Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Pediatr Infect Dis J ; 38(5): e82-e86, 2019 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30256315

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Infectious disease (ID) pandemics pose a considerable global threat and can disproportionately affect vulnerable populations including children. Pediatric clinical research in pandemics is essential to improve children's healthcare and minimize risks of harm by interventions that lack an adequate evidence base for this population. The unique features of ID pandemics require consideration of special processes to facilitate clinical research. We aimed to obtain consensus on pediatric clinician-researchers' perceptions of the priorities to feasibly conduct clinical pediatric pandemic research in Europe. METHODS: Mixed method study in 2 stages, recruiting pediatric clinician-researchers with experience of conducting pediatric ID research in clinical settings in Europe. Stage 1 was an expert stakeholder workshop and interviews. Discussions focused on participant's experience of conducting pediatric ID research and processes to facilitate pandemic research. Information informed stage 2, an online consensus survey to identify pediatric inician-researchers priorities to enable ID pandemic research. RESULTS: Twenty-three pediatric clinician-researchers attended the workshop and 39 completed the survey. Priorities were primarily focused on structural and operational requirements of research design and regulation: (1) clarity within the European Clinical Trials Directive for pediatric pandemic research; (2) simplified regulatory processes for research involving clinical samples and data; and (3) improved relationships between regulatory bodies and researchers. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that changes need to be made to the current regulatory environment to facilitate and improve pediatric research in the pandemic context. These findings can provide expert evidence to research policy decision-makers and regulators and to develop a strategy to lobby for change.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica/organização & administração , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis/métodos , Doenças Transmissíveis/epidemiologia , Gerenciamento Clínico , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa/prevenção & controle , Pandemias , Pesquisa , Doenças Transmissíveis/diagnóstico , Doenças Transmissíveis/terapia , Doenças Transmissíveis/transmissão , Europa (Continente)/epidemiologia , Humanos
2.
PLoS One ; 13(8): e0200531, 2018.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30067760

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Point of care tests (POCTs) are increasingly being promoted for guiding the primary medical care of community acquired lower respiratory tract infections (CA-LRTI). POCT development has seldom been guided by explicitly identified clinical need and requirements of the intended users. Approaches for identifying POCT priorities and developing target product profiles (TPPs) for POCTs in primary medical care are not well developed, and there is no published TPP for a CA-LRTI POCT aimed at developed countries. METHODS: We conducted workshops with expert stakeholders and a survey with primary care clinicians to produce a target product profile (TPP) to guide the development of a clinically relevant and technologically feasible POCT for CA-LRTI. RESULTS: Participants with clinical, academic, industrial, technological and basic scientific backgrounds contributed to four expert workshops, and 45 practicing primary care clinicians responded to an online survey and prioritised community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) as the CA-LRTI where a new POCT was most urgently needed. Consensus was reached on a TPP document that included information on the intended niche in the clinical pathway in primary medical care; diagnostic product specification (intended use statement and test concept), and minimum and ideal user specifications. Clinicians minimum requirements of a CA-LRTI POCT included the use of minimally invasive samples, a result in less than 30 minutes, no more than a single preparation step, minimum operational requirements, and detection of common respiratory pathogens and their resistance to commonly prescribed antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: This multidisciplinary, multistage partnership approach generated a clinically-driven TPP for guiding the development of a new POCT, and this approach as well as the TPP itself may be useful to others developing a new POCT.


Assuntos
Sistemas Automatizados de Assistência Junto ao Leito , Infecções Respiratórias/diagnóstico , Conferências de Consenso como Assunto , Europa (Continente) , Clínicos Gerais/psicologia , Humanos , Pneumonia/diagnóstico , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Inquéritos e Questionários
3.
Health Expect ; 21(1): 387-395, 2018 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28960624

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Pandemics of new and emerging infectious diseases are unpredictable, recurrent events that rapidly threaten global health and security. We aimed to identify public views regarding provision of information and consent to participate in primary and critical care clinical research during a future influenza-like illness pandemic. METHODS: Descriptive-interpretive qualitative study, using focus groups (n = 10) and semi-structured interviews (n = 16), with 80 members of the public (>18 years) in Belgium, Spain, Poland and the UK. Local qualitative researchers followed a scenario-based topic guide to collect data. Data were transcribed verbatim, translated into English and subject to framework analysis. RESULTS: Public understandings of pandemics were shaped by personal factors (illness during the previous H1N1 pandemic, experience of life-threatening illness) and social factors (historical references, media, public health information). Informants appreciated safeguards provided by ethically robust research procedures, but current enrolment procedures were seen as a barrier. They proposed simplified enrolment processes for higher risk research and consent waiver for certain types of low-risk research. Decision making about research participation was influenced by contextual, research and personal factors. Informants generally either carefully weighed up various approaches to research participation or responded instinctively. They supported the principle of using routinely collected, anonymized clinical biological samples for research without explicit consent, but regarded this as less acceptable if researchers were motivated primarily by commercial gain. CONCLUSIONS: This bottom-up approach to ascertaining public views on pandemic clinical research has identified support for more proportionate research protection procedures for publically funded, low-risk studies.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica , Participação da Comunidade , Surtos de Doenças , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Participação do Paciente , Adulto , Idoso , Europa (Continente) , Feminino , Grupos Focais , Humanos , Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pesquisa Qualitativa
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...