from the parents’ perspective. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with parents (n = 20) whose children had tested positive for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Inductive thematic analysis revealed the following 10 themes that represented parents’ perception of FHRQoL while taking care of a child with COVID-19: pediatric COVID-19 as a disease with many unknowns; emotional saturation; internal family relationships in the context of “a new experience”; routine household activities and daily regimen while family is in lockdown; plenty of free time; a wide social support network; social stigma associated with COVID-19; different options for work; savings and debts; challenges with family housing and transport availability. Our results show that parents experience multiple effects of pediatric COVID-19 with regard to FHRQoL.

Rotavirus is the leading cause of severe diarrhea in young children and infants worldwide, representing a heavy public health burden. Limited information is available regarding the impact of rotavirus gastroenteritis on the quality of life of affected children and their families. The objectives of study were to estimate the impact of rotavirus infection on health-related quality of life (HRQL), to assess the social and emotional effects on the families of affected children. This study enrolled all (n = 527) RotaStrip®-positive (with further PCR detection) cases (0–18 years of age) hospitalized from April 2013 to December 2015 and their caregivers. A questionnaire comprising clinical (filled-in by the medical staff) and social (filled by the caregivers) sections was completed per child. Main indicators of emotional burden reported by caregivers were compassion (reported as severe/very severe by 91.1% of parents), worry (85.2%), stress/anxiety (68.0%). Regarding social burden, 79.3% of caregivers reported the need to introduce changes into their daily routine due to rotavirus infection of their child. Regarding economic burden, 55.1% of parents needed to take days off work because of their child’s sickness, and 76.1% of parents reported additional expenditures in the family’s budget. Objective measures of their child’s health status were not associated with HRQL of the family, as were the parent’s subjective evaluation of their child’s health and some sociodemographic factors. Parents were significantly more worried if their child was tearful (p = 0.006) or irritable (p < 0.001). Parents were more stressful/anxious if their child had a fever (p = 0.003), was tearful (p < 0.001), or was irritable (p < 0.001). Changes in parents’ daily routines were more often reported if the child had a fever (p = 0.02) or insufficient fluid intake (p = 0.04). Objective health status of the child did not influence the emotional, social or economic burden, whereas the parents’ subjective perception of the child’s health status and sociodemographic characteristics, were influential. A better understanding of how acute episodes affect the child and family, will help to ease parental fears and advise parents on the characteristics of rotavirus infection and the optimal care of an infected child.

Background/Objectives: Decision making is fundamental to personal autonomy and person-centered, rights-based psychiatric care. This study explored the perceptions and experiences of decision making in psychiatric care from the perspectives of service users, caregivers, and healthcare professionals, identifying contexts that facilitate or hinder these practices. Methods: An exploratory–descriptive qualitative design was applied, using semi-structured interviews with eight service users, six caregivers, and seven healthcare professionals (21 interviews in total). Data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed through inductive content analysis. Results: Four main categories were identified: (1) antecedents for decision making, (2) challenges in decision making, (3) consequences of decision making, and (4) recommendations for improvement. Conclusions: This study provides insight into how decisions in psychiatric care are made in Latvia, highlighting the legal, personal, and institutional factors influencing these processes. Participants offered valuable perspectives, identifying both facilitators and barriers to autonomous decision making, as well as suggesting necessary improvements. The findings suggest the need for legal reform and systemic improvements in practices that favor agency in decision making. Additionally, they underscore the importance of strengthening individual capacities to support meaningful collaboration among service users, caregivers, and healthcare professionals in making healthcare decisions that enhance the quality of care and well-being of people with mental health difficulties.

Background/Objectives: Decision-making in mental health care is essential for personal autonomy and a cornerstone of person-centered, rights-based psychiatric care. This study aimed to explore and describe the perceptions and experiences of decision-making in psychiatric care from the perspectives of service users, caregivers, and healthcare professionals. It also examined the decision-making contexts that either facilitate or hinder these practices. Methods: An exploratory-descriptive qualitative design using semi-structured interviews was employed. A total of 21 interviews were conducted with 8 service users, 6 caregivers, and 7 healthcare professionals. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using inductive content analysis. Results: Four main categories emerged: (1) Antecedents for decision-making: a) mental healthcare factors, b) service user factors; (2) Challenges in decision-making; (3) Consequences of decision-making: a) benefits, b) risks, c) burden; and (4) Recommendations for better decision-making: a) informational support, b) other help and support. Conclusions: This study highlights the complexity of decision-making in Latvian psychiatric care, as perceived by service users, caregivers, and professionals. All participants identified both benefits and risks in the decision-making process. Factors influencing decision-making stemmed from the mental health system and the service user’s personal circumstances. Systemic improvements, including better informational support and communication, are needed to strengthen decision-making agency in psychiatric care.

Background/Objectives: Understanding people’s experiences is essential for improving healthcare systems (HCSs) and health outcomes, but assessing these experiences requires accurate, culturally and contextually appropriate measures. The People’s Voice Survey (PVS) is an instrument developed to assess current and future user experience across all levels of HCS globally. This research presents a cognitive interview (CI) approach as one measure for adapting PVS questions for adult and adolescent populations in three European countries. Methods: Twenty-four semi-structured CIs were conducted in Latvia, fifteen in Switzerland, and four in Germany. Study participants were recruited via convenience sampling. Interviews were conducted across virtual, telephone, and face-to-face settings. The “text summary” approach and Tourangeau’s four-step question-and-answer model served as the theoretical framework for the study. Results: The majority of the core PVS questions tested functioned well. The most common issues identified were related to comprehension and the decision process in all country cases. Analysis showed that almost all PVS core questions were also suitable for adolescents, with the exception of some questions related to evaluation and knowledge of HCS functioning, due to limited knowledge and/or experience with HCSs. Key adjustments included clarifying the question formulation, adding explanations to unclear and unknown terms and concepts, adding the following questions and missing answer categories. Conclusions: The paper shows how CIs are used to identify issues at all response stages when answering PVS core questions, thereby enabling the measure to be improved and supporting the use of CIs to enhance HCS assessment instruments.