Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T05:16:04.417Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Neurodevelopmental and psychosocial interventions for individuals with CHD: a research agenda and recommendations from the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 June 2021

Adam R Cassidy*
Affiliation:
Boston Children’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
Samantha C Butler
Affiliation:
Boston Children’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
Jennie Briend
Affiliation:
Sisters by Heart, El Segundo, CA, USA
Johanna Calderon
Affiliation:
Boston Children’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
Frank Casey
Affiliation:
Paediatric Cardiology Belfast Trust, Royal Belfast Hospital for Sick Children, Belfast, Northern Ireland
Lori E Crosby
Affiliation:
Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
Jennifer Fogel
Affiliation:
Advocate Children’s Hospital, Oak Lawn, IL, USA
Naomi Gauthier
Affiliation:
Boston Children’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
Carol Raimondi
Affiliation:
Conquering CHD, Madison, WI, USA
Bradley S Marino
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Cleveland Clinic Children’s Hospital, Cleveland, OH, USA
Erica Sood
Affiliation:
Nemours Cardiac Center & Nemours Center for Healthcare Delivery Science, Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, Delaware, USA; Department of Pediatrics, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Jennifer L Butcher
Affiliation:
C. S. Mott Children’s Hospital, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Adam R. Cassidy, Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. Tel: +1 507-284-2649; Fax: +1 507-284-4158. E-mail: Cassidy.Adam@mayo.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In 2018, the Neurodevelopmental and Psychosocial Interventions Working Group of the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative convened through support from an R13 grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to survey the state of neurodevelopmental and psychosocial intervention research in CHD and to propose a slate of critical questions and investigations required to improve outcomes for this growing population of survivors and their families. Prior research, although limited, suggests that individualised developmental care interventions delivered early in life are beneficial for improving a range of outcomes including feeding, motor and cognitive development, and physiological regulation. Interventions to address self-regulatory, cognitive, and social-emotional challenges have shown promise in other medical populations, yet their applicability and effectiveness for use in individuals with CHD have not been examined. To move this field of research forward, we must strive to better understand the impact of neurodevelopmental and psychosocial intervention within the CHD population including adapting existing interventions for individuals with CHD. We must examine the ways in which dedicated cardiac neurodevelopmental follow-up programmes bolster resilience and support children and families through the myriad transitions inherent to the experience of living with CHD. And, we must ensure that interventions are person-/family-centred, inclusive of individuals from diverse cultural backgrounds as well as those with genetic/medical comorbidities, and proactive in their efforts to include individuals who are at highest risk but who may be traditionally less likely to participate in intervention trials.

Type
Review
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

The November 2020 issue of Cardiology in the Young contains the inaugural five manuscripts from the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative, Reference Sood, Jacobs and Marino1-Reference Ilardi, Sanz and Cassidy5 marking the beginning of the partnership between the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative and Cardiology in the Young. In this issue of Cardiology in the Young, this article is part of the first set of three papers from the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative R13 Grant funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health of the United States of America, which defines the research agenda for the next decade across seven domains of cardiac neurodevelopmental and psychosocial outcomes research. Reference Sood, Jacobs and Marino6-Reference Sood, Lisanti and Woolf-King8

Now that individuals with CHD are living longer, it is clear that the neurodevelopmental and psychosocial challenges they face are among the strongest correlates and predictors of quality of life across the lifespan. Reference Wilson, Smith-Parrish, Marino and Kovacs9 This risk is especially great among those diagnosed with critical CHD requiring surgery within the first year of life. Elevated risk of early feeding, motor and self-regulatory difficulties during infancy give way to later-emerging deficits in attention, executive function, visual-spatial processing, and social cognitive capacities during childhood and adolescence, which in turn undermine the development of adaptive skills necessary to successfully manage the transition to adulthood and subsequent independence. Reference Cassidy, Ilardi and Bowen10 Despite increasing recognition of these challenges, Reference Cassidy, Ilardi and Bowen10,Reference Marino, Lipkin and Newburger11 little attention has been given to the design and implementation of CHD-specific neurodevelopmental and psychosocial interventions. Reference Calderon and Bellinger12,Reference Tesson, Wales and Butow13

At this time, our knowledge of the risks for adverse neurodevelopmental and psychosocial outcomes in individuals with CHD dramatically outstrips our knowledge of how to mitigate those risks – an imbalance that has become untenable as patients, families, care providers, and other stakeholders increasingly look for guidance regarding how best to optimise individual potential and maximise the quality of life for each child and family affected by CHD. Further, since both biological and social determinants of health are critical when optimising wellness, interventions must be designed to have socio-ecologic validity and the capacity to reach all individuals, especially those facing greater psychosocial challenges and health disparities.Reference Black, Roberts and Steele14

The Neurodevelopmental and Psychosocial Interventions Working Group of the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative included content area experts in psychology and neuropsychology, cardiology, feeding and speech/language pathology, health disparities, and family support including a patient and a parent stakeholder (Table 1). Working Group participants included members from the United States of America and Europe who convened in 2018 to address the following goals: 1) Describe the state of neurodevelopmental and psychosocial intervention research in CHD and 2) propose an intervention research agenda aimed at optimising the neurodevelopmental and psychosocial potential of individuals affected by CHD. The effort was supported by a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute R13 grant awarded to the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative in collaboration with the Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, which funded a two-day meeting of multidisciplinary, multinational experts and patient/caregiver stakeholders in Kansas City, MO.

Table 1. Neurodevelopmental and Psychosocial Interventions Working Group participants

WG = working group.

* Working Group Co-Lead; ** Health Disparities Expert.

To achieve its goals, the Working Group developed five critical questions to guide the development of an intervention research agenda for CHD for the next decade (Table 2). Each critical question focused on interventions that are inclusive for individuals of all backgrounds including those who traditionally face health disparities and those with genetic diagnoses and other medical comorbidities. The research agenda included interventions that have both randomised controlled trial and quality improvement designs, occur across settings (e.g., home, school, hospital, e-Health/telemedicine, camp), are tailored to the challenges associated with CHD, are preventative, include cost-effectiveness analysis, and are focused on optimisation for both individual and group differences.

Table 2. Interventions: critical questions, significant gaps in knowledge, and investigations needed

CQ = critical question, CND = cardiac neurodevelopmental

Critical question 1: How do we adapt effective interventions in other medical populations that address known risk factors in CHD?

Existing knowledge

There is a sizeable body of evidence supporting the efficacy of interventions which address known neurodevelopmental and psychosocial risk factors in other high-risk populations such as children born preterm and those diagnosed with developmental disabilities. Moreover, theoretical frameworks exist for adapting interventions for use in individuals with various medical conditions. Reference Craig, Dieooe, Macintyre, Michie, Nazareth and Petticrew15,Reference Czajkowski, Powell and Adler16

Individualised developmental care programmes show particular promise for promoting positive neurodevelopmental outcomes among medically at-risk children when implemented in the newborn period. Individualised developmental care is a model of care that minimises the mismatch between infant neurobiological needs and the often toxic hospital environment. The Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program Reference Butler, Huyler, Kaza and Rachwal17,Reference Als18 is the only evidence-based developmental care programme and is well validated in the preterm infant population where it has been shown to decrease the length of hospital stay and improve physiological functioning, long-term neurodevelopment, parent confidence, and patient and family satisfaction among infants born preterm. Reference Als18-Reference Als, Duffy and McAnulty21 Other programmes, such as Trauma Informed Care and Family Centered Care, incorporate an understanding of trauma and need to recognise the central importance of family into routine care and treatment of illness. Reference Ko, Ford and Kassam-Adams22-Reference Stuber, Schneider, Kassam-Adams, Kazak and Saxe24 Specific aspects of these programmes, such as skin-to-skin contact, interdisciplinary developmental care rounds, cue-based care, family support, and education for providers, have been found to be developmentally supportive of children and families affected by CHD and contribute to improved neurodevelopmental outcomes. Reference Butler, Huyler, Kaza and Rachwal17,Reference Miller, Lisanti and Witte25-Reference Harrison, Chen, Stein, Brown and Heathcock31 The use of breast milk and breastfeeding can also support infant growth and oral feeding, as well as promote bonding with family and improve cognitive development, Reference Brown Belfort32 and social-emotional growth over time. Reference Combs and Marino33,Reference Kramer, Aboud and Mironova34

