+1 Recommend
0 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Written action plans for children with long‐term conditions: A systematic review and synthesis of qualitative data

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          Long‐term conditions ( LTCs) in children require a high level of self‐management. Written action plans ( WAPs) have been advocated to guide decision‐making and support self‐management but there is uncertainty about how WAPs “work” and what aspects are important for successful implementation.


          To review and synthesize existing qualitative evidence about the design and use of WAPs across childhood LTCs.


          We undertook a systematic search of the literature (Medline, EMBASE, Ci NAHL, PsycInfo, Web of science) from inception to May 2015; critically appraised included studies; and synthesized the findings, drawing on normalisation process theory.


          3473 titles were screened and 53 papers read in full. Nine studies (four key, two minor and three of poor quality) contributed to our analysis, predominantly work on asthma from the USA and in specialist settings. WAPs may help to alleviate user worry and boost confidence. Confidence to act was closely linked to feelings of responsibility and authority. The value and use of WAPs are determined by multiple factors, and varies between different user groups. Logistical challenges include sharing a WAP between different stakeholders and keeping it up to date. Colour coding and pictures may enhance the appeal and usability of WAPS.


          WAPs are complex interventions but our understanding of their use and value in children with LTCs is limited. WAPs need to meet the needs of users who have different requirements/levels of understanding and confidence according to their different roles. Future research into WAPs needs to be both disease and context‐specific.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

          Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Adherence to long-term therapies: evidence for action.

              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health.


                Author and article information

                Health Expect
                Health Expect
                Health Expectations : An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                09 December 2017
                June 2018
                : 21
                : 3 ( doiID: 10.1111/hex.2018.21.issue-3 )
                : 585-596
                © 2017 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd

                This is an open access article under the terms of the License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                Figures: 1, Tables: 3, Pages: 12, Words: 8583
                Funded by: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Academic Clinical Fellow
                Funded by: NIHR Post Doctoral Fellowship
                Award ID: PDF‐2014‐07‐013
                Funded by: NIHR School for Primary Care Research
                Review Article
                Review Articles
                Custom metadata
                June 2018
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:version=5.4.0 mode:remove_FC converted:31.05.2018


                Comment on this article