Objectives: To review literature relating to evidence, context and facilitation to describe knowledge translation in paediatric palliative care. Paediatric palliative care requires competences including both paediatric specialists as well as services that are developed for this purpose, and there is a need to facilitate paediatric palliative care knowledge translation. Promoting Action on Research Implementation in the Health Services (PARiHS) is a framework for knowledge translation, which highlights the relationships between evidence, context and facilitation. PARiHS framework has been revised and updated in a new version called i-PARiHS. Methods: The electronic databases AgeLine, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, PubMed and Scopus were searched. Papers included were limited to English and Swedish publications and restricted to publications dated between 1993 and August 2019. All types of observational and experimental studies using any research design were included. Results and conclusions: Thirty-eight articles were included and there was a common vision about how and when palliative care should be offered to children. The i-PARiHS was used as a lens to describe the knowledge translation in paediatric palliative care. Symptom relief was the most commonly described evidence-based strategy, and the hospital environment was the most commonly described context. Different types of education were the most commonly used strategies to facilitate knowledge translation. The results mainly focused on increasing knowledge of palliative care in paediatric care. To sum up, the results report strategies to achieve knowledge translation of paediatric palliative care, and these can be interpreted as a guideline for how this process can be facilitated. Trial registration number: CRD42018100663.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Bundle interventions are becoming increasingly used as patient safety interventions. The objective of this study was to describe and categorize which bundle interventions are used to reduce prescribing errors (PEs) and administration errors (AEs) in hospitalized children and to assess the quality of the published literature. METHODS: Articles published in English and Arabic between 1985 and September 2015 were sought in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINHAL. Bibliographies of included articles were screened for additional studies. We included any study with a comparator group reporting rates of PEs and AEs. Two authors independently extracted data, classified interventions in each bundle and assessed the studies for potential risk of bias. Constituent interventions of the bundles were categorized using both the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group (EPOC) taxonomy of intervention and the Behavioural Change Wheel (BCW). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. All bundles contained interventions that were either professional, organizational or a mixture of both. According to the BCW, studies used interventions with functions delivering environmental restructuring (17/17), education (16/17), persuasion (4/17), training (3/17), restriction (3/17), incentivization (1/17), coercion (1/17), modelling (1/17) and enablement (1/17). Nine studies had bundles with two intervention functions, and eight studies had three or more intervention functions. All studies were low quality before/after studies. Selection bias varied between studies. Performance bias was either low or unclear. Attrition bias was unclear, and detection bias was rated high in most studies. Ten studies described the interventions fairly well, and seven studies did not adequately explain the interventions used. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: This novel analysis in a systematic review showed that bundle interventions delivering two or more intervention functions have been investigated but that the study quality was too poor to assess impact

BACKGROUND: Understanding the impact of effective paediatric adherence promotion interventions on patients, families and the healthcare system is necessary to inform efforts to improve healthcare quality and control costs. Building on previous research suggesting that improving adherence may have far-reaching benefits, the objective of this study was to quantify the impact of effective adherence promotion interventions for children and adolescents with a chronic medical condition on patients, families and the healthcare system. METHODS: Authors systematically reviewed articles indexed in PubMed, PsycINFO and CINAHL to identify randomized controlled trials of paediatric adherence promotion interventions. Interventions that improved paediatric adherence and examined patient-level, family-level or healthcare system-level outcomes in children and adolescents (M age

Objectives Relevant guidelines and consensuses for COVID-19 contain recommendations aimed at optimising the management in paediatric wards. The goal of this study was to determine the quality of those recommendations and provide suggestions to hospital managers for the adjustment of existing hospital prevention and control strategies, and also to offer recommendations for further research. Design A rapid review of the guidelines and consensuses for the management in paediatric wards facing COVID-19. Methods PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, UpToDate, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Wanfang database and relevant websites such as medlive.cn, dxy.cn, the National Health and Health Commission and the China Center for Disease Control and Prevention were systematically searched through late May 2020. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool was then used to assess the quality of the selected articles and summarise the relevant evidence concerning management in paediatric wards. Results A total of 35 articles were included, composed of 3 consensus guidelines, 25 expert consensuses and 7 expert opinions. Of the 35 papers, 24 were from China, 2 from the USA, 1 from Spain, 1 from Brazil, 1 from Saudi Arabia and 6 from multinational cooperative studies. Scores for the six domains of the AGREE II tool (scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigour of development, clarity of presentation, applicability and editorial independence) were 98.57%, 53.57%, 17.92%, 69.62%, 26.96% and 50.35%, respectively. Recommendations for nosocomial infection and control, human resource management as well as management of paediatric patients and their families were summarised. Conclusions Due to the outbreak of COVID-19, the quality of rapid guidelines and consensuses for the management in paediatric wards affected by COVID-19 is unsatisfactory. In the future, it will be necessary to develop more high-quality guidelines or consensuses for the management in paediatric wards to deal with nosocomial outbreaks in order to fully prepare for emergency medical and health problems.