In addition to inpatient supports, early intervention has demonstrated positive effects on the developmental achievements of children with or at-risk for developmental disability. Reference Nores and Barnett35-Reference Olds, Kitzman and Cole37 Families from high-risk populations who received prenatal and infancy home visits by nurses showed improved cognitive, academic, behavioural, and sociodemographic outcomes for their children. Reference Eckenrode, Campa and Luckey38

Interventions targeting areas of deficit commonly observed among individuals with CHD have been developed and well-established with non-CHD populations. As an example, practice guidelines for behavioural and psychotropic interventions for individuals diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder are established for other populations, yet there has been limited research involving individuals with CHD who have special considerations due to cardiovascular effects of common medications Reference Wolraich, Hagan and Allan39,Reference Vetter, Blum and Berger40 . Similarly, the efficacy of behavioural and psychotropic interventions for individuals with mood Reference David-Ferdon and Kaslow41 and anxiety disorders, Reference Wang, Whiteside and Sim42,Reference Hetrick, McKenzie, Cox, Simmons and Merry43 including procedural anxiety Reference Cohen, Blount, Chorney, Zempsky, Rodrigues, Cousins, Roberts and Steele44 and coping with medical illness, Reference Harbeck-Weber, Fisher, Dittner and Roberts45 has been established, but these interventions have been understudied among individuals with CHD. A 2013 Cochrane review identified no randomised controlled trials demonstrating the efficacy of cognitive-behavioural interventions for depression in adolescents or adults with CHD, and a Reference Lane, Millane and Lip46 more recent review continued to report limited efficacy among these populations. Reference Tesson, Wales and Butow13

Among healthy school-age children and adolescents, as well as those with various medical conditions, there is a strong interest in addressing neurocognitive deficits (e.g., in executive function, attention), using, for example, computerised interventions such as Cogmed; however, data on the effectiveness of these programmes have been mixed. Reference Melby-Lervåg and Hulme47,Reference Diamond and Ling48 Therapeutic camp programmes have been shown to improve mood, self-concept, empathy, quality of life, and emotional well-being for children with cancer and their families. Reference Martiniuk, Silva, Amylon and Barr49 Adolescents with chronic illness also benefit, in terms of adjustment and well-being, from peer-based support programmes, including programmes that are school-based and disease-specific, as well as those that are community-based. Reference Gomez-Gascon, Martin-Fernandez, Galvez-Herrer, Tapias-Merino, Beamud-Lagos and Mingote-Adan50 Emerging evidence exists for telemedicine and e-Health interventions in improving outcomes for adolescents with chronic medical and psychiatric conditions, including PTSD. Reference Sawyer, Drew, Yeo and Britto51

Significant gaps in knowledge

Despite decades of research evaluating neurodevelopmental and psychosocial interventions for other medical populations, the safety, feasibility, acceptability, accessibility, efficacy, and effectiveness of these interventions for use in individuals with CHD are largely unknown. Adapting interventions from other populations will require an understanding of the unique characteristics and challenges inherent in CHD, and their relevance to the particular intervention considered. In addition, while continued surveillance and consultation are recommended for children with complex CHD, it is unclear how many are receiving early intervention following discharge and how this impacts long-term development.

Outside the hospital setting, and particularly among school-age children, adolescents, and young adults with CHD, we remain largely uninformed regarding the long-term effectiveness of neurocognitive interventions (e.g., Cogmed), as well as their potential impact on academic and social domains; the effectiveness of specific educational and peer mentorship interventions; the impact of health inequities and barriers that may prevent individuals and families from accessing interventions; how best to engage telemedicine and e-Health, social media, and other technology tools to broaden the reach of interventions beyond the clinic setting; and the short- and longer-range economic implications and cost-effectiveness of intervening to mitigate the host of risks associated with CHD.

Investigations needed

  1. (1) Investigate the safety and feasibility of individualised developmental care interventions delivered during a cardiac hospitalisation

Safety and feasibility studies of individualised developmental care interventions in the cardiac ICU are needed to adapt evidence-based programmes to the unique needs of infants with CHD and their families. Smaller-scale quality improvement studies should lead to larger-scale, multi-centre, randomised controlled trials to assess child neurodevelopmental and physiologic outcomes in the newborn period, as well as in early infancy and over the course of the lifespan. Such research could potentially highlight the implications of early-life intervention on later markers of health and well-being, along with improved family outcomes, decreased parent stress, and reduced healthcare utilisation and economic burdens.

  1. (2) Examine best practices for promoting handling and moving of infants and young children during cardiac hospitalisation

Concept and safety/feasibility studies are necessary to examine safe practices for handling/moving infants in the inpatient acute cardiac care setting, providing skin-to-skin holding, and increasing parent involvement in care and handling. This should be followed thereafter by quality improvement projects geared at increasing parent/caregiver comfort regarding the full range of developmental care interventions while hospitalised. These endeavours would be strengthened by a team-based, interdisciplinary approach that includes collaborative partnerships among nursing, cardiology/cardiac surgery, physical therapy, occupational therapy, child life and music therapy, nutrition, speech/language pathology, and psychology.

  1. (3) Study short- and longer-range outcomes associated with individualised developmental care interventions in an acute cardiac inpatient setting

As mentioned, there are many positive outcomes associated with individualised developmental care intervention, including decreased length of hospitalisation and improved feeding, among children born preterm. Reference Als, Lawhon, Duffy, Mcanulty, Gibes-Grossman and Blickman19-Reference Als, Duffy and McAnulty21,Reference Nores and Barnett35 In the case of infants with CHD, for which length of hospital stay is among the strongest risk factors for adverse outcomes, Reference Hansen, Rotermann and Logoteta52-Reference Newburger, Wypij and Bellinger54 reduced length of hospital stay would lower hospital costs and reduce exposures to potentially noxious elements in the acute inpatient environment (e.g., plasticizers, Reference Gaynor, Ittenbach and Calafat55 loud sounds, bright lights, inadequate protection of sleep, inadequate attention to parent mental health, separation from family, stress reduction, and the use of non-pharmacologic comfort interventions Reference Ryan, Jones and Allen56 ) that may contribute to worse outcomes for these children. Individualised developmental care interventions also advocate for staff support to reduce stress and burnout, which would positively affect the patient and family. Interventions to support growth and weight gain, use of human milk, early breastfeeding, and decreasing time to full oral feeding in patients with CHD Reference Ross and Browne57-Reference Medoff-Cooper, Irving and Marino61 are of utmost importance as oral feeding ranks the greatest stressor for caregivers following cardiac surgery and often lengthens hospital stay. Reference Imms62,Reference Furlong-Dillard, Neary and Marietta63 In addition, there is no current gold standard programme for infant feeding in cardiology, but this should be explored. Programmes that monitor development over time and provide intervention beyond infancy such as early intervention and early supports in the school system would likely reduce concerns seen in adolescence and adulthood.

  1. (4) Conduct translational research studying empirically supported psychosocial and neurocognitive interventions developed for other populations in individuals with CHD

Building on existing knowledge of interventions that work in other populations, translational studies are needed to effectively adapt interventions for use among children with CHD. Psychosocial interventions targeting anxiety, mood concerns, and the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural therapy in addressing these issues will be particularly important given their high prevalence among individuals with CHD. Efficacious interventions developed for individuals with other chronic illnesses, such as cancer and diabetes, that address comorbidities such as pain, adherence to medical regimens, family functioning, transition from paediatric to adult healthcare, and traumatic stress could be adapted to benefit individuals with CHD. Reference Roberts and Steele64 Neurocognitive interventions that address attention, executive function, and visual-spatial deficits are also necessary and should investigate a range of delivery modalities including computerised and in-person formats.

  1. (5) Investigate new modalities for delivering neurodevelopmental and psychosocial interventions within the CHD population

Concept, pilot, and quality improvement studies can explore new modalities of intervention delivery, followed thereafter by larger-scale, multi-centre implementation studies. For example, telemedicine for post-surgical developmental follow-up may promote earlier identification and treatment of neurodevelopmental and psychosocial issues. Reference Stuckey and Domingues-Montanari65,Reference Young, Gupta and Palacios66 Randomised controlled trials of these interventions in hospital settings or via telemedicine Reference March, Spence and Donovan67 may establish effectiveness for patients with CHD, reach a larger population, and provide preventative intervention.

Critical question 2: What is the impact of neurodevelopmental and psychosocial interventions in individuals with CHD?

