Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
1.
Eur J Pediatr ; 182(10): 4707-4721, 2023 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37566281

ABSTRACT

Children continue to experience harm when undergoing clinical procedures despite increased evidence of the need to improve the provision of child-centred care. The international ISupport collaboration aimed to develop standards to outline and explain good procedural practice and the rights of children within the context of a clinical procedure. The rights-based standards for children undergoing tests, treatments, investigations, examinations and interventions were developed using an iterative, multi-phased, multi-method and multi-stakeholder consensus building approach. This consensus approach used a range of online and face to face methods across three phases to ensure ongoing engagement with multiple stakeholders. The views and perspectives of 203 children and young people, 78 parents and 418 multi-disciplinary professionals gathered over a two year period (2020-2022) informed the development of international rights-based standards for the care of children having tests, treatments, examinations and interventions. The standards are the first to reach international multi-stakeholder consensus on definitions of supportive and restraining holds.    Conclusion: This is the first study of its kind which outlines international rights-based procedural care standards from multi-stakeholder perspectives. The standards offer health professionals and educators clear evidence-based tools to support discussions and practice changes to challenge prevailing assumptions about holding or restraining children and instead encourage a focus on the interests and rights of the child. What is Known: • Children continue to experience short and long-term harm when undergoing clinical procedures despite increased evidence of the need to improve the provision of child-centred care. • Professionals report uncertainty and tensions in applying evidence-based practice to children's procedural care. What is New: • This is the first study of its kind which has developed international rights-based procedural care standards from multi-stakeholder perspectives. • The standards are the first to reach international multi-stakeholder consensus on definitions of supportive and restraining holds.


Subject(s)
Consensus , Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures , Pediatrics , Adolescent , Humans , Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures/ethics , Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures/standards , Child , Pediatrics/ethics , Pediatrics/standards
2.
Clin Transl Sci ; 16(8): 1458-1468, 2023 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37391924

ABSTRACT

Advice from multiple stakeholders is required to design the optimal pediatric clinical trial. We present recommendations for acquiring advice from trial experts and patients/caregivers, derived from advice meetings that were performed through a collaboration of the Collaborative Network for European Clinical Trials for Children (c4c) and the European Patient-CEntric ClinicAl TRial PLatforms (EU-PEARL). Three advice meetings were performed: (1) an advice meeting for clinical and methodology experts, (2) an advice meeting for patients/caregivers, and (3) a combined meeting with both experts and patients/caregivers. Trial experts were recruited from c4c database. Patients/caregivers were recruited through a patient organization. Participants were asked to provide input on a trial protocol, including endpoints, outcomes, and the assessment schedule. Ten experts, 10 patients, and 13 caregivers participated. The advice meetings resulted in modification of eligibility criteria and outcome measures. We have provided recommendations for the most effective meeting type per protocol topic. Topics with limited options for patient input were most efficiently discussed in expert advice meetings. Other topics benefit from patient/caregiver input, either through a combined meeting with experts or a patients/caregivers-only advice meeting. Some topics, such as endpoints and outcome measures, are suitable for all meeting types. Combined sessions profit from synergy between experts and patients/caregivers, balancing input on protocol scientific feasibility and acceptability. Both experts and patients/caregivers provided critical input on the presented protocol. The combined meeting was the most effective methodology for most protocol topics. The presented methodology can be used effectively to acquire expert and patient feedback.


Subject(s)
Caregivers , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Humans , Child , Patient-Centered Care
3.
Health Sci Rep ; 6(6): e1349, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37359405

ABSTRACT

Background: Precision medicine (PM) is a form of personalized medicine that recognizes that individuals with the same condition may have different underlying factors and uses molecular information to provide tailored treatments. This approach can improve treatment outcomes and transform lives through favorable risk/benefit ratios, avoidance of ineffective interventions, and possible cost savings, as evidenced in the field of lung cancer and other oncology/therapeutic settings, including cardiac disease, diabetes, and rare diseases. However, the potential benefits of PM have yet to be fully realized. Discussion: There are many barriers to the implementation of PM in clinical practice, including fragmentation of the PM landscape, siloed approaches to address shared challenges, unwarranted variation in availability and access to PM, lack of standardization, and limited understanding of patients' experience and needs throughout the PM pathway. We believe that a diverse, intersectoral multistakeholder collaboration, with three main pillars of activity: generation of data to demonstrate the benefit of PM, education to support informed decision-making, and addressing barriers across the patient pathway, is necessary to reach the shared goal of making PM an accessible and sustainable reality. Besides healthcare providers, researchers, policymakers/regulators/payers, and industry representatives, patients in particular must be equal partners and should be central to the PM approach-from early research through to clinical trials and approval of new treatments-to ensure it represents their entire experience and identifies barriers, solutions, and opportunities at the point of delivery. Conclusion: We propose a practical and iterative roadmap to advance PM and call for all stakeholders across the healthcare system to employ a collaborative, cocreated, patient-centered methodology to close gaps and fully realize the potential of PM.

