ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: People living with asthma, their carers, clinicians and policymakers are the end-users of research and need research that address their individual healthcare needs. We aimed to understand the research priorities of end-users of asthma research. METHODS: A national cross-sectional mixed-methods study was conducted. The study included an online survey that engaged patients, carers, healthcare professionals and policymakers to provide statements to free-text questions about what they would like to see answered by research to improve living with asthma on a day-to-day basis. Responses where thematically analysed followed by three online priority setting consensus workshops. RESULTS: There were 593 respondents who provided 1446 text comments. Participants prioritized 10 asthma research themes which were: (1) asthma in children, (2) COVID 19 and asthma, (3) asthma care and self-management, (4) diagnosis and medication, (5) managing asthma attacks, (6) causes, prevention and features of asthma, (7) mental health, (8) asthma and ageing, (9) severe asthma, (10) asthma and other health conditions. Each theme comprises specific research questions. CONCLUSION: This project successfully established 10 priority research themes for asthma, reflecting the collective voice of the end-users of this research. These novel data can be used to address the documented mismatch in research prioritization between the research community and the end-users of research.
Subject(s)
Biomedical Research , COVID-19 , Child , Humans , Caregivers , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The aim of this project was to identify the top 10 priorities for childhood chronic conditions and disability (CCD) research from the perspectives of children and young people with lived experience, their parents and caregivers and the professionals who work with them. METHODS: We conducted a three-stage study based on the James Lind Alliance priority-setting partnership methods. It comprised two online surveys (n = 200; n = 201) and a consensus workshop (n = 21) with these three stakeholder groups in Australia. RESULTS: In the first stage, 456 responses were submitted, which were coded and collapsed into 40 overarching themes. In the second stage, 20 themes were shortlisted, which were further refined in stage 3, before the top 10 priorities being selected. Of these, the top three priorities were improving awareness and inclusion in all aspects of their life (school, work and social relationships), improving access to treatments and support and improving the process of diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The top 10 priorities identified reflect the need to focus on the individual, health systems and social aspects of the CCD experience when conducting research in this area. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study was guided by three Advisory Groups, comprising (1) young people living with CCD; (2) parents and caregivers of a child or young person with CCD and (3) professionals working with children and young people with CCD. These groups met several times across the course of the project and provided input into study aims, materials, methods and data interpretation and reporting. Additionally, the lead author and seven members of the author group have lived and experienced CCD.
Subject(s)
Biomedical Research , Disabled Persons , Humans , Child , Adolescent , Health Priorities , Caregivers , Surveys and Questionnaires , Chronic DiseaseABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Priority settings are important to plan and direct future research. The aim of this study was to identify the top ten pediatric and child health nursing research priorities from the perspectives of consumers, community, and healthcare professionals in Western Australia. DESIGN AND METHODS: This study used an adapted James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership design with three phases. 1) A planning workshop to inform a survey. 2) A survey using five open-ended-questions distributed between October 2020 and January 2021 through social media and healthcare professionals' emails. Responders' statements were analyzed with content analysis. 3) A consensus workshop to finalize and rank the themes. RESULTS: The planning workshop participants (n = 25) identified gaps such as community child healthcare and confirmed lack of consumer engagement in previous studies. The survey responses (n = 232) generated 911 statements analyzed into 19 themes. The consensus workshop participants (n = 19) merged and added themes, resulting in 16 final themes. The top three ranked themes were: 'access to service', 'mental health and psychological wellbeing', and 'communication'. CONCLUSIONS: The research themes are necessarily broad to capture the wide range of issues raised, reflecting the scope of pediatric and child health nursing. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The priorities will inform future research to be directed to areas of priority for stakeholders who have often not had a say in setting the research agenda.