Existing knowledge

Preliminary interventions in infants with CHD show improvement in infant oral feeding, Reference Indramohan, Pedigo, Rostoker, Cambare, Grogan and Federman68,Reference Weston, Husain and Curzon69 physiological regulation, Reference Harrison and Brown70 early cognitive development, Reference Harrison and Brown70 family functioning, Reference Harrison and Brown70 and reduced length of hospital stay following surgery. Reference Indramohan, Pedigo, Rostoker, Cambare, Grogan and Federman68,Reference Weston, Husain and Curzon69 Moreover, findings from the Congenital Heart Disease Intervention Project, a series of controlled trials aimed at improving psychosocial and neurodevelopmental outcomes among young children with severe CHD, support the use of parent-oriented psychoeducation for improving infant mental, social, and emotional development at 6 months of age and gains in family functioning and fewer days of missed school among 4–6-year-old children. Reference McCusker, Doherty and Molloy71-Reference Casey, Stewart and McCusker75 However, a similarly designed randomised controlled trial utilising both parent- and child-oriented psychoeducation reported only small, non-significant improvements in child psychosocial adjustment relative to standard care. Reference van der Mheen, Meentken and van Beynum76 For children and adolescents with CHD, computerised interventions are being studied to examine their impact on executive function and social skills. Reference Calderon, Bellinger and Hartigan77 Aerobic exercise has been associated with self- or proxy-reported improvements in cognitive functioning, social outcomes, and health-related quality of life. Recommendations for reducing child anxiety related to invasive cardiac procedures Reference LeRoy, Elixson, O’Brien, Tong, Turpin and Uzark78 have been documented but not clinically tested. Single centre interventions including psychotropic medication, Reference Cassidy, Ilardi and Bowen10 access to a psychologist in clinic, Reference Marino, Lipkin and Newburger11 mindfulness training, Reference Calderon and Bellinger12 and increased physical activity Reference Tesson, Wales and Butow13-Reference Craig, Dieooe, Macintyre, Michie, Nazareth and Petticrew15 have demonstrated reduced symptoms of depression, anxiety, stress, and improved quality of life for adolescents and adults with CHD.

Significant gaps in knowledge

Most prior neurodevelopmental/psychosocial intervention studies are single-centred, cross-sectional, and have not made use of randomised controlled designs which remain the gold standard for clinical trials. Many of these investigations had limited statistical power to detect a meaningful effect, and outcome measurements varied greatly between studies. Further, the efficacy of interventions in adolescence, to date, has been weak, Reference Tesson, Wales and Butow13 and more trials are needed. Finally, many of these intervention studies exclude individuals with CHD with comorbidities such as genetic syndromes, which may substantially impact intervention design, administration, interpretation, and generalisability of findings.

Investigations needed

  1. (1) Operationalise clinically meaningful intervention outcomes across development

It is critical to carefully consider outcome measures based on the age and functional status of the child, and any behavioural and emotional constructions of relevance to the intervention. Initially, studies focused on global neurodevelopmental skills such as overall intelligence quotient scores, but as more has been learned about risk, outcomes are being tailored to aspects of neurodevelopment that are more often impaired among a CHD population such as executive function and visual-spatial processing. Standardised measurement protocols to assess neurodevelopmental outcomes, as well as key moderators of intervention efficacy and effectiveness (e.g., SES, language), must be identified and may include formal assessment, structured observational measures, caregiver-/self-report questionnaires, and measures of neurobiological change (i.e., structural or functional variations on neuroimaging). It is important to have consistency across sites to reduce bias that can come from single-centre reporting and promote generalisability of findings. The Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative has made recommendations Reference Ware, Butcher and Latal4,Reference Ilardi, Sanz and Cassidy5 for a standardised assessment battery from infancy through teen years, which will help to guide future intervention research when selecting outcome measures to assess the impact of interventions on the neurodevelopment of individuals with CHD. Reference Ware, Butcher and Latal4,Reference Ilardi, Sanz and Cassidy5 Large-scale, multi-centre studies, which will be feasible within the context of the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative data registry, are necessary to allow for adequate clinical stratification and inclusion of potential comorbidities as well as more diverse sociodemographic variables.

  1. (2) Conduct prospective randomised controlled trials with longer-term follow-up to investigate efficacy and effectiveness beyond the snapshot of a pre-post intervention

Studies with sequential post-intervention visits, at predetermined time intervals, would provide evidence of cost-effectiveness and potential generalisation of treatment effects in the long term. The number and timing of follow-up should take the developmental period into account with more immediate follow-up during early development and longer-term follow-up of more complex neurodevelopmental skills into adolescence and beyond. Further, efficacy trials (does an intervention work in an ideal setting) should be developed with a mind to effectiveness (does an intervention work in a real-world setting and are they feasible given limitations such as cost).

  1. (3) Partner with key stakeholders to define “clinically meaningful” outcomes

Determining what constitutes a clinically meaningful change post-intervention involves more than statistical significance. Indeed, the threshold for clinically meaningful changes pre- versus post-intervention should be interpreted in light of both individual and population-based changes in CHD. Reference Bellinger79 In all interventions research, it will be important to enlist the input of patients, families, and other stakeholders to ensure an accurate understanding of the real-world relevance of selected outcome measures and to consider such an understanding alongside quantitative indicators of change (e.g., effect sizes quantification and use of reliable change index estimates, along with statistical significance). For instance, a 2-point standard score drop on a measure of externalising behaviour may be a statistically significant change but is unlikely to be a noticeable change in real-world behaviour.

Critical question 3: How are cardiac neurodevelopmental programmes currently utilised, in what ways do these coordinated programmes impact outcomes, and what are the best programme practices?

Existing knowledge

Early intervention programmes for high-risk populations, such as preterm and/or very low birth weight infants, are well-established and associated with improved neurodevelopmental Reference Cioni, Inguaggiato and Sgandurra80 and psychosocial functioning Reference Case-Smith81 and have demonstrated the positive impact of inpatient neurodevelopmental care Reference Burke82,Reference Westrup83 and outpatient neurodevelopmental follow-up. Reference Spittle, Anderson, Boyd and Doyle84 Networks of newborn follow-up programmes serve as data registries providing programme benchmarks, initiating multi-site quality improvement projects to improve the standard of care, and allow for the development of best practice guidelines. Reference Horbar85 Indeed, the importance of standardised follow-up programmes for former medically fragile neonates is so strongly recognised that it is a requirement for accreditation for graduate medical education in neonatal–perinatal medicine by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. 86

The National Pediatric Cardiology Quality Improvement Collaborative Reference Clauss, Anderson and Lannon87 and the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative have created data registries to track neurodevelopmental outcomes for children with CHD. The creation of data registries and benchmarking, especially when approached through the lens of quality improvement science, will inform the development, implementation, and dissemination of best practice guidelines. For other complex paediatric conditions including cancer Reference Walsh, Noll, Annett, Patel, Patenaude and Embry88 and cystic fibrosis, Reference Fink, Loeffler, Marshall, Goss and Morgan89 the best practices of care have been driven by data derived from patient registries.

Significant gaps in knowledge

While much is known about the neurodevelopmental and psychosocial benefits of developmental follow-up programmes in neonatology, there are no published studies on the impact of participation in cardiac neurodevelopmental follow-up programmes. These programmes provide what are thought to be critical intervention supports and services, and yet empirical data are currently lacking.

Investigations needed

  1. (1) Conduct feasibility, acceptability, and accessibility studies to examine processes (e.g., screening, monitoring procedures) and components (e.g., types of services) that result in the most beneficial outcomes

Outcome measurements, standardised across programmes, should focus on assessing domains that are most clinically meaningful to individuals with CHD and their families (e.g., quality of life, successful transition to independence). Studies may also include measurement of programme access, utilisation, cost-effectiveness, and socio-demographic variation as well as patient experience and pathways to care. Determining methods to reduce barriers to accessing cardiac neurodevelopmental programmes would boost attendance, a key aspect of universal protection/prevention screening and assessment programmes. It will be particularly important to examine the availability of trained personnel, time to appointment date or waitlist, physical space, cost, and insurance coverage.

  1. (2) Examine whether centres that have coordinated cardiac neurodevelopmental programmes actually have improved neurodevelopmental and psychosocial outcomes for individuals with CHD

Study designs should include pre-post programme implementation data collection and should compare outcomes across time points as well as between centres with and without cardiac neurodevelopmental programmes on variables such as percentage of children entering school with appropriate educational supports, patient/family satisfaction, quality of life, and performance on formal measures of neurodevelopmental and psychosocial functioning. Establishing model programmes as the standard of care across medical centres will require clear evidence of effectiveness for a variety of stakeholders, including patients and families, advocacy groups, hospital administration, and insurance carriers.