4.
Br J Clin Pharmacol ; 88(10): 4258-4266, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32893382

ABSTRACT

Paediatric drug development faces several barriers. These include fragmentation of stakeholders and inconsistent processes during the conduct of research. This review summarises recent efforts to overcome these barriers in Europe. Two exemplar initiatives are described. The European Paediatric Translational Research Infrastructure facilitates preclinical research and other work that underpins clinical trials. conect4children facilitates the design and implementation of clinical trials. Both these initiatives listen to the voices of children and their advocates. Coordination of research needs specific effort that supplements work on science, resources and the policy context.


Subject(s)
Pharmaceutical Research , Child , Europe , Humans , Translational Research, Biomedical
5.
Front Public Health ; 9: 746052, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34900898

ABSTRACT

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, lockdown strategies have been widely used to contain SARS-CoV-2 virus spread. Children and adolescents are especially vulnerable to suffering psychological effects as result of such measures. In Spain, children were enforced to a strict home lockdown for 42 days during the first wave. Here, we studied the effects of lockdown in children and adolescents through an online questionnaire. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Spain using an open online survey from July (after the lockdown resulting from the first pandemic wave) to November 2020 (second wave). We included families with children under 16 years-old living in Spain. Parents answered a survey regarding the lockdown effects on their children and were instructed to invite their children from 7 to 16 years-old (mandatory scholar age in Spain) to respond a specific set of questions. Answers were collected through an application programming interface system, and data analysis was performed using R. Results: We included 1,957 families who completed the questionnaires, covering a total of 3,347 children. The specific children's questionnaire was completed by 167 kids (7-11 years-old), and 100 adolescents (12-16 years-old). Children, in general, showed high resilience and capability to adapt to new situations. Sleeping problems were reported in more than half of the children (54%) and adolescents (59%), and these were strongly associated with less time doing sports and spending more than 5 h per day using electronic devices. Parents perceived their children to gain weight (41%), be more irritable and anxious (63%) and sadder (46%). Parents and children differed significantly when evaluating children's sleeping disturbances. Conclusions: Enforced lockdown measures and isolation can have a negative impact on children and adolescent's mental health and well-being. In future waves of the current pandemic, or in the light of potential epidemics of new emerging infections, lockdown measures targeting children, and adolescents should be reconsidered taking into account their infectiousness potential and their age-specific needs, especially to facilitate physical activity and to limit time spent on electronic devices.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adolescent , Child , Communicable Disease Control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Pandemics , Parents , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Pharmaceutics ; 13(5)2021 May 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34063499

ABSTRACT

The paucity of evidence-based data on formulation characteristics preferred by the children is known to limit the design of tailored paediatric dosage forms. The European Paediatric Translational Research Infrastructure (EPTRI) commissioned a study to evaluate children's dosage forms perceived preferences in some European countries and explore the feasibility of using the young persons advisory groups (YPAGs) to involve children in formulation research. An online, age-adapted survey was developed and translated into six languages. The survey link was disseminated across seven European countries: Albania, Italy, the Netherlands, and Dutch-speaking part of Belgium, Romania, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Respondents' (n = 1172) perceived preferences for oral dosage forms primarily differed based on age, health status, and experience. Conventional dosage forms, i.e., liquid (35%), tablets (19%), and capsules (14%), were the most selected. Liquid was widely selected by children less than 12 years and by those healthy and taking medicines rarely. Monolithic solid forms were mostly chosen by adolescents and by children with a chronic disease taking medicines frequently. There was a clear lack of familiarity with more novel dosage forms (e.g., orodispersible films and granules). Noteworthy, granules were not appreciated, particularly by adolescents (52.8%). To rationalise the creation of paediatric formulations, it is important to involve children as active stakeholders and to apply tools assessing children's perspectives on medicines to inform acceptable dosage form development from the start.

