More infants with bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) now survive to adulthood, but little is known regarding persisting respiratory impairment. We report respiratory symptoms, lung function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adult BPD survivors compared with preterm (non-BPD) and full-term controls.Respiratory symptoms (European Community Respiratory Health Survey) and HRQoL (EuroQol (EQ)-5D) were measured in 72 adult BPD survivors (mean±sdstudy age 24.1±4.0 years; mean±sdgestational age 27.1±2.1 weeks; and mean±sdbirth weight 955±256 g) cared for in the regional neonatal intensive care unit, Royal Maternity Hospital, Belfast, UK (between 1978 and 1993). These were compared with 57 non-BPD controls (mean±sdstudy age 25.3±4.0 years; mean±sdgestational age 31.0±2.5 weeks; and mean±sdbirth weight 1238±222 g) and 78 full-term controls (mean±sdstudy age 25.7±3.8 years; mean±sdgestational age 39.7±1.4 weeks; and mean±sdbirth weight 3514±456 g) cared for at the same hospital. Spirometry was performed on 56 BPD, 40 non-BPD and 55 full-term participants.BPD subjects were twice as likely to report wheeze and three times more likely to use asthma medication than controls. BPD adults had significantly lower forced expiratory volume in 1 s and forced expiratory flow at 25–75% of forced vital capacity than both the preterm non-BPD and full-term controls (all p<0.01). Mean EQ-5D was 6 points lower in BPD adults compared to full-term controls (p<0.05).BPD survivors have significant respiratory and quality of life impairment persisting into adulthood.

Intensive care survivors suffer chronic and potentially life-changing physical, psychosocial and cognitive sequelae, and supporting recovery is an international priority. As survivors’ transition from the intensive care unit to home, their support needs develop and change. In this scoping review, we categorised patients’ support needs using House’s Social Support Needs framework (informational, emotional, instrumental, appraisal) and mapped these against the Timing it Right framework reflecting the patient’s transition from intensive care (event/diagnosis) to ward (stabilisation/preparation) and discharge home (implementation/adaptation). We searched electronic databases from 2000 to 2017 for qualitative research studies reporting adult critical care survivors’ experiences of care. Two reviewers independently screened, extracted and coded data. Data were analysed using a thematic framework approach. From 3035 references, we included 32 studies involving 702 patients. Studies were conducted in UK and Europe (n = 17, 53%), Canada and the USA (n = 6, 19%), Australasia (n = 6, 19%), Hong Kong (n = 1, 3%), Jordan (n = 1, 3%) and multi-country (n = 1, 3%). Across the recovery trajectory, informational, emotional, instrumental, appraisal and spiritual support needs were evident, and the nature and intensity of need differed when mapped against the Timing it Right framework. Informational needs changed from needing basic facts about admission, to detail about progress and treatments and coping with long-term sequelae. The nature of emotional needs changed from needing to cope with confusion, anxiety and comfort, to a need for security and family presence, coping with flashbacks, and needing counselling and community support. Early instrumental needs ranged from managing sleep, fatigue, pain and needing nursing care and transitioned to needing physical and cognitive ability support, strength training and personal hygiene; and at home, regaining independence, strength and return to work. Appraisal needs related to obtaining feedback on progress, and after discharge, needing reassurance from others who had been through the ICU experience. This review is the first to identify the change in social support needs among intensive care survivors as they transition from intensive care to the home environment. An understanding of needs at different transition periods would help inform health service provision and support for survivors.

This paper updates guidelines for effective treatments of children with specific types of acquired brain injury (ABI) published in 2007 with more recent evidence. A systematic search was conducted for articles published from 2006 to 2017. Full manuscripts describing treatments of children (post-birth to 18) with acquired brain injury were included if study was published in peer-reviewed journals and written in English. Two independent reviewers and a third, if conflicts existed, evaluated the methodological quality of studies with an Individual Study Review Form and a Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist. Strength of study characteristics was used in development of practice guidelines. Fifty-six peer-reviewed articles, including 27 Class I studies, were included in the final analysis. Established guidelines for writing practice recommendations were used and 22 practice recommendations were written with details of potential treatment limitations. There was strong evidence for family/caregiver-focused interventions, as well as direct interventions to improve attention, memory, executive functioning, and emotional/behavioural functioning. A majority of the practice standards and guidelines provided evidence for the use of technology in delivery of interventions, representing an important trend in the field. Abbreviations: ABI = acquired brain injury, ACRM = American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine, ACT = Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, Amat-c = Amsterdam Memory and Attention Training for Children, BRIEF = Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function, BRIEF-MI = The Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function Metacognitive Index, CAPS = Counselor Assisted Problem-solving, CBT = cognitive behaviour therapy, COPM = Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, CO-OP = Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance, CRP = Cognitive Remediation Program, EBR = Evidence-Based Review, FPS = Family Problem-solving, IRC = Internet Resource Comparison, JBI = Joanna Briggs Institute, mTBI = mild traumatic brain injury, SSTP = Stepping Stones Triple P, SMART = Strategic Memory Advanced Reasoning Training, TBI = traumatic brain injury, TOPS = Teen Online Problem-solving, TOPS-TO = Teen Online Problem-solving–Teens Only, WM = Working Memory

Background The number of EDs visit is on the increase, and the pressure on EDs is of significant concern worldwide. The usage of EDs by parents of children with minor illness is an important and still unresolved problem causing a burden to healthcare services. The aim of this study was to review the literature to summarise parental reasons for visiting ED for children with minor illness. Method Seven electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus) were comprehensively searched during a 2-week period in August 2016 and updated between 11 and 20 June 2018. The study selection process was undertaken independently by two authors. Qualitative and quantitative studies that focused on the reasons for parents of children with minor illness to attend an ED were included. Studies were assessed for quality and data were analysed by means of narrative synthesis. Results Twenty-four studies were included. Eleven studies employed quantitative methods, eleven studies used qualitative methods and two studies used mixed methods. Parental reasons for using ED included perceived urgency, ED advantages (eg, faster service, superior ED resources and efficiency), difficulties with getting a general practitioner appointment, lack of facilities in primary healthcare services, lack of health insurance, reassurance, convenience and access. Conclusion This review identified some of the reasons why parents bring their children to the ED for minor illnesses highlighting the multifaceted nature of this problem. Understanding parental reasons behind their choice to use the ED may help us better design targeted interventions to reduce unnecessary ED visits and alleviate the burden on overstretched healthcare services. This review may help inform emergency care policy makers, researchers and healthcare staff to understand parents’ reasons for visiting the ED, to better meet their healthcare needs.