  1. (3) Develop efficient ways to screen individuals seen in cardiac neurodevelopmental programmes and tailor to different levels of intervention

Insofar as timely and appropriate identification and stratification of risk facilitate efficient access to limited assessment and treatment resources, it will be important to design and test procedures for screening individuals with CHD to ensure that resources are allocated appropriately. In line with screening models proposed by Kazak and colleagues, Reference Kazak, Hwang and Fang Chen90 for paediatric psychology, and Hardy et al., Reference Hardy, Olson and Sy91 for paediatric neuropsychology, large-scale, multi-site studies which evaluate the appropriateness of tiered screening procedures implemented within primary care/cardiology clinic settings would identify individuals most in need of neurodevelopmental and/or psychosocial support. As these models suggest, the majority of patients may succeed with only periodic surveillance and recommendations, while the minority will require more intensive interventions. Developing a way to screen patients into these tiered interventions should result in more efficient care and could result in resource savings.

Critical question 4: How do we foster the development of resilience in individuals with CHD?

Existing knowledge

The concept of resilience, defined as “a dynamic process wherein individuals display positive adaptation despite experiences of significant adversity or trauma,” Reference Luthar and Cicchetti92 is perhaps best understood as a capacity that develops over time, rather than as an inherent personality trait. Reference Ungar93 Resilience, and other wellness-promoting concepts such as post-traumatic growth and grit, is positively associated with better health outcomes Reference Traub and Boynton-Jarrett94 and decreased stress responses 95 within the general population, and improved psychosocial functioning and self-management in individuals with chronic illness. Reference Stewart and Yuen96-Reference Sharkey, Bakula and Baraldi98 For example, among young, highly stressed children in foster care, therapeutic interventions have been shown to promote resilience by mitigating the effects of early adversity on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis activity and promoting the development of adaptive caregiver attachment relationships. Reference Fisher, Gunnar, Dozier, Bruce and Pears99 In addition, adolescents with greater knowledge of their own medical history and associated complications, higher resilience, and more positive family dynamics have been found to better adhere to health-promoting behaviours such as following exercise and nutrition recommendations and reporting more adaptive stress management strategies. Reference Huang, Chen and Chen100 Resilience in individuals with CHD is also related to a lower level of depressive symptoms Reference Moon, Huh, Kang, Park, Jun and Lee101 and is influenced by parenting factors such as emotional warmth, rejection, punishment, control, and overprotection in adolescence. Reference Moon, Song and Huh102

Other than a feasibility study Reference Kovacs, Bandyopadhyay and Grace103 and some evidence to support the use of a group-based intervention to improve aspects of resilience in adolescents with CHD, Reference Wang, Whiteside and Sim42 studies examining resilience in individuals with CHD are limited. Numerous studies report that participation in disease-specific camp programmes positively influences perceived health, interpersonal relationships, and self-esteem, Reference Martiniuk, Silva, Amylon and Barr49,Reference Desai, Sutton, Staley and Hannon104-Reference Walker and Pearman108 which are components of resilience, but resilience has not yet been specifically measured.

Significant gaps in knowledge

Literature on the experiences impacting resilience, interventions to bolster resilience, and measurement is limited in the CHD population. For both children and adolescents, there is evidence to suggest that exercise/physical activity interventions promote improved cardiovascular health and enhanced psychosocial functioning and quality of life individuals with CHD, Reference Dulfer, Helbing and Utens109-Reference Dean, Gillespie and Greene112 although findings are somewhat mixed Reference Dulfer, Helbing, Duppen and Utens113 and the impact of physical activity interventions on resilience remains to be examined. Even with more than 35 years of physical activity promotion and exercise training in patients with CHD, Reference Takken, Giardini and Reybrouck114,Reference Duppen, Takken and Hopman115 research into optimal training methods and resilience as an outcome of physical exercise programmes is lacking.

Investigations needed

  1. (1) Adopt a conceptual framework for designing and conducting resilience-promoting intervention studies that appropriately capture the nature and complexity of resilience

A model from the National Scientific Council on the Developing Child recommends that interventions designed to facilitate resilience should include 1) ways to improve the caregiver–child relationship, 2) methods for building self-efficacy and perceived control, 3) strengthening adaptive and self-regulatory functioning, and 4) incorporating faith, hope, and cultural traditions. 95 Moreover, resilience interventions should encompass the entire lifespan and should begin with monitoring, supporting, and promoting the development of adaptive coping strategies for the family, if possible, before the child with CHD is even born, as further discussed below.

  1. (2) Capitalise on early identification to begin bolstering caregiver/family resilience prior to delivery

At prenatal cardiac diagnosis, interventions designed to shape the communication provided to the family, with a particular focus on the developing parent–infant relationship, education regarding infant neurodevelopment, and maternal and paternal self-care would support family well-being. By focusing on optimisation and resilience, the emphasis of the prenatal visit may shift to infant neuroprotection and promotion of optimistic parent perceptions of their child, potentially reducing parental stress during the pregnancy. This focus on family well-being before the child is born could result in improved long-term outcomes for the child with CHD. Reference Lisanti116

  1. (3) Recognise individual and family-based differences in perception and experience in living with CHD

The development of valid, CHD-specific tools to measure aspects of resilience will be important for assessing each child/family’s unique experiences with CHD, including systemic and cultural factors, and family stress and available support. Adding measurement of resilience to a standardised battery could help to better understand how different experiences bolster resilience and identify targets for future intervention.

  1. (4) Identify interventions for promoting resilience during childhood and adolescence

Studies are needed to directly evaluate the potential benefit of physical activity interventions on resilience among individuals with CHD. Additionally, specifically measuring resilience as part of a CHD camp programme could help to better understand positive outcomes from this experience. Other potential interventions may include developing a mentoring programme for individuals with CHD or qualitative research with focus groups of adults with CHD to examine individual factors associated with resilience. Studies similar to those in adults with cancer, which utilise stress management to improve resilience, Reference Loprinzi, Prasad, Schroeder and Sood117 would likely benefit adults with CHD as well and should be investigated.

  1. (5) Include resilience as a primary outcome in CHD surgical trials

The effects of decreased stress 95 should be looked at with respect to surgical outcomes, in addition to ICU length of stay, post-operative complications, and other aspects of health and recovery. Furthermore, child, family, and cultural markers of resilience should be carefully examined in clinical and surgical trials as potential moderators of outcomes.

Critical question 5: How do we develop systematic and effective approaches to optimise developmental and medical transitions for individuals with CHD and their families?

Existing knowledge

The experience of living with CHD includes numerous transition points with possible vulnerability and potential for intervention. Some of the most salient transitions include: 1) acute inpatient care to stepdown unit care; 2) tube to oral feeding; 3) inpatient to outpatient settings; 4) surgical centre to local medical care; 5) early intervention to the school system; 6) childhood to adolescence; 7) adolescence to young adulthood; 8) paediatric to adult CHD care; and 9) for caregivers, from being primarily an observer of their child’s medical care to being the primary provider of daily medical surveillance and care and eventually becoming less active participants as their child moves towards independence.

The parents of medically complex infants with CHD can experience high levels of stress, post-traumatic stress, anxiety, and depression, Reference Visconti, Saudino, Rappaport, Newburger and Bellinger118 which may negatively impact their ability to parent in ways most supportive of the high-risk child. The need to access services from multiple hospital and community systems makes communication and coordination among providers and caregivers critical. However, clear and understandable communication is often lacking. Reference Penny119 Discharge instructions, for example, often include difficult medical terminology and can be confusing for families. School systems that are unfamiliar with the needs of children with CHD are unlikely to provide appropriate supports and services, increasing the risk for academic underachievement and discouragement. School-liaison programmes, which serve as a bridge between clinic and school and are considered standard-of-care in paediatric cancer, Reference Wiener, Kazak, Noll, Patenaude and Kupst120 are effective in promoting access to services and associated with increased parent satisfaction and parent beliefs that their child is meeting his/her academic potential. Reference Northman, Ross, Morris and Tarquini121,Reference Northman, Morris and Loucas122

Specific to CHD, deficits in executive function, which are highly prevalent, Reference Cassidy, White, DeMaso, Newburger and Bellinger123,Reference Sanz, Berl, Armour, Wang, Cheng and Donofrio124 are likely to become more problematic during the transition to adolescence, undermining the development of independence and adaptive skills that may further compromise the transition to adulthood. Indeed, 40%–60% of CHD patients experience a lapse in their care, particularly during the transition to adult medical care, and those who experience a lapse are three times more likely to require urgent cardiac intervention. Reference Gurvitz, Valente and Broberg125,Reference Yeung, Kay, Roosevelt, Brandon and Yetman126 Lack of knowledge, self-management, and self-advocacy skills have also been documented among heart transplant patients. Reference Grady, Hof and Andrei127 However, participation during adolescence in a nursing-led educational intervention designed to prepare transplant patients for transition to adult care resulted in better maintenance of medical follow-up and increased CHD knowledge and self-management skills, Reference Mackie, Rempel and Kovacs128 so an initial transition intervention has shown some promise.