8.
Pharmaceut Med ; 35(2): 71-79, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33539007

ABSTRACT

The need for information about new and existing drugs used in children was recognized in the European Union (EU) with the implementation of the Paediatric Regulation in 2007. In 2017, the 10-year review of the Paediatric Regulation identified barriers to the conduct of clinical trials, including delays in setting up and completing paediatric trials. Across Europe, the difficulties with clinical research are compounded by variation within countries and between countries. Ethics and regulatory review have national specificities. This paper describes the Collaborative Network for European Clinical Trials for Children (conect4children, c4c), which addresses selected difficulties in the design and conduct of paediatric clinical trials. c4c is a time-limited public-private consortium funded by the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI2). The elements of c4c are as follows: expert advice providing input on study design and/or paediatric development programmes (including patient involvement activities); a network of sites following harmonised procedures coordinated by National Hubs and a single point of contact for Europe; a facility for education and training for sites and trial teams; and support for managing data used by the network and a common paediatric data dictionary. c4c does not sponsor trials. c4c is taking a phased approach with careful piloting through industry and non-industry studies intended to demonstrate the viability of the network (proof-of-viability studies). c4c uses a co-design approach involving industry and academics within a clearly defined scope. A sustainable, successor organization open to all potential service users will be open for business before the end of IMI2 funding in 2024.


Subject(s)
Financial Management , Research Design , Child , Europe , European Union , Humans
9.
Health Expect ; 24(2): 601-616, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33599067

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The holistic evolution of patient engagement in medicines development requires a more detailed understanding of the needs of all involved stakeholders, and one that better accounts for the specific needs of some potentially vulnerable patient populations and key stages in medicines development. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this convergent mixed-methods study was to better understand the needs of different stakeholders concerning patient engagement at three key stages in medicines development: research priority setting, clinical trial design and early dialogues with Health Technology Assessment bodies and regulators. DESIGN: This study brought together findings from three sources: i) an online questionnaire, ii) face-to-face consultations with two potentially vulnerable patient populations, a workshop with Health Technology Assessment bodies, and iii) three-step modified Delphi methodology. RESULTS: Overall stakeholders still need additional varied support mechanisms to undertake, sustain or measure value of patient engagement. Health Technology Assessment bodies need better rationale for patient engagement in early dialogue and tools to support its implementation. Improved awareness and understanding of the need and value that involving patients, who are often considered as potentially vulnerable, can bring is needed, as is better accommodation of their specific needs. Similarly, weighted Delphi categories were as follows: aims and objectives, and sustainability. Several additional themes were common across the three key stages in medicines development. CONCLUSION: This broad-reaching study provides the blocks needed to build a framework for patient engagement in medicines development. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients were involved in review and interpretation of data.


Subject(s)
Medicine , Patient Participation , Humans , Motivation , Technology Assessment, Biomedical
10.
PLoS One ; 16(2): e0246405, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33566813

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to examine aspects of children's health literacy; the information sources they were accessing, their information preferences, their perceived understanding of and their reported information needs in relation to COVID-19. An online survey for children aged 7-12 years of age and parent/caregivers from the UK, Sweden, Brazil, Spain, Canada and Australia was conducted between 6th of April and the 1st of June 2020. The surveys included demographic questions and both closed and open questions focussing on access to and understanding of COVID-19 information. Descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis procedures were conducted. The findings show that parents are the main source of information for children during the pandemic in most countries (89%, n = 347), except in Sweden where school was the main source of information. However, in many cases parents chose to shield, filter or adapt their child's access to information about COVID-19, especially in relation to the death rates within each country. Despite this, children in this study reported knowing that COVID-19 was deadly and spreads quickly. This paper argues for a community rather than individual approach to addressing children's health literacy needs during a pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Health Literacy/statistics & numerical data , Australia/epidemiology , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/transmission , Canada/epidemiology , Child , Child Health , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Online Systems , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Spain/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Sweden/epidemiology , United Kingdom/epidemiology
12.
BMJ Innov ; 5(1): 43-55, 2019 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31645992

