Disease Course and Response to Immunotherapy in Children With Childhood Disintegrative Disorder: A Retrospective Case Series.

Childhood disintegrative disorder is a poorly understood neurobehavioral disorder of early childhood characterized by acute to subacute profound regression in previously developed language, social behavior, and adaptive functions. The etiology of childhood disintegrative disorder remains unknown and treatment is focused on symptomatic management. Interest in neuroinflammatory mechanisms has grown with the increased recognition of autoimmune brain diseases and similarities between the presenting symptoms of childhood disintegrative disorder and pediatric autoimmune encephalitis. Importantly, a diagnosis of pediatric autoimmune encephalitis requires evidence of inflammation on paraclinical testing, which is absent in childhood disintegrative disorder. Here we report 5 children with childhood disintegrative disorder who were initially diagnosed with possible autoimmune encephalitis and treated with immunotherapy. Two children had provocative improvements, whereas 3 did not change significantly on immunotherapy. Additionally, a sixth patient with childhood disintegrative disorder evaluated in our Autoimmune Brain Disease Clinic showed spontaneous improvement and is included to highlight the variable natural history of childhood disintegrative disorder that may mimic treatment responsiveness.

Multidisciplinary analysis of invasive meningococcal disease as a framework for continuous quality and safety improvement in regional Australia.

BACKGROUND: System factors in a regional Australian health district contributed to avoidable care deviations from invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) management guidelines. Traditional root cause analysis (RCA) is not well-suited to IMD, focusing on individual cases rather than system improvements. As IMD requires complex care across healthcare silos, it presents an opportunity to explore and address system-based patient safety issues. CONTEXT: Baseline assessment of IMD cases (2005-2006) identified inadequate triage, lack of senior clinician review, inconsistent vital sign recording and laboratory delays as common issues, resulting in antibiotic administration delays and inappropriate or premature discharge. METHODS: Clinical governance, in partnership with clinical and public health services, established a multidisciplinary Meningococcal Reference Group (MRG) to routinely review management of all IMD cases. The MRG comprised representatives from primary care, acute care, public health, laboratory medicine and clinical governance. Baseline data were compared with two subsequent evaluation points (2011-2012 and 2013-2015). INTERVENTIONS: Phase I involved multidisciplinary process mapping and development of a standardised audit tool from national IMD management guidelines. Phase II involved formalisation of group processes and advocacy for operational change. Phase III focused on dissemination of findings to clinicians and managers. RESULTS: Greatest care improvements were observed in the final evaluation. Median antibiotic delay decreased from 72 to 42 min and proportion of cases triaged appropriately improved from 38% to 75% between 2013 and 2015. Increasing fatal outcomes were attributed to the emergence of more virulent meningococcal serotypes. CONCLUSIONS: The MRG was a key mechanism for identifying system gaps, advocating for change and enhancing communication and coordination across services. Employing IMD case review as a focus for district-level process reflection presents an innovative patient safety approach, combining the strengths of prospective hazard analysis with more traditional RCA methodologies.

The missing link: family physician perspectives on barriers and enablers to prescribing a new Meningococcal B vaccine and other recommended, non-government funded vaccines.

OBJECTIVES: To determine factors influencing Family Physician (FP) uptake of non government-funded vaccines, and to explore FP attitudes towards the introduction and use of a new vaccine to protect against serogroup B meningococcal disease to inform its future introduction into the Australian Immunisation Schedule. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Quantitative, self-administered state-wide questionnaire mailed to all FPs in South Australia (n=1786). Results from 523 FP respondents in South Australia, collected between June and October 2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported immunisation counselling practices; and knowledge, attitudes and barriers to prescribing of Meningococcal B (Men B) vaccine and other recommended, non-funded immunisations. RESULTS: The response rate was 30% (n=523). While most (59%) respondents had worked in general practice for over 20 years, only 39% of all respondents had ever had personal or professional experience with a case of invasive meningococcal disease (IMD). Most FPs (63%) were aware that a meningococcal B vaccine was being developed, and 93% of respondents agreed that this vaccine should be government-funded. FPs ranked Men B vaccine as the highest priority to receive funding of eight currently non-funded immunisation strategies. High vaccine cost and low patient socioeconomic status were identified as definite barriers to prescribing non-funded vaccines by 59% of respondents. Past IMD experience significantly affected attitudes and prescribing practices. CONCLUSIONS: IMD, while encountered rarely in clinical practice, is considered an important disease to vaccinate against by FPs. Cost and perceived low socioeconomic status of patients are substantial barriers to FPs prescribing Men B and other non-funded vaccines, and inclusion of such vaccines on the National Immunisation Program is likely to improve equity of access.