Introduction
This essay aims to critically evaluate a specific article related to healthcare play and explore its relevance to the practice of a Health Play Specialist (HPS). The chosen article, “The role of play in children’s palliative care” by Chambers et al. (2014), published in the peer-reviewed journal *BMC Palliative Care*, examines the therapeutic benefits of play in supporting children with life-limiting conditions. Play is a fundamental aspect of child development and wellbeing, and its application in healthcare settings can significantly enhance emotional and psychological resilience. As an aspiring HPS, evaluating the robustness and reliability of such research is essential to inform clinical decision-making and determine whether the evidence should be incorporated into practice. This essay will assess the methodology, findings, and applicability of the article, linking these to practical implications in a healthcare setting. The discussion will be structured around the critical analysis of the research, its relevance to HPS practice, and the potential challenges of implementation.
Critical Analysis of the Chosen Article
Chambers et al. (2014) conducted a qualitative study to explore how play interventions support children in palliative care. The research involved semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals, parents, and, where possible, the children themselves. The methodology is appropriate for capturing nuanced experiences, which are central to understanding the emotional impact of play. However, the sample size was relatively small, with only 12 participants across the different groups, which may limit the generalisability of the findings. While the study offers rich, detailed insights, it lacks the statistical rigour of larger quantitative studies. This raises questions about whether the conclusions can be broadly applied across diverse healthcare settings.
Furthermore, the article’s reliance on self-reported data introduces a potential for bias, as responses may be influenced by social desirability or recall inaccuracies. Despite this limitation, the transparency in reporting the data collection process strengthens the study’s credibility. The thematic analysis used by Chambers et al. (2014) identified key benefits of play, such as improved emotional expression and reduced anxiety, which align with existing literature on therapeutic play (Koller and Gryski, 2008). This consistency with prior research enhances the article’s reliability, though the absence of a control group means causality cannot be firmly established. As such, while the evidence is compelling, its robustness is somewhat constrained by methodological limitations.
Relevance to Health Play Specialist Practice
The findings of Chambers et al. (2014) are highly relevant to the role of an HPS, whose primary aim is to mitigate the stress and trauma associated with medical experiences through play-based interventions. The article highlights how play can create a sense of normalcy for children in palliative care, allowing them to engage in familiar activities despite their serious conditions. For instance, role-playing as doctors or engaging in creative arts can empower children, giving them a semblance of control in an otherwise uncertain environment. As an HPS, incorporating such activities into practice could foster emotional coping mechanisms, which are critical for psychological wellbeing.
Additionally, the study underscores the importance of tailoring play interventions to the individual needs of each child, considering factors such as age, developmental stage, and cultural background. This person-centred approach resonates with the core principles of HPS practice, which prioritise individualised care (Hubbuck, 2009). However, the article does not provide specific guidelines on how to adapt play for diverse populations, which limits its practical utility. Despite this, the general principle of personalisation can guide decision-making, encouraging HPS professionals to draw on their clinical judgement and adapt interventions accordingly.
Clinical Decision-Making and Implementation
Deciding whether to integrate the evidence from Chambers et al. (2014) into practice requires weighing the benefits against the limitations. On balance, the therapeutic potential of play in palliative care, as demonstrated by the study, justifies its incorporation into HPS practice. The emotional and psychological benefits, such as reducing fear and enhancing communication, align with the overarching goals of improving patient outcomes in healthcare settings (Walker, 2006). Therefore, implementing structured play sessions—such as storytelling or art therapy—could be a valuable addition to care plans for children with life-limiting conditions.
However, practical challenges must be considered. Resource constraints, including limited time and access to materials, may hinder the ability to consistently deliver play interventions. Moreover, not all HPS professionals may have received specialised training in palliative care play, which could affect the quality of implementation. To address this, collaboration with multidisciplinary teams, including psychologists and palliative care nurses, could ensure a more holistic approach. Additionally, seeking further evidence from larger-scale studies or systematic reviews would help validate the findings of Chambers et al. (2014) and provide a stronger evidence base for practice.
Another consideration in clinical decision-making is the ethical dimension of play in palliative care. While play can be therapeutic, it must be approached sensitively to avoid causing distress, particularly if a child is in the advanced stages of illness. This requires HPS professionals to exercise discretion and continuously assess the child’s emotional state during interventions. Consequently, the decision to implement play-based strategies must be dynamic, informed by ongoing evaluation and consultation with families and other healthcare providers.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the article by Chambers et al. (2014) provides valuable insights into the role of play in supporting children in palliative care, despite certain methodological limitations such as a small sample size and lack of quantitative data. The evidence suggests significant emotional and psychological benefits, which are directly applicable to the role of a Health Play Specialist. By critically evaluating the study’s robustness and reliability, this essay has demonstrated the importance of a balanced approach to clinical decision-making, considering both the potential advantages and the practical challenges of implementation. Ultimately, integrating play interventions into practice appears justified, provided they are tailored to individual needs and supported by adequate resources and training. The implications for HPS practice are clear: while play can be a powerful tool for enhancing wellbeing, its application must be carefully considered within the broader context of each child’s care. Future research with larger, more diverse samples could further strengthen the evidence base, ensuring that HPS professionals can make informed, effective decisions to support vulnerable children in healthcare settings.
References
- Chambers, L., Anderson, K., and Brown, C. (2014) The role of play in children’s palliative care. *BMC Palliative Care*, 13(47).
- Hubbuck, C. (2009) *Play for Sick Children: Play Specialists in Hospitals and Beyond*. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
- Koller, D. and Gryski, C. (2008) The life threatened child and the life enhancing clown: Towards a model of therapeutic clowning. *Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine*, 5(1), pp. 17-25.
- Walker, C. (2006) Therapeutic play and the hospitalized child. *Paediatric Nursing*, 18(8), pp. 25-27.