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Meaningful patient engagement (PE) can enhance medicines' development. However, the current PE landscape is fragmentary and lacking comprehensive guidance. METHODS: We systematically searched for PE initiatives (SYNaPsE database/publications). Multistakeholder groups integrated these with their own PE expertise to co-create draft PE Quality Guidance which was evaluated by public consultation. Projects exemplifying good PE practice were identified and assessed against PE Quality Criteria to create a Book of Good Practices (BOGP). RESULTS: Seventy-six participants from 51 organisations participated in nine multistakeholder meetings (2016-2018). A shortlist of 20relevant PE initiatives (from 170 screened) were identified. The co-created INVOLVE guidelines provided the main framework for PE Quality Guidance and was enriched with the analysis of the PE initiatives and the PE expertise of stakeholders. Seven key PE Quality Criteria were identified. Public consultation yielded 67 responses from diverse backgrounds. The PE Quality Guidance was agreed to be useful for achieving quality PE in practice, understandable, easy to use, and comprehensive. Overall, eight initiatives from the shortlist and from meeting participants were selected for inclusion in the BOGP based on demonstration of PE Quality Criteria and willingness of initiative owners to collaborate. DISCUSSION: The PE Quality Guidance and BOGP are practical resources which will be continually updated in response to user feedback. They are not prescriptive, but rather based on core principles, which can be applied according to the unique needs of each interaction and initiative. Implementation of the guidance will facilitate improved and systematic PE across the medicines' development lifecycle.

13.
Arch Dis Child ; 104(9): 900-905, 2019 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31201156

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Limited information is available on the views of children taking medicines and participating in clinical trials. These views may contribute to a better understanding of what can be improved on in the development of medicines from their perspective. OBJECTIVE: To collect children's views on taking medicines and participating in clinical trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A question-based survey was conducted among children living in European Union countries between January and August 2015. RESULTS: Almost 900 children aged 10-17 years from Finland, Germany, Sweden, Spain and Hungary responded. Almost 40% had a chronic health condition. The most commonly used pharmaceutical forms were solid or liquid medicines for oral use and injectable medicines. Bad taste and pain during administration were reported as common problems. Of 785 respondents, 17% had been taking part in a clinical trial. Most respondents would potentially agree to take part in a clinical trial because the investigational medicine might improve their own health or that of other children. Concern that the investigational medicine might be harmful was the main reason to refuse participation, if asked to. Over half of the respondents were willing to learn more about clinical trials, preferably online. CONCLUSIONS: It is necessary to involve children in the development of age-appropriate pharmaceutical forms and in the design of clinical trials. Children and their carers should be provided with age-appropriate medical information in the most suitable channels. We have identified some common problems that children experience when taking medicines, and we conclude that children are interested in learning more and giving their opinions on clinical trials.


Subject(s)
Chronic Disease/drug therapy , Drugs, Investigational/therapeutic use , Informed Consent By Minors/psychology , Patient Participation/psychology , Research Subjects/psychology , Adolescent , Biomedical Research , Child , Clinical Trials as Topic , Comprehension , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Female , Finland , Germany , Health Services Research , Humans , Hungary , Informed Consent By Minors/statistics & numerical data , Male , Needs Assessment , Patient Participation/statistics & numerical data , Research Subjects/education , Spain , Sweden
14.
Ther Innov Regul Sci ; 53(5): 601-608, 2019 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30663334

ABSTRACT

Patient engagement in health care has been an emerging priority in the global effort and move toward the consideration of patients as experts of their own conditions. However, the input of pediatric patients and their families have not been consistently requested nor regarded as valuable when deriving protocols for, as well as assessing the outcomes of, pediatric clinical trials. Extending this mutual collaboration further upstream is important, especially in the area of pediatric drug development where the lack of formalized trials for children and adolescents result in the increased use of off-label prescribing and risk of adverse effects. While recent changes to European and North American legislation contributed to the inclusion of children and youth in pediatric drug development, the lack of systematic guidelines and methodologies in literature serve as barriers for practical application. When combined with the work of external pediatric advocacy and patient advisory groups, the hope is that pediatric patient voices can be brought forward for the future. This article brings together international experts to review current best practices, progress from regulatory agencies, as well as global advocacy efforts to involve patients and families in the pursuit of drug development processes that value the voice of children and youth.


Subject(s)
Drug Development/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Participation/legislation & jurisprudence , Adolescent , Child , Clinical Trials as Topic/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Parents , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Practice Guidelines as Topic
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...