ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to map the available evidence regarding the scope of child life specialist services, practice, and utilization. INTRODUCTION: The concept of child life services began in 1922 and emerged as the child life specialist services specialty in the United States in the 1970s and 1980s. Child life specialists are members of multidisciplinary health care system teams who prioritize the developmental needs of pediatric patients to support and improve patient and family health care experiences. Evidence of the effectiveness of child life specialist services and the utilization of those services is often incorporated in multidisciplinary research reports and thus overlooked. INCLUSION CRITERIA: All quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research study reports and systematic reviews investigating child life specialist services, practice, and utilization in health care systems were included. METHODS: This review was guided by the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and a published a priori protocol. CINAHL (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, and PsycINFO (APA) were searched for evidence published from January 1980 to August 2022. RESULTS: Research publications about child life specialist services, practice, and utilization have increased dramatically over the past decade, with more than 50% of studies published in the past 5 years. Although the first authors of the majority of the research publications were physicians, these multidisciplinary author teams depicted child life specialist services in a variety of roles, including co-investigators, interventionists, and research subjects. The 105 full-text publications reviewed were from 9 countries, plus 1 publication that surveyed people across Europe. The contexts spanned a wide scope of clinical settings and medical subspecialties, but primarily in hospitals and health centers, and to a lesser extent, in ambulatory clinics and communities. A wide variety of child life specialist services were described across these settings. CONCLUSION: Mapping the research can help delineate the barriers and facilitators to child life specialist services in health care systems. This scoping review provides evidence of the global diffusion of child life specialist services across health care system settings, with recent increases in research publications involving child life specialist services.
Subject(s)
Child Health Services , Humans , Child , SpecializationABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to map the available evidence regarding the scope of child life specialist practice and utilization. INTRODUCTION: Child life specialists provide developmentally appropriate and emotion-focused supportive interventions that aim to build coping skills, enhance resilience, and mitigate traumatic experiences during health care encounters. Evidence of the care provided by a child life specialist is spread throughout health care literature. It is an emerging field that is aligned with a heightened focus on mental health and emotional safety. Evidence for the efficacy of child life specialists continues to grow. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Mapping the current evidence will capture the breadth of services provided by child life specialists. This scoping review will consider all evidence that reports on services provided by child life specialists, including across all quantitative and qualitative study designs, systematic reviews, and scoping reviews. The review will also include child life specialist workforce studies, such as child life specialist utilization, geographic availability, multidisciplinary team integration, and clinician-focused research. Case studies or narrative experiences outside of a qualitative research methodology, descriptions of program implementation, educational surveys, and quality improvement projects will be excluded from the scoping review. METHODS: JBI methodology for scoping reviews will guide the review process. Literature published from 1980 to the present will be included. Databases to be searched include PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. The search for unpublished evidence will include Google Scholar and OpenGrey. Extracted data will be presented in tabular format with accompanying narrative summary.
Subject(s)
Adaptation, Psychological , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Child , Qualitative Research , Health Facilities , Research Design , Review Literature as TopicABSTRACT
To control the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the virus responsible for coronavirus disease 2019, many hospitals have strict visitor restriction policies. These policies often prohibit both parents from visiting at the same time or having grandparents or other family members visit at all. We discuss cases in which such policies created ethical dilemmas and possibly called for compassionate exceptions from the general rules.