Significant gaps in knowledge

Intervention research aimed at promoting optimal adaptation across the full range of transitions inherent in CHD is limited, and existing research focuses almost exclusively on the transition from paediatric to adult care. Reference Mackie, Rempel and Kovacs128 Interventions are still needed to aid parents in the transition from inpatient to outpatient care; to increase the effectiveness of patient/family CHD educational tools; and to support successful transitions from hospital to community-based CHD providers and schools. Moreover, among adolescents with CHD, it remains unclear how best to promote functional independence, adaptive skills, and self-awareness/knowledge of one’s medical condition.

Addressing these critical questions should result in a more accurate understanding of the range of transitions inherent to CHD, which would in turn facilitate the generation of smoother and more standardised procedures and practice guidelines for promoting optimal development across times of transition. With enhanced communication and coordination across providers and settings, fewer patients would be missed or lost to follow-up, child and family support needs would be more readily identified and would trigger appropriate referrals and access to therapeutic services, and barriers to accessing services would be recognised and addressed to reduce healthcare inequities.

Investigations needed

  1. (1) Comprehensively characterise the full range of transitions inherent to living with CHD

Large-scale, population-based parent and/or self-report surveys with both qualitative and quantitative analytic techniques are needed to characterise the full range of transitions experienced by individuals with CHD, as well as key challenges to adaptive/functional independence across the lifespan.

  1. (2) Utilise quality improvement science to improve strategies for assisting families in navigating CHD-specific challenges and transitions in the medical system

Quality improvement-oriented intervention studies are also indicated to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of strategies for preparing parents following prenatal CHD diagnosis. Additional interventions may include providing developmental summaries, modifying discharge information, and increasing the frequency of post-discharge follow-up and should deliberately consider how technology such as phone-based apps and teleconferencing may be used to support families following discharge.

Conclusions

Advancements in neurodevelopmental and psychosocial interventions for individuals with CHD have the potential to radically reshape prevailing paradigms related to patient care and expectations regarding short- and long-range outcomes from infancy to adulthood. The establishment of a coordinated cardiac neurodevelopmental programme data registry, Reference Marino, Sood and Cassidy2 the use of standardised measurement of key neurodevelopmental and psychosocial outcomes across programmes, and administrative support for follow-up and data collection are critical. From the perspective of research and quality improvement science, results of well-designed intervention trials, including trials within a well-designed data registry, Reference Li, Sajobi and Menon129,Reference Lauer and D’Agostino130 would directly inform practice guidelines and improve long-term outcomes for children and families managing CHD. Finally, to promote resilience and optimisation for all individuals with CHD, it is crucial for outcomes to be individualised, to avoid exclusion based on genetics and other medical comorbidities, to address cultural differences and values that may impact the development of resilience, and to include outreach efforts to study interventions for those less likely to participate. Improvements in neurodevelopment and parent support will, in turn, result in a healthier, happier, more independent, more productive, and generally more resilient population, requiring fewer federal and state governmental services and well-positioned to contribute to society to the fullest extent possible.

Acknowledgements

The members of the Neurodevelopmental and Psychosocial Interventions Working Group would like to thank Dawn Ilardi, Nadine Kasparian, Amy Jo Lisanti, Jacquie Sanz, and the Publications Committee of the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative for their thoughtful review of this manuscript.

Financial support

This work was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (grant number 1R13HL142298-01).

