Abstract
Studies of quality of life (QoL) routinely exclude children with complex needs. These children struggle to access leisure activities, particularly those with severe communication needs or challenging behaviour. Sparkle provides specialised leisure services to children and young people (0-17 years) with complex needs in South Wales, UK. We aimed to evaluate previously validated tools to measure QoL with this population.
Three tools were assessed over a 6-year period – PedsQL, KINDLR and QI-Disability. PedsQL (41) and KINDLR (10) were attempted by the children attending the clubs (5-17 years old), and QI-Disability by caregivers (96). The majority of child participants had a neurodevelopmental diagnosis, a proportion of whom were non-verbal.
Neither KINDLR nor PedsQL were appropriate for the population, with children unable to understand the questions and answers. The QI-Disability scores showed a statistically significant improvement in parents’ estimate of their child’s positive emotions, but results were severely limited by drop off.
Existing validated QoL tools cannot be meaningfully used by children with complex needs. While the caregiver tool showed some benefit of specialist leisure provision, it is recognised that caregivers may perceive a child’s QoL differently to the child themselves, and caregivers clearly found repeat measurements onerous.
Competing Interest Statement
One of the authors is employed and funded by Sparkle (South Wales), the registered charity (1093690) that delivers the service evaluated during this research. Another author is an unsalaried Trustee of the charity. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare.
Funding Statement
No funding was received to conduct this evaluation.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Research Risk Review Panel of Aneurin Bevan University Health Board Research and Development Department waived ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
fiona.astill{at}wales.nhs.uk, nicole.mcgrath2{at}wales.nhs.uk, kempam{at}cardiff.ac.uk, hurtl{at}cardiff.ac.uk, sabinemaguire{at}gmail.com
Data availability
Data are not openly available due to lack of participant consent to open the data.
