Collaborative General Practitioner Shared Care Versus Self-Directed Care Following Critical Illness in Young Children: A Pilot Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES: Up to one in three PICU survivors experience persistent developmental or psychologic challenges, and parents often report significant psychologic distress. Current health systems lack standardized pathways to support children and families after PICU. We aimed to assess the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a collaborative general practitioner (GP) shared-care follow-up model of care intervention and the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the intervention. DESIGN: Multicenter, pilot, hybrid effectiveness-implementation study with parallel RCT. Trial registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12621000799853, June 24, 2021. SETTING: Two PICUs in Queensland, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Parents of children admitted to PICU from ages 2 months or older to younger than 4 years. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized (1:1, web-based block randomization schedule) to 6 months of GP shared care (intervention) or self-directed care (active control). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was trial feasibility. Secondary effectiveness and implementation outcomes included child neurodevelopmental vulnerability and parent psychosocial outcomes at 6 months and parental perception of the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the intervention, respectively. Between October 2021 and March 2023, 154 of 363 eligible parents (one per family) provided consent (42%); 69 were randomized to the intervention, and 72 to active control. Most parents were mothers (95%), 31-40 years old (54%), from metropolitan areas (72%). Children were predominantly male (64%), younger than 12 months old (41%), admitted for respiratory illness (39%). Retention (81%), fidelity (96%), and intervention acceptability was high (71-86%), but recruitment was low (42%) and intervention feasibility varied (35-82%). At 6 months, neurodevelopmental vulnerability rates were similar (shared care [39%] vs. active control [44%]; adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.72 [95% CI, 0.32-1.60]). Parenting stress was lower in the intervention group (median, 20 [interquartile range (IQR), 12-47]) vs. active control (median, 42 [IQR, 19-66]; difference, -23 [95% CI, -40 to -6]). CONCLUSIONS: A trial of a collaborative GP-shared-care model of care post-PICU is feasible and may reduce parenting stress. Further intervention refinement and a larger trial are warranted to evaluate clinical effectiveness, implementation, and scalability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Pediatric Critical Care Medicine
Published
2026-08-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/pcc.0000000000004024
Primary Topic
Infant Development and Preterm Care
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Collaborative General Practitioner Shared Care Versus Self-Directed Care Following Critical Illness in Young Children: A Pilot Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation Randomized Controlled Trial

Trang Pham, Lori Anthony, James Best, Paula Lister et al.
Pediatric Critical Care Medicine
Infant Development and Preterm Care
article

Collaborative General Practitioner Shared Care Versus Self-Directed Care Following Critical Illness in Young Children: A Pilot Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation Randomized Controlled Trial

Trang Pham, Lori Anthony, James Best, Paula Lister, Debra Thoms, Renate Le Marsney, Kerri‐Lyn Webb, Samudragupta Bora, Christian Stocker, Belinda Dow, Helen Liley, Zephanie Tyack, Luregn J. Schlapbach, Debbie A. Long, Kristen Gibbons, Charlotte Moore, Leigh Dunn
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Up to one in three PICU survivors experience persistent developmental or psychologic challenges, and parents often report significant psychologic distress. Current health systems lack standardized pathways to support children and families after PICU. We aimed to assess the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a collaborative general practitioner (GP) shared-care follow-up model of care intervention and the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the intervention. DESIGN: Multicenter, pilot, hybrid effectiveness-implementation study with parallel RCT. Trial registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12621000799853, June 24, 2021. SETTING: Two PICUs in Queensland, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Parents of children admitted to PICU from ages 2 months or older to younger than 4 years. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized (1:1, web-based block randomization schedule) to 6 months of GP shared care (intervention) or self-directed care (active control). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was trial feasibility. Secondary effectiveness and implementation outcomes included child neurodevelopmental vulnerability and parent psychosocial outcomes at 6 months and parental perception of the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the intervention, respectively. Between October 2021 and March 2023, 154 of 363 eligible parents (one per family) provided consent (42%); 69 were randomized to the intervention, and 72 to active control. Most parents were mothers (95%), 31-40 years old (54%), from metropolitan areas (72%). Children were predominantly male (64%), younger than 12 months old (41%), admitted for respiratory illness (39%). Retention (81%), fidelity (96%), and intervention acceptability was high (71-86%), but recruitment was low (42%) and intervention feasibility varied (35-82%). At 6 months, neurodevelopmental vulnerability rates were similar (shared care [39%] vs. active control [44%]; adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.72 [95% CI, 0.32-1.60]). Parenting stress was lower in the intervention group (median, 20 [interquartile range (IQR), 12-47]) vs. active control (median, 42 [IQR, 19-66]; difference, -23 [95% CI, -40 to -6]). CONCLUSIONS: A trial of a collaborative GP-shared-care model of care post-PICU is feasible and may reduce parenting stress. Further intervention refinement and a larger trial are warranted to evaluate clinical effectiveness, implementation, and scalability.

Pediatric Critical Care Medicine
Queensland University of Technology (AU), The University of Queensland (AU), University Hospitals of Cleveland (US), Children’s Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service (AU), Mater Research (AU), Sunshine Coast University Hospital (AU), University Children's Hospital Zurich (CH), Mater Mothers' Hospital (AU), Rainbow Babies & Children's Hospital (US), Children's Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Infant Development and Preterm Care
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.