Conflicts of interest

None

Footnotes

Adam R. Cassidy is now at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

References

Sood, E, Jacobs, JP, Marino, BS The Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative: A new community improving outcomes for individuals with congenital heart disease. Cardiol Young 2020; 30: 15951596. doi: 10.1017/S1047951120003509.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marino, BS, Sood, E, Cassidy, AR, et al. The origins and development of the cardiac neurodevelopment outcome collaborative : creating innovative clinical, quality improvement, and research opportunities. Cardiol Young 2020; 30: 15971602. doi: 10.1017/S1047951120003510.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, TA, Sadhwani, A, Sanz, J, et al. Variations in practice in cardiac neurodevelopmental follow-up programs. Cardiol Young 2020; 30: 16031608. doi: 10.1017/S1047951120003522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ware, J, Butcher, J, Latal, B, et al. Neurodevelopmental evaluation strategies for children with complex congenital heart disease aged birth through five years: recommendations from the cardiac neurodevelopmental outcome collaborative. Cardiol Young 2020; 30: 16091622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ilardi, D, Sanz, J, Cassidy, AR, et al. Neurodevelopmental evaluation for school-age children with congenital heart disease: recommendations from the cardiac neurodevelopmental outcome collaborative. Cardiol Young 2020; 30: 16231636.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sood, E, Jacobs, J, Marino, BS Optimizing neurodevelopmental and psychosocial outcomes for survivors with congenital heart disease: a research agenda for the next decade. Cardiol Young 2021; 31 (This issue).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanz, JH, Anixt, J, Bear, L, et al. Characterization of Neurodevelopmental and Psychological Outcomes in Congenital Heart Disease: A research agenda and recommendations from the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative. Cardiol Young 2021; 31 (This issue).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sood, E, Lisanti, A, Woolf-King, S, et al. Parent mental health and family functioning following diagnosis of congenital heart disease: A research agenda and recommendations from the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative. Cardiol Young 2021; 31 (This Issue).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, WM, Smith-Parrish, M, Marino, BS, Kovacs, AH Progress in Pediatric Cardiology Neurodevelopmental and psychosocial outcomes across the congenital heart disease lifespan. Prog Pediatr Cardiol 2015; 39: 113118. doi: 10.1016/j.ppedcard.2015.10.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassidy, AR, Ilardi, D, Bowen, SR, et al. Congenital heart disease: A primer for the pediatric neuropsychologist. Child Neuropsychol 2018; 24: 859902. doi: 10.1080/09297049.2017.1373758.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marino, BS, Lipkin, PH, Newburger, JW, et al. Neurodevelopmental outcomes in children with congenital heart disease: evaluation and management: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2012; 126: 11431172. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e318265ee8a.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calderon, J, Bellinger, DC Executive function deficits in congenital heart disease: why is intervention important? Cardiol Young 2015; (JANUARY): 1–9. doi: 10.1017/S1047951115001134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tesson, S, Wales, NS, Butow, PN, et al. Psychological Interventions for People Affected by Childhood-Onset Heart Disease : A Systematic Review. 2019; 38: 151–161.Google Scholar
Black, M A multi-level, biobehavioral, lifespan perspective. In: Roberts, M, Steele, R, eds. Handbook of Pediatric Psychology. 5th ed. Guilford Press; 2017.Google Scholar
Craig, P, Dieooe, P, Macintyre, S, Michie, S, Nazareth, I, Petticrew, M Developing and evaluating complex interventions: Following considerable development in the field since 2006, MRC and NIHR have jointly commissionned an update of this guidance to be published in 2019. Med Res Counc. Published online 2019: 1–39. https://mrc.ukri.org/documents/pdf/complex-interventions-guidance/.Google Scholar
Czajkowski, SM, Powell, LH, Adler, N, et al. From Idea to Efficacy: the ORBIT Model for Developing Behavioral Treatments for Chronic Diseases. Heal Psychol 2015; 34: 971982. doi: 10.1037/hea0000161.From.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, SC, Huyler, K, Kaza, A, Rachwal, C Filling a significant gap in the cardiac ICU: implementation of individualised developmental care. Cardiol Young Published online 2017: 1–10. doi: 10.1017/S1047951117001469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Als, H Program Guide—Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program (NIDCAP): An Education and Training Program for Health Care Professionals. NIDCAP Federation International.Google Scholar
Als, H, Lawhon, G, Duffy, FH, Mcanulty, GB, Gibes-Grossman, R, Blickman, JG Individualized Developmental Care for the Very Low - Birth - Weight Preterm Infant Medical and Neurofunctional Effects. J Am Med Assoc 1994; 272: 853858. doi: 10.1001/jama.272.11.853.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Als, H, Gilkerson, L, Duffy, FH, et al. A three-center, randomized, controlled trial of individualized developmental care for very low birth weight preterm infants: Medical, neurodevelopmental, parenting, and caregiving effects. J Dev Behav Pediatr 2003; 24: 399408. doi: 10.1097/00004703-200312000-00001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Als, H, Duffy, FH, McAnulty, GB, et al. Early Experience Alters Brain Function and Structure. Pediatrics 2004; 113: 846857. doi: 10.1542/peds.113.4.846.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ko, SJ, Ford, JD, Kassam-Adams, N, et al. Creating Trauma-Informed Systems: child Welfare, Education, First Responders, Health Care, Juvenile Justice. Prof Psychol Res Pract 2008; 39: 396404. doi: 10.1037/0735-7028.39.4.396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kassam-Adams, N, Marsac, ML, Hildenbrand, A, Winston, F Posttraumatic stress following pediatric injury update on diagnosis, risk factors, and intervention. JAMA Pediatr 2013; 167: 11581165. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.2741.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stuber, ML, Schneider, S, Kassam-Adams, N, Kazak, AE, Saxe, G The medical traumatic stress toolkit. CNS Spectr 2006; 11: 137142. doi: 10.1017/s1092852900010671.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, TA, Lisanti, AJ, Witte, MK, et al. A Collaborative Learning Assessment of Developmental Care Practices for Infants in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit. J Pediatr Published online 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.01.043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sood, E, Berends, WM, Butcher, JL, et al. Developmental Care in North American Pediatric Cardiac Intensive Care Units: survey of Current Practices. Adv Neonatal Care 2016; 16: 211219. doi: 10.1097/ANC.0000000000000264.Developmental.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lisanti, AJ, Vittner, D, Medoff-Cooper, B, Fogel, J, Wernovsky, G, Butler, S Individualized Family-Centered Developmental Care. J Cardiovasc Nurs 2018; 1. doi: 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lisanti, AJ, Vittner, D, Medoff-Cooper, B, Fogel, J, Wernovsky, G, Butler, S Individualized Family-Centered Developmental Care: an Essential Model to Address the Unique Needs of Infants with Congenital Heart Disease. J Cardiovasc Nurs 2019; 34: 8593. doi: 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000546.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peterson, JK, Evangelista, LS Developmentally Supportive Care in Congenital Heart Disease: A Concept Analysis. J Pediatr Nurs 2017; 36: 17. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2017.05.007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peterson, JK Supporting optimal neurodevelopmental outcomes in infants and children with congenital heart disease. Crit Care Nurse 2018; 38: 6874.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrison, TM, Chen, CY, Stein, P, Brown, R, Heathcock, JC Neonatal Skin-to-Skin Contact: Implications for Learning and Autonomic Nervous System Function in Infants With Congenital Heart Disease. Biol Res Nurs 2019; 21: 296306. doi: 10.1177/1099800419827599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown Belfort, M The Science of Breastfeeding and Brain Development. Breastfeed Med Off J Acad Breastfeed Med 2017; 12: 459461. doi: 10.1089/bfm.2017.0122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Combs, V, Marino, BS A comparison of growth patterns in breast and bottle-fed infants with congenital heart disease. Pediatr Nurs 1993; 19: 175179.Google ScholarPubMed
Kramer, MS, Aboud, F, Mironova, E, et al. Breastfeeding and child cognitive development: new evidence from a large randomized trial. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2008; 65: 578584. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.65.5.578.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nores, M, Barnett, WS Benefits of early childhood interventions across the world: (Under) Investing in the very young. Econ Educ Rev 2010; 29: 271282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Majnemer, A Benefits of early intervention for children with developmental disabilities. Semin Pediatr Neurol 1998; 5: 6269. doi: 10.1016/S1071-9091(98)80020-X.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olds, DL, Kitzman, H, Cole, R, et al. Effects of Nurse Home-Visiting on Maternal Life Course and Child Development: age 6 Follow-Up Results of a Randomized Trial. Pediatrics 2004; 114: 15501559. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-0962.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eckenrode, J, Campa, M, Luckey, DW, et al. Long-term Effects of Prenatal and Infancy Nurse Home Visitation on the Life Course of Youths. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2010; 164: 916. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2009.240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolraich, ML, Hagan, JF, Allan, C, et al. Clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents. Pediatrics 2019; 144. doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-2528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vetter, VL, Blum, N, Berger, S, et al. Cardiovascular Monitoring of Children and Adolescents With Heart Disease Receiving Medications for Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. Circulation 2008; 117: 24072423. doi: 10.1161/circulationaha.107.189473.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
David-Ferdon, C, Kaslow, NJ Evidence-Based Psychosocial Treatments for Child and Adolescent Depression. Vol 37.; 2008. doi: 10.1080/15374410701817865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Z, Whiteside, SPH, Sim, L, et al. Comparative effectiveness and safety of cognitive behavioral therapy and pharmacotherapy for childhood anxiety disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr 2017; 171: 10491056. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.3036.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hetrick, SE, McKenzie, JE, Cox, GR, Simmons, MB, Merry, SN Newer generation antidepressants for depressive disorders in children and adolescents. BJPsych Adv 2017; 23: 7474. doi: 10.1192/apt.23.2.74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, L, Blount, R, Chorney, J, Zempsky, W, Rodrigues, N, Cousins, L. Management of pediatric pain and distress due to medical procedures. In: Roberts, M, Steele, R, eds. Handbook Pediatric Psychology, 5th Edition. The Guilford Press; 2018.Google Scholar
Harbeck-Weber, C, Fisher, JL, Dittner, CA Promoting Coping and Enhancing Adaptation to Illness. In: Roberts, M, ed. Handbook of Pediatric Psychology. The Guilford Press; 2003: 99118.Google Scholar
Lane, DA, Millane, TA, Lip, GYH Psychological interventions for depression in adolescent and adult congenital heart disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 2013. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004372.pub2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melby-Lervåg, M, Hulme, C Is working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review. Dev Psychol 2013; 49: 270291. doi: 10.1037/a0028228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diamond, A, Ling, DS Conclusions about interventions, programs, and approaches for improving executive functions that appear justified and those that, despite much hype, do not. Dev Cogn Neurosci. Published online 2015. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2015.11.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martiniuk, A, Silva, M, Amylon, M, Barr, R Camp programs for children with cancer and their families: review of research progress over the past decade. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2014; 61: 778787.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gomez-Gascon, T, Martin-Fernandez, J, Galvez-Herrer, M, Tapias-Merino, E, Beamud-Lagos, M, Mingote-Adan, JC Effectiveness of an intervention for prevention and treatment of burnout in primary health care professionals. BMC Fam Pract 2013; 14: 173. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-14-173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sawyer, SM, Drew, S, Yeo, MS, Britto, MT Adolescents with a chronic condition: challenges living, challenges treating. Lancet 2007; 369: 14811489. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60370-5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hansen, JH, Rotermann, I, Logoteta, J, et al. Neurodevelopmental outcome in hypoplastic left heart syndrome: Impact of perioperative cerebral tissue oxygenation of the Norwood procedure. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2016; 151: 13581366. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.02.035.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaynor, JW, Stopp, C, Wypij, D, et al. Impact of Operative and Postoperative Factors on Neurodevelopmental Outcomes After Cardiac Operations. Ann Thorac Surg 2016; 102: 843849. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.05.081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newburger, JW, Wypij, D, Bellinger, DC, et al. Length of stay after infant heart surgery is related to cognitive outcome at age 8 years. J Pediatr 2003; 143: 6773. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3476(03)00183-5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaynor, JW, Ittenbach, RF, Calafat, AM, et al. Perioperative Exposure to Suspect Neurotoxicants from Medical Devices in Newborns with Congenital Heart Defects. Ann Thorac Surg. Published online 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.06.035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, K, Jones, M, Allen, K, et al. Neurodevelopmental Outcomes Among Children With Congenital Heart Disease: At-Risk Populations and Modifiable Risk Factors. World J Pediatr Congenit Hear Surg 2019; 10: 750758.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, ES, Browne, JV Developmental progression of feeding skills: an approach to supporting feeding in preterm infants. Semin Neonatol 2002; 7: 469475. doi: 10.1053/siny.2002.0152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horner, S, Simonelli, AM, Schmidt, H, et al. Setting the stage for successful oral feeding: the impact of implementing the SOFFI feeding program with medically fragile NICU infants. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs 2014; 28: 5968. doi: 10.1097/JPN.0000000000000003.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spatz, DL State of the science: use of human milk and breast-feeding for vulnerable infants. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs 2006; 20: 5155. doi: 10.1097/00005237-200601000-00017.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barbas, KH, Kelleher, DK Breastfeeding success among infants with congenital heart disease. Pediatr Nurs 2004; 30: 285289.Google ScholarPubMed
Medoff-Cooper, B, Irving, SY, Marino, BS, et al. Weight change in infants with a functionally univentricular heart: from surgical intervention to hospital discharge. Cardiol Young 2011; 21: 136144. doi: 10.1017/S104795111000154X.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Imms, C Impact on parents of feeding young children with congenital or acquired cardiac disease. Cardiol Young 2000; 10: 574581.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Furlong-Dillard, J, Neary, A, Marietta, J, et al. Evaluating the Impact of a Feeding Protocol in Neonates before and after Biventricular Cardiac Surgery. Pediatr Qual Saf 2018; 3: e080. doi: 10.1097/pq9.0000000000000080.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, M, Steele, R, eds. Handbook of Pediatric Psychology, Fifth Edition. The Guilford Press; 2018.Google Scholar
Stuckey, R, Domingues-Montanari, S Telemedicine is helping the parents of children with neurodevelopmental disorders living in remote and deprived areas. Paediatr Int Child Health 2017; 37: 155157. doi: 10.1080/20469047.2017.1315914.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, K, Gupta, A, Palacios, R Impact of Telemedicine in Pediatric Postoperative Care. Telemed e-Health 2018; 25: 17. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2018.0246.Google ScholarPubMed
March, S, Spence, SH, Donovan, CL The Efficacy of an Internet-based CBT Intervention for Child Anxiety Disorders. J Pediatr Psychol 2009; 34: 474487.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Indramohan, G, Pedigo, TP, Rostoker, N, Cambare, M, Grogan, T, Federman, MD Identification of Risk Factors for Poor Feeding in Infants with Congenital Heart Disease and a Novel Approach to Improve Oral Feeding. J Pediatr Nurs 2017; 35: 149154. doi: 10.1016/j.pedn.2017.01.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weston, C, Husain, SA, Curzon, CL, et al. Improving Outcomes for Infants with Single Ventricle Physiology through Standardized Feeding during the Interstage. Nurs Res Pract Published online 2016: 1–7. doi: 10.1155/2016/9505629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, TM, Brown, R Autonomic Nervous System Function after a Skin-to-Skin Contact Intervention in Infants with Congenital Heart Disease. J Cardiovasc Nurs 2017; 32: E1E13. doi: 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000397.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCusker, CG, Doherty, NN, Molloy, B, et al. A controlled trial of early interventions to promote maternal adjustment and development in infants born with severe congenital heart disease. Child Care Health Dev 2010; 36: 110117. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.2009.01026.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCusker, CG, Doherty, NN, Molloy, B, et al. Determinants of neuropsychological and behavioural outcomes in early childhood survivors of congenital heart disease. Arch Dis Child 2007; 92: 137141. doi: 10.1136/adc.2005.092320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCusker, CG, Doherty, NN, Molloy, B, et al. A randomized controlled trial of interventions to promote adjustment in children with congenital heart disease entering school and their families. J Pediatr Psychol 2012; 37: 10891103. doi:jss092 [pii]\r10.1093/jpepsy/jss092.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCusker, CG, Armstrong, M, Mullen, M, Doherty, N, Casey, F A sibling-controlled, prospective study of outcomes at home and school in children with severe congenital heart disease. Cardiol Young 2013; 23: 507516. doi: 10.1017/s1047951112001667.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Casey, FA, Stewart, M, McCusker, CG, et al. Examination of the physical and psychosocial determinants of health behaviour in 4–5-year-old children with congenital cardiac disease. Cardiol Young 2010; 20: 532537. doi: 10.1017/S1047951110000673.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van der Mheen, M, Meentken, M, van Beynum, I, et al. CHIP-Family intervention to improve the psychosocial well-being of young children with congenital heart disease and their families: results of a randomised controlled trial. Cardiol Young Published online 2019: 1–11.Google Scholar
Calderon, J, Bellinger, DC, Hartigan, C, et al. Improving neurodevelopmental outcomes in children with congenital heart disease : protocol for a randomised controlled trial of working memory training. BMJ Open. Published online 2019: 1–10. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LeRoy, S, Elixson, EM, O’Brien, P, Tong, E, Turpin, S, Uzark, K Recommendations for Preparing Children and Adolescents for Invasive Cardiac Procedures. Circulation 2003; 108: 25502564. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.0000100561.76609.64.Google ScholarPubMed
Bellinger, DC Perspectives on incorporating human neurobehavioral end points in risk assessments. Risk Anal 2003; 23: 163174. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-4658.1995.tb00318.x-i1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cioni, G, Inguaggiato, E, Sgandurra, G Early intervention in neurodevelopmental disorders: Underlying neural mechanisms. Dev Med Child Neurol 2016; 58: 6166. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.13050.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Case-Smith, J Interventions to Promote Social-Emotional development in Young Children with or at Risk Disability. Am J Occup Ther 2013; 67: 395404. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2013.004713.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burke, S Systematic review of developmental care interventions in the neonatal intensive care unit since 2006. J Child Heal Care 2018; 22: 269286. doi: 10.1177/1367493517753085.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Westrup, B Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program (NIDCAP) - Family-centered developmentally supportive care. Early Hum Dev 2007; 83: 443449. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2007.03.006.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spittle, Orton J, Anderson, P, Boyd, R, Doyle, L Early developmental intervention programs post hospital discharge to prevent motor and cognitive impairments in preterm infants What ’ s new Dates Text of review Synopsis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 24. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005495.pub4.www.cochranelibrary.com.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horbar, JD SECTION 3 : CASE STUDIES The Vermont Oxford Network : evidence-Based Quality Improvement for. 1999; 103.Google Scholar
ACGME Program Requirements for Graduate Medical Education in Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education.; 2017. https://www.acgme.org/Portals/0/PFAssets/ProgramRequirements/329_neonatal-perinatal_medicine_2017-07-01.pdf?ver=2017-06-30-083415-990.Google Scholar
Clauss, SB, Anderson, JB, Lannon, C, et al. Quality improvement through collaboration: the National Pediatric Quality improvement Collaborative initiative. Curr Opin Pediatr 2015; 27: 555562. doi: 10.1097/MOP.0000000000000263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walsh, KS, Noll, RB, Annett, RD, Patel, SK, Patenaude, AF, Embry, L Standard of Care for Neuropsychological Monitoring in Pediatric Neuro-Oncology: Lessons From the Children’s Oncology Group (COG). Pediatr Blood Cancer 2016; 63: 191195. doi: 10.1002/pbc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fink, AK, Loeffler, DR, Marshall, BC, Goss, CH, Morgan, WJ Data that empower: the success and promise of CF patient registries. Pediatr Pulmonol 2017; 52: S44S51. doi: 10.1002/ppul.23790.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kazak, AE, Hwang, WT, Fang Chen, F, et al. Screening for family psychosocial risk in pediatric cancer: validation of the Psychosocial Assessment Tool (PAT) version 3. J Pediatr Psychol 2018; 43: 737748. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsy012.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hardy, KK, Olson, K, Sy, PD, et al. A Prevention-Based Model of Neuropsychological Assessment for Children With Medical Illness. J Pediatr Psychol Published online 2017: 1–8. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsx060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luthar, SS, Cicchetti, D The construct of resilience: implications for interventions and social policies. Dev Psychopathol 2000; 12: 857885. doi: 10.1017/S0954579400004156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ungar, M Practitioner review: diagnosing childhood resilience - A systemic approach to the diagnosis of adaptation in adverse social and physical ecologies. J Child Psychol Psychiatry Allied Discip 2015; 56: 417. doi: 10.1111/jcpp.12306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traub, F, Boynton-Jarrett, R Modifiable Resilience Factors to Childhood Adversity for Clinical Pediatric Practice. Pediatrics 2017; 139: e20162569. doi: 10.1542/peds.2016-2569.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Child NSC on the D. Supportive Relationships and Active Skill-Building Strengthen the Foundations of Resilience: Working Paper 13.; 2015. http://www.developingchild.harvard.edu.Google Scholar
Stewart, DE, Yuen, T A Systematic Review of Resilience in the Physically Ill. Psychosomatics 2011; 52: 199209. doi: 10.1016/j.psym.2011.01.036.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyerson, DA, Grant, KE, Carter, JS, Kilmer, RP Posttraumatic growth among children and adolescents: A systematic review. Clin Psychol Rev 2011; 31: 949964. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2011.06.003.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sharkey, CM, Bakula, DM, Baraldi, AN, et al. Grit, illness-related distress, and psychosocial outcomes in college students with a chronic medical condition: A path analysis. J Pediatr Psychol 2018; 43: 552560. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsx145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher, PA, Gunnar, MR, Dozier, M, Bruce, J, Pears, KC Effects of therapeutic interventions for foster children on behavioral problems, caregiver attachment, and stress regulatory neural systems. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2006; 1094: 215225. doi: 10.1196/annals.1376.023.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huang, H-R, Chen, C-W, Chen, C-M, et al. A positive perspective of knowledge, attitude, and practices for health-promoting behaviors of adolescents with congenital heart disease. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2018; 17: 217225. doi: 10.1177/1474515117728609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moon, JR, Huh, J, Kang, IS, Park, SW, Jun, TG, Lee, HJ Factors influencing depression in adolescents with congenital heart disease. Hear Lung J Acute Crit Care 2009; 38: 419426. doi: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2008.11.005.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moon, JR, Song, J, Huh, J, et al. The Relationship between Parental Rearing Behavior, Resilience, and Depressive Symptoms in Adolescents with Congenital Heart Disease. Front Cardiovasc Med 2017; 4: 18. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2017.00055.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kovacs, AH, Bandyopadhyay, M, Grace, SL, et al. Adult Congenital Heart Disease-Coping And REsilience (ACHD-CARE): Rationale and methodology of a pilot randomized controlled trial. Contemp Clin Trials 2015; 45: 385393. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2015.11.002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Desai, PP, Sutton, LJ, Staley, MD, Hannon, DW A qualitative study exploring the psychosocial value of weekend camping experiences for children and adolescents with complex heart defects. Child Care Health Dev 2014; 40: 553561. doi: 10.1111/cch.12056.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moons, P, Barrea, C, De Wolf, D, et al. Changes in perceived health of children with congenital heart disease after attending a special sports camp. Pediatr Cardiol 2006; 27: 6772. doi: 10.1007/s00246-005-1021-5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suys, B, Ovaert, C, Eyskens, B, et al. Improved perceived health status persists three months after a special sports camp for children with congenital heart disease. Eur J Pediatr 2006; 165: 767772. doi: 10.1007/s00431-006-0171-7.Google Scholar
Simons, LE, Blount, RI, Campbell, R, et al. Decreases in anxiety associated with participation in a camp for children with cardiac defects. Cardiol Young 2007; 17: 631637. doi: 10.1017/S1047951107001485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, DA, Pearman, D Therapeutic recreation camps: an effective intervention for children and young people with chronic illness? Arch Dis Child 2009; 94: 401406. doi: 10.1136/adc.2008.145631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulfer, K, Helbing, W, Utens, E The Influence of Exercise Training on Quality of Life and Psychosocial Functioning in Children with Congenital Heart Disease: A Review of Intervention Studies. Sports 2017; 5: 13. doi: 10.3390/sports5010013.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dulfer, K, Duppen, N, Kuipers, IM, et al. Aerobic exercise influences quality of life of children and youngsters with congenital heart disease: A randomized controlled trial. J Adolesc Heal 2014; 55: 6572. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.12.010.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jacobsen, RM, Ginde, S, Mussatto, K, Neubauer, J, Earing, M, Danduran, M Can a Home-based Cardiac Physical Activity Program Improve the Physical Function Quality of Life in Children with Fontan Circulation? Congenit Heart Dis 2016; 11: 175182. doi: 10.1111/chd.12330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dean, PN, Gillespie, CW, Greene, EA, et al. Sports participation and quality of life in adolescents and young adults with congenital heart disease. Congenit Heart Dis 2015; 10: 169179. doi: 10.1111/chd.12221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulfer, K, Helbing, WA, Duppen, N, Utens, EMWJ Associations between exercise capacity, physical activity, and psychosocial functioning in children with congenital heart disease: A systematic review. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2014; 21: 12001215. doi: 10.1177/2047487313494030.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Takken, T, Giardini, A, Reybrouck, T, et al. Recommendations for physical activity, recreation sport, and exercise training in paediatric patients with congenital heart disease: a report from the Exercise, Basic & Translational Research Section of the European Association of Cardiovascular Preventio. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2012; 19: 10341065.Google Scholar
Duppen, N, Takken, T, Hopman, MTE, et al. Systematic review of the effects of physical exercise training programmes in children and young adults with congenital heart disease. Int J Cardiol 2013; 168: 17791787. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2013.05.086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lisanti, AJ Parental stress and resilience in CHD: A new frontier for health disparities research. Cardiol Young 2018; 28: 11421150. doi: 10.1017/S1047951118000963.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loprinzi, CE, Prasad, K, Schroeder, DR, Sood, A Stress management and resilience training (SMART) program to decrease stress and enhance resilience among breast cancer survivors: A pilot randomized clinical trial. Clin Breast Cancer 2011; 11: 364368. doi: 10.1016/j.clbc.2011.06.008.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Visconti, KJ, Saudino, KJ, Rappaport, LA, Newburger, JW, Bellinger, DC Influence of parental stress and social support on the behavioral adjustment of children with transposition of the great arteries. J Dev Behav Pediatr 2002; 23: 314321. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12394519.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penny, DJ Speaking to children and their families about congenital heart disease : ushering in a new era of healthcare literacy. Congenit Heart Dis 2017; 12: 241. doi: 10.1111/chd.12474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiener, L, Kazak, AE, Noll, RB, Patenaude, AF, Kupst, MJ Standards for the Psychosocial Care of Children With Cancer and Their Families: An Introduction to the Special Issue. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2015; 62: S419S424. doi: 10.1002/pbc.25675.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Northman, L, Ross, S, Morris, M, Tarquini, S Supporting Pediatric Cancer Survivors With Neurocognitive Late Effects: A Model of Care. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs 2015; 32: 134142. doi: 10.1177/1043454214554012.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Northman, L, Morris, M, Loucas, C, et al. The Effectiveness of a Hospital-Based School Liaison Program : A Comparative Study of Parental Perception of School Supports for Children With Pediatric Cancer and Neurofibromatosis Type 1. Published online 2018. doi: 10.1177/1043454218765140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassidy, AR, White, MT, DeMaso, DR, Newburger, JW, Bellinger, DC Executive Function in Children and Adolescents with Critical Cyanotic Congenital Heart Disease. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2015; 20: 3449. doi: 10.1017/S1355617714001027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanz, JH, Berl, MM, Armour, AC, Wang, J, Cheng, YI, Donofrio, MT Prevalence and pattern of executive dysfunction in school age children with congenital heart disease. Congenit Heart Dis 2016;(May). doi: 10.1111/chd.12427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gurvitz, M, Valente, AM, Broberg, C, et al. Prevalence and predictors of gaps in care among adult congenital heart disease patients: HEART-ACHD (The Health, Education, and Access Research Trial). J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 61: 21802184. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.02.048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yeung, E, Kay, J, Roosevelt, GE, Brandon, M, Yetman, AT Lapse of care as a predictor for morbidity in adults with congenital heart disease. Int J Cardiol 2008; 125: 6265. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2007.02.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grady, KL, Hof, KV, Andrei, AC, et al. Pediatric Heart Transplantation: transitioning to Adult Care (TRANSIT): baseline Findings. Pediatr Cardiol 2018; 39: 354364. doi: 10.1007/s00246-017-1763-x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mackie, AS, Rempel, GR, Kovacs, AH, et al. Transition Intervention for Adolescents With Congenital Heart Disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018; 71: 17681777. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.02.043.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, G, Sajobi, TT, Menon, BK, et al. Registry-based randomized controlled trials- what are the advantages, challenges, and areas for future research? J Clin Epidemiol 2016; 80: 1624. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.08.003.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lauer, M, D’Agostino, R The Randomized Registry Trial — The Next Disruptive Technology in Clinical Research? N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 15771579. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1310771.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1. Neurodevelopmental and Psychosocial Interventions Working Group participants

Figure 1

Table 2. Interventions: critical questions, significant gaps in knowledge, and investigations needed