Subject(s)
Biomedical Research , Child Health , Child , Health Priorities , Humans , Surveys and Questionnaires , Western AustraliaABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has seen a global surge in anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and stress. AIMS: This study aimed to describe the perspectives of patients with COVID-19, their family, health professionals, and the general public on the impact of COVID-19 on mental health. METHODS: A secondary thematic analysis was conducted using data from the COVID-19 COS project. We extracted data on the perceived causes and impact of COVID-19 on mental health from an international survey and seven online consensus workshops. RESULTS: We identified four themes (with subthemes in parenthesis): anxiety amidst uncertainty (always on high alert, ebb and flow of recovery); anguish of a threatened future (intense frustration of a changed normality, facing loss of livelihood, trauma of ventilation, a troubling prognosis, confronting death); bearing responsibility for transmission (fear of spreading COVID-19 in public; overwhelming guilt of infecting a loved one); and suffering in isolation (severe solitude of quarantine, sick and alone, separation exacerbating grief). CONCLUSION: We found that the unpredictability of COVID-19, the fear of long-term health consequences, burden of guilt, and suffering in isolation profoundly impacted mental health. Clinical and public health interventions are needed to manage the psychological consequences arising from this pandemic.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , Depression/psychology , Family , Humans , Mental Health , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, recovery, and mortality have been identified as critically important core outcomes by more than 9300 patients, health professionals, and the public from 111 countries in the global coronavirus disease 2019 core outcome set initiative. The aim of this project was to establish the core outcome measures for these domains for trials in coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Three online consensus workshops were convened to establish outcome measures for the four core domains of respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, and recovery. SETTING: International. PATIENTS: About 130 participants (patients, public, and health professionals) from 17 countries attended the three workshops. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Respiratory failure, assessed by the need for respiratory support based on the World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale, was considered pragmatic, objective, and with broad applicability to various clinical scenarios. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment was recommended for multiple organ failure, because it was routinely used in trials and clinical care, well validated, and feasible. The Modified Medical Research Council measure for shortness of breath, with minor adaptations (recall period of 24 hr to capture daily fluctuations and inclusion of activities to ensure relevance and to capture the extreme severity of shortness of breath in people with coronavirus disease 2019), was regarded as fit for purpose for this indication. The recovery measure was developed de novo and defined as the absence of symptoms, resumption of usual daily activities, and return to the previous state of health prior to the illness, using a 5-point Likert scale, and was endorsed. CONCLUSIONS: The coronavirus disease 2019 core outcome set recommended core outcome measures have content validity and are considered the most feasible and acceptable among existing measures. Implementation of the core outcome measures in trials in coronavirus disease 2019 will ensure consistency and relevance of the evidence to inform decision-making and care of patients with coronavirus disease 2019.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Clinical Trials as Topic , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Research Design , Dyspnea , Humans , Multiple Organ Failure , Recovery of Function , Reproducibility of Results , Respiratory InsufficiencyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The Australian guidelines to reduce health risks from drinking alcohol were released in 2020 by the National Health and Medical Research Council. Based on the latest evidence, the guidelines provide advice on how to keep the risk of harm from alcohol low. They refer to an Australian standard drink (10 g ethanol). RECOMMENDATIONS: â¢Guideline 1: To reduce the risk of harm from alcohol-related disease or injury, healthy men and women should drink no more than ten standard drinks a week and no more than four standard drinks on any one day. The less you drink, the lower your risk of harm from alcohol. â¢Guideline 2: To reduce the risk of injury and other harms to health, children and people under 18 years of age should not drink alcohol. â¢Guideline 3: To prevent harm from alcohol to their unborn child, women who are pregnant or planning a pregnancy should not drink alcohol. For women who are breastfeeding, not drinking alcohol is safest for their baby. CHANGES AS RESULT OF THE GUIDELINE: The recommended limit for healthy adults changed from two standard drinks per day (effectively 14 per week) to ten per week. The new guideline states that the less you drink, the lower your risk of harm from alcohol. The recommended maximum on any one day remains four drinks (clarified from previously "per drinking occasion"). Guidance is clearer for pregnancy and breastfeeding, and for people aged less than 18 years, recommending not drinking.
Subject(s)
Alcohol-Related Disorders/prevention & control , Alcoholic Beverages/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Underage Drinking/prevention & control , Adolescent , Adult , Alcoholic Beverages/adverse effects , Australia , Child , Humans , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: There are over 4,000 trials conducted in people with coronavirus disease 2019. However, the variability of outcomes and the omission of patient-centered outcomes may diminish the impact of these trials on decision-making. The aim of this study was to generate a consensus-based, prioritized list of outcomes for coronavirus disease 2019 trials. DESIGN: In an online survey conducted in English, Chinese, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish languages, adults with coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, health professionals, and the general public rated the importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale (7-9, critical importance) and completed a Best-Worst Scale to estimate relative importance. Participant comments were analyzed thematically. SETTING: International. SUBJECTS: Adults 18 years old and over with confirmed or suspected coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, members of the general public, and health professionals (including clinicians, policy makers, regulators, funders, and researchers). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: None. MAIN RESULTS: In total, 9,289 participants from 111 countries (776 people with coronavirus disease 2019 or family members, 4,882 health professionals, and 3,631 members of the public) completed the survey. The four outcomes of highest priority for all three groups were: mortality, respiratory failure, pneumonia, and organ failure. Lung function, lung scarring, sepsis, shortness of breath, and oxygen level in the blood were common to the top 10 outcomes across all three groups (mean > 7.5, median ≥ 8, and > 70% of respondents rated the outcome as critically important). Patients/family members rated fatigue, anxiety, chest pain, muscle pain, gastrointestinal problems, and cardiovascular disease higher than health professionals. Four themes underpinned prioritization: fear of life-threatening, debilitating, and permanent consequences; addressing knowledge gaps; enabling preparedness and planning; and tolerable or infrequent outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Life-threatening respiratory and other organ outcomes were consistently highly prioritized by all stakeholder groups. Patients/family members gave higher priority to many patient-reported outcomes compared with health professionals.
Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Health Priorities/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/standards , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Female , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Research Design , SARS-CoV-2 , Symptom Assessment , COVID-19 Drug TreatmentABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The outcomes reported in trials in coronavirus disease 2019 are extremely heterogeneous and of uncertain patient relevance, limiting their applicability for clinical decision-making. The aim of this workshop was to establish a core outcomes set for trials in people with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Four international online multistakeholder consensus workshops were convened to discuss proposed core outcomes for trials in people with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019, informed by a survey involving 9,289 respondents from 111 countries. The transcripts were analyzed thematically. The workshop recommendations were used to finalize the core outcomes set. SETTING: International. SUBJECTS: Adults 18 years old and over with confirmed or suspected coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, members of the general public and health professionals (including clinicians, policy makers, regulators, funders, researchers). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: None. MAIN RESULTS: Six themes were identified. "Responding to the critical and acute health crisis" reflected the immediate focus on saving lives and preventing life-threatening complications that underpinned the high prioritization of mortality, respiratory failure, and multiple organ failure. "Capturing different settings of care" highlighted the need to minimize the burden on hospitals and to acknowledge outcomes in community settings. "Encompassing the full trajectory and severity of disease" was addressing longer term impacts and the full spectrum of illness (e.g. shortness of breath and recovery). "Distinguishing overlap, correlation and collinearity" meant recognizing that symptoms such as shortness of breath had distinct value and minimizing overlap (e.g. lung function and pneumonia were on the continuum toward respiratory failure). "Recognizing adverse events" refers to the potential harms of new and evolving interventions. "Being cognizant of family and psychosocial wellbeing" reflected the pervasive impacts of coronavirus disease 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality, respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, and recovery are critically important outcomes to be consistently reported in coronavirus disease 2019 trials.
Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/standards , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Female , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Research Design , SARS-CoV-2 , Symptom Assessment , COVID-19 Drug TreatmentABSTRACT
RATIONALE: MMPs (Matrix metalloproteinases) and their endogenous tissue inhibitors may contribute to lung injury through extracellular matrix degradation and modulation of inflammation and fibrosis. OBJECTIVES: To test for an association between MMP pathway proteins and inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and clinical outcomes. METHODS: We measured MMPs in plasma collected on acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) Day 1 from 235 children at five hospitals between 2008 and 2017. We used latent class analysis to identify patients with distinct MMP profiles and then associated those profiles with markers of inflammation (IL-1RA, -6, -8, -10, and -18; macrophage inflammatory protein-1α and -1ß; tumor necrosis factor-α and -R2), endothelial injury (angiopoietin-2, von Willebrand factor, soluble thrombomodulin), impaired oxygenation (PaO2/FiO2 [P/F] ratio, oxygenation index), morbidity, and mortality. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In geographically distinct derivation and validation cohorts, approximately one-third of patients demonstrated an MMP profile characterized by elevated MMP-1, -2, -3, -7, and -8 and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 and -2; and depressed active and total MMP-9. This MMP profile was associated with multiple markers of inflammation, endothelial injury, and impaired oxygenation on Day 1 of ARDS, and conferred fourfold increased odds of mortality or severe morbidity independent of the P/F ratio and other confounders (95% confidence interval, 2.1-7.6; P < 0.001). Logistic regression using both the P/F ratio and MMP profiles was superior to the P/F ratio alone in prognosticating mortality or severe morbidity (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.82 vs. area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.73; P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric patients with ARDS have specific plasma MMP profiles associated with inflammation, endothelial injury, morbidity, and mortality. MMPs may play a role in the pathobiology of children with ARDS.
Subject(s)
Matrix Metalloproteinases/blood , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/blood , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Biomarkers/blood , Child , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Childhood obesity is a global health concern. Early intervention to help parents adopt best practice for infant feeding and physical activity is critical for maintaining healthy weight. Australian governments provide universal free primary healthcare from child and family health nurses (CFHNs) to support families with children aged up to five years and to provide evidence-based advice to parents. This paper aims to examine factors influencing the child obesity prevention practices of CFHNs and to identify opportunities to support them in promoting healthy infant growth. METHODS: This mixed methods study used a survey (n = 90) and semi-structured interviews (n = 20) with CFHNs working in two local health districts in Sydney, Australia. Survey data were analysed descriptively; interview transcripts were coded and analysed iteratively. Survey and interview questions examined how CFHNs addressed healthy infant feeding practices, healthy eating, active play and limiting sedentary behaviour during routine consultations; factors influencing such practices; and how CFHNs could be best supported. RESULTS: CFHNs frequently advised parents on breastfeeding, introducing solid foods, and techniques for settling infants. They spent less time providing advice on evidence-based formula feeding practices or encouraging physical activity in young children. Although nurses frequently weighed and measured children, they did not always use growth charts to identify those at risk of becoming overweight or obese. Nurses identified several barriers to promoting healthy weight gain in infants and young children, including limited parental recognition of overweight in their children or motivation to change diet or lifestyle; socioeconomic factors (such as the cost of healthy food); and beliefs and attitudes about infant weight and the importance of breastfeeding and physical activity amongst parents and family members. CONCLUSIONS: CFHNs require further education and support for their role in promoting optimal child growth and development, especially training in behaviour change techniques to increase parents' understanding of healthy infant weight gain. Parent information resources should be accessible and address cultural diversity. Resources should highlight the health effects of childhood overweight and obesity and emphasise the benefits of breastfeeding, appropriate formula feeding, suitable first foods, responsiveness to infant feeding cues, active play and limiting screen time.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Encouraging early child development and the early identification of developmental difficulties is a priority. The Ministry of Health in the Australian State of New South Wales (NSW), has recommended a program of developmental surveillance using validated screening questionnaires, namely, the Parents' Evaluation of Development Status (PEDS) and Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQs), however, the use of these tools has remained sub-optimal. A longitudinal prospective birth cohort "Watch Me grow" study was carried out in the South Western Sydney (SW) region of NSW to ascertain the uptake as well as the strategies and the resources required to maximise engagement in the surveillance program. This paper reports on a qualitative component of the study examining the attitudes, enablers and barriers to the current developmental surveillance practices, with reference to screening tools, amongst health professionals. METHODS: Qualitative data from 37 primary health care providers in a region of relative disadvantage in Sydney was analysed. RESULTS: The major themes that emerged from the data were the "difficulties/problems" and "positives/benefits" of surveillance in general, and "specificity" of the tools which were employed. Barriers of time, tool awareness, knowledge and access of referral pathways, and services were important for the physician providers, while the choice of screening tools and access to these tools in other languages were raised as important issues by Child and Family Health Nurses (CFHN). The use of these tools by health professionals was also influenced by what the professionals perceived as the parents' understanding of their child's development. While the PEDS and ASQs was utilised by CFHNs, both General Practitioners (GPs) and paediatricians commented that they lacked awareness of developmental screening tools and highlighted further training needs. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the practical challenges to, and limited knowledge and uptake of, the use of recommended screening tools as part of developmental surveillance. There is a need for further research regarding the most effective integrated models of care which will allow for a better collaboration between parents and service providers and improve information sharing between different professionals such as CFHNs GPs, Practices nurses and Paediatricians involved in screening and surveillance programs.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Developmental Disabilities/diagnosis , Mass Screening , Child Development , Child, Preschool , Female , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Infant , Male , New South Wales , Parents , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Regular health visits for parents with young children provide an opportunity for developmental surveillance and anticipatory guidance regarding common childhood problems and help to achieve optimal developmental progress prior to school entry. However, there are few published reports from Australian culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities exploring parents' experiences for accessing child health surveillance programs. This paper aims to describe and explain parental experiences for accessing developmental surveillance and anticipatory guidance for children. METHODS: Qualitative data was obtained from 6 focus groups (33 parents) and seven in-depth interviews of CALD parents recruited from an area of relative disadvantage in Sydney. Thematic analysis of data was conducted using an ecological framework. RESULTS: An overarching theme of "awareness-beliefs-choices" was found to explain parents' experiences of accessing primary health care services for children. "Awareness" situated within the meso-and macro-systems explained parents knowledge of where and what primary health services were available to access for their children. Opportunities for families to obtain this information existed at the time of birth in Australian hospitals, but for newly arrived immigrants with young children, community linkages with family and friends, and general practitioner (GPs) were most important. "Beliefs" situated within the microsystems included parents' understanding of their children's development, in particular what they considered to be "normal" or "abnormal". Parental "choices", situated within meso-systems and chronosystems, related to their choices of service providers, which were based on the proximity, continuity, purpose of visit, language spoken by the provider and past experience of a service. CONCLUSIONS: CALD parents have diverse experiences with primary health care providers which are influenced by their awareness of available services in the context of their duration of stay in Australia. The role of the general practitioner, with language concordance, suggests the importance of diversity within the primary care health workforce in this region. There is a need for ongoing cultural competence training of health professionals and provisions need to be made to support frequent use of interpreters at general practices in Australia.
Subject(s)
Child Development , Child Health Services/standards , Cultural Diversity , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Child , Community Health Services/organization & administration , Cultural Competency , Emigrants and Immigrants/statistics & numerical data , Female , Focus Groups , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Language , New South Wales , Parents , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Socioeconomic FactorsABSTRACT
Following of the emergence of Zika virus in Brazil in 2015, an epidemiological surveillance system was quickly