Basic training requirements for health care professionals who care for children.

The European Academy of Paediatrics (EAP) is the paediatric section of the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). The UEMS is responsible for the supervision and approval of training programmes in paediatrics and in its subspecialties. This implies also that EAP has the responsibility to address the training of all professionals working with children, to ensure that their paediatric competences and skills are adequate when dealing with children. The EAP has developed syllabi for paediatricians that provide standards of practice, and criteria for the assessment of competencies in trainees and training centres across Europe. The EAP recommends that all health care professionals working with children should have an officially approved training in child health in addition to formal qualifications in their own field. Moreover, the existing paediatric workforce must maintain their knowledge and skills with relevant continuous professional development and medical education in child health. CONCLUSION: There is a need to reassess the training of all health care professionals caring for children, ensuring that it supports new models of integrated and multidisciplinary care and focuses on the needs of the child and the family. A standardised, competency-based minimum paediatric training programme/curriculum should be part in the specialty curriculums.

Leave no one behind: why WHO's regional office for Europe should prioritise children and adolescents in their program of work. A position statement from the European academy of paediatrics.

Children and adolescents are no longer a priority in the most recent European Programme of Work (EPW) 2020-2025 of the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Europe. In this position statement we provide arguments for why we think this population should be explicitly addressed in this important and influential document. We firstly emphasize the persistent health problems and inequalities in access to care for children and adolescents that are challenging to solve, and thus require a continuous focus. Secondly, we urge the WHO to prioritize children and adolescents in their EPW due to the new and emerging health problems related to global issues. Finally, we explain why permanent prioritization of children and adolescents is essential for the future of children and of society.

Paediatric Care in The Netherlands: State of Affairs, Challenges and Prospects.

There are many societal developments in The Netherlands, such as a rising and changing demand for care and support and a paradigm shift from curation to prevention, that currently-and in the near future-will have an impact on paediatric care. These developments both reveal potential risks in paediatric care and affect practices that require future improvement. In this viewpoint, we first present the most pressing developments for paediatrics, and we demonstrate why and how Dutch paediatricians have renewed their vision on paediatric care in order to cope with a changing society. It is a vision towards the year 2030 that gives children and paediatric care the right place in the Dutch healthcare landscape to guarantee accessible, high-quality, and effective care for every child at the right time. Realising this renewed vision requires however not only an adjustment from paediatricians and paediatricians in training, but also from professionals who work with them and from the Government that can facilitate or accelerate the implementation of the renewed vision in various ways.

Strengthening Medical Care for Young People in the Netherlands: A Reflection.

To improve medical care for young people in the Netherlands, various professional groups representing physicians who provide medical care to children have developed a vision called 'strengthening medical care for young people'. The purpose of this viewpoint is to reflect on the implementation of proposals to augment cooperation and coordination between the professional groups involved. Our reflection demonstrates that additional action regarding cooperation and coordination is still necessary to strengthen this care for young people. First, regarding the practical implementation of collaboration, the guidelines are unclear, and many are out-of-date. Second, adequate structured interdisciplinary training and intervision are lacking for physicians frequently collaborating in the care of young people. Third, interdisciplinary access to patient files is too complex and time-consuming. We recommend structured monitoring of the implementation of all improvement proposals, regarding both processes and outcomes. In addition, we recommend collaboration with physicians treating mentally disabled individuals to improve medical care for this group.

Availability and use of rapid diagnostic tests for the management of acute childhood infections in Europe: A cross-sectional survey of paediatricians.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care-tests (POCTs) have been advocated to optimise care in patients with infections but their actual use varies. This study aimed to estimate the variability in the adoption of current POCTs by paediatricians across Europe, and to explore the determinants of variability. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted of hospital and primary care paediatricians, recruited through professional networks. Questions focused on the availability and use of currently available POCTs. Data were analysed descriptively and using Median Odds Ratio (MOR) to measure variation between countries. Multilevel regression modelling using changes in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of models were used to assess the contribution of individual or workplace versus country level factors, to the observed variation. The commonest POCT was urine dipsticks (UD) which were available to >80% of primary care and hospital paediatricians in 68% (13/19) and 79% (23/29) countries, respectively. Availability of all POCTs varied between countries. In primary care, the country (MOR) varied from 1.61 (95%CI: 1.04-2.58) for lactate to 7.28 (95%CI: 3.04-24.35) for UD. In hospitals, the country MOR varied from 1.37 (95%CI:1.04-1.80) for lactate to 11.93 (95%CI:3.35-72.23) for UD. Most paediatricians in primary care (69%, 795/1154) and hospital (81%, 962/1188) would use a diagnostic test in the case scenario of an infant with undifferentiated fever. Multilevel regression modelling showed that the country of work was more important in predicting both the availability and use of POCTs than individual or workplace characteristics. CONCLUSION: There is substantial variability in the adoption of POCTs for the management of acute infections in children across Europe. To inform future implementation of both existing and innovative tests, further research is needed to understand what drives the variation between countries, the needs of frontline clinicians, and the role of diagnostic tests in the management of acute childhood infections.

