Conectar
In current practice, fluid volumes administered to children following kidney transplant vary widely. Up to 52% of children experience fluid overload-related complications. Current fluid guidelines are not evidence-based and the optimal amount of fluid for children after transplant is not known. The aim of Randomised multiple centre trial of conservative versus LIberal fluid adMInisTration for children receiving a kidney tranSplant (LIMITS) is to determine whether relative limitation of fluid volume administered to children receiving kidney transplants is superior to liberal fluid volume administration.
LIMITS is a pragmatic, open-label, UK-based, multicentre randomised controlled trial, with an internal pilot phase and integrated economic evaluation. A total of 140 children receiving kidney transplants will be randomised to receive either conservative postoperative fluid administration (maximum of 150 mL/m2/hour for no longer than 18 hours, followed by a fixed daily target of maximum 1.5 L/m2/day thereafter) versus the comparator of liberal postoperative fluid administration (fluid volume administered to replace urine output and insensible losses for at least 48 hours with target urine output >2 mL/kg/hour). The primary outcome is mean days at home in the first 30 days after kidney transplant. The primary outcome will be analysed using a mixed linear regression model adjusted for donor type (living vs deceased donor) and participant weight (
The trial received Health Research Authority approval on 20 August 2025 (REC reference: 25/EE/0161, IRAS project ID: 354370). Findings will be presented to academic groups via national and international conferences and peer-reviewed journals. The patient and public involvement group will play an important part in disseminating the study findings to the public domain.
To clarify the definition and evolution of Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) and identify its attributes, antecedents, and consequences in health-related research.
This study follows Rodgers' evolutionary concept analysis with a seven-step framework.
Datasets were searched using terms related to PPIE and key categories (i.e., attributes, antecedents, and consequences). Data were sourced from CINAHL, PsycInfo, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science covering publications from inception to October 31, 2024. Document titles, abstracts, and keywords were manually screened to identify relevant studies for full-text review.
A total of 1751 documents were screened, resulting in 38 eligible studies included in the final analysis. PPIE has evolved from a narrow focus on patient inclusion and participation, where patients had minimal influence on research and researchers resisted sharing control of research, to a collaborative model emphasising sustained partnerships, shared contributions, equitable power distribution, and active involvement across research stages. This shift has been driven by research innovation, a growing emphasis on healthcare equity and patient-centred care, technological advances, and stakeholder advocacy (e.g., patients, funders, ethics committees). While PPIE enhances research relevance and impact, barriers, such as resource constraints, power imbalances, patient limited research capabilities and increased researcher workload persist. Facilitators, such as training programmes, standardised guidelines, flexible arrangements and transparent communication can enable meaningful partnerships.
The concept of PPIE is evolving toward greater clarity and consistency in research, positioning patients and the public as active, essential contributors rather than passive participants. Barriers and facilitators were identified to inform its utilisation in research.
This study clarifies the conceptual ambiguities of PPIE, informs theory development, and provides actionable insights. Healthcare and nursing researchers can draw on its findings to utilise PPIE to enhance collaborative and inclusive research practices that align with the needs of patients and the public.
This study adheres to the PRISMA (2020) reporting guidelines for systematic reviews.
One of our co-authors is a patient with lived experience of cancer, who contributed valuable comments and suggestions to enhance this paper.
An increasing number of teenagers and young adults (TYA) with chronic conditions and complex needs are transitioning from paediatric to adult services, including admission to intensive care units (ICUs). As these services are often ill-equipped to care for TYA, there is a risk of compromised care. Despite recent guidelines from the UK Paediatric Critical Care and Intensive Care Societies highlighting the importance and urgency of improving ICU transition, current recommendations are not evidence-based and established pathways for ICU transition remain limited.
This mixed-methods research study aims to generate evidence to underpin national policy on transition from paediatric to adult ICUs that will improve clinical care and patient experience. To do this, we will: (1) link and analyse UK national data (years 2017–2024) on paediatric and adult ICU admissions, hospital inpatient, outpatient and emergency care visits and survival status, to determine the clinical characteristics and healthcare resource utilisation from teenage years to early adulthood of people admitted to an ICU as a young person (admission aged 14 and 15), and how these relate to ICU admissions after age 16; (2) conduct semistructured interviews, online forums and surveys with TYA patients, carers and health professionals to understand their experience of transition in ICU services; and (3) synthesise these strands of evidence and use a structured process of stakeholder engagement to propose potential targeted improvements as appropriate.
This study was approved by the East of England - Cambridge South Research Ethics Committee on 1 August 2024 (research ethics committee number 24/EE/0108), and the Health Research Authority Confidentiality Advisory Group (CAG) on 7 October 2024 (CAG number 24/CAG/0068). Study results will be actively disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations and accessible lay texts and graphic summaries for the use of charities and patients including those with learning disabilities and neurodevelopmental disorders.
FreshRSS 