COVID-19 Containment Measures at Childcare and Schools in 19 European Countries: An Observational Study on Local, Federal and National Policies.

Objectives: After childcare and schools have been closed in March 2020 to prevent the spread of COVID-19, they were open again in most European countries after the summer holidays till early autumn. Aim of this study is to give an overview and to compare COVID-19 childcare and school containment policies in 19 European countries. Methods: We collected data on containment measures among delegates of the European Academy of Pediatrics (EAP), through an online, closed questionnaire in the second half of October 2020. Results: Most policy has been formulated for secondary education. In all three settings policy was most often formulated for individual hygiene, cleaning of surfaces, exclusion of sick children, ventilation, distance between children and between children and teachers. In secondary schools, policy is formulated on face masks in and outside the class. School closure, cancellation of physical education and class size reduction are measures for which the fewest countries have formulated national policies. Conclusion: We recommend to accompany the opening of children's facilities and schools by surveillance studies that further clarify questions about control measures implemented to halt COVID-19 pandemic.

Delayed presentation to regular Dutch paediatric care in COVID-19 times: a national survey.

We explored the collateral harm in Dutch children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic from experience of paediatricians via an open question distributed via the website of the Dutch Paediatric Society. From the end of March till the first week of July, we received 51 reports of collateral harm involving mostly very young children with mainly acute physical problems but also social problems. In older children, several cases of diabetic ketoacidosis were reported. Our results show that delaying care can lead to seriously ill children, life-threatening situations and that in some cases it can even lead to death. If we want to avoid such a delay at a possible second peak of Corona, general care providers and paediatricians have to join forces and find new ways of working. Systematic data collection of collateral harm in children is needed to be able to intervene adequately.

Vaccine confidence among parents: Large scale study in eighteen European countries.

BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that vaccines save 2-3 million lives worldwide every year, a percentage of children are not getting appropriately vaccinated, thus leading to disease outbreaks. One of the major reasons of low vaccine uptake in Europe is vaccine hesitancy, contributing to the recent measles outbreaks. Monitoring of vaccine hesitancy is valuable in early identification of vaccine concerns. METHODS: We performed an eighteen country European survey on parents' attitudes and behaviors regarding their children's immunization. Parents having at least one child 1-4 years old were mostly recruited by primary care paediatricians to reply to a web-based questionnaire. The questionnaire was developed by the European Academy of Paediatrics Research in Ambulatory Setting Network steering committee, based on similar surveys. An individual level hesitancy score was constructed using the answers to 21 questions, and correlations of the score with socio-demographic characteristics and types of providers were explored. To assess inter country differences, a country level self -reported confidence was defined. RESULTS: Fifty six percent and 24% of 5736 respondents defined themselves as "not at all hesitant", and "somewhat hesitant", respectively. Parents who consulted general practitioners were more hesitant than parents who consulted pediatricians (p < 0.05). Consultation with homeopathists was associated with the highest reported hesitancy (p < 0.05). Vaccine confidence was highest in Portugal and Cyprus, and lowest in Bulgaria and Poland. CONCLUSION: The majority of parents in Europe believe in the importance of childhood vaccination. However, significant lack of confidence was found in certain European countries, highlighting the need for continuous monitoring, awareness and response plans. The possible influence of different types of healthcare providers on parental decisions demonstrated for the first time in our survey, calls for further research. Monitoring and continuous medical education efforts aimed mostly at those professionals who might not be likely to recommend vaccination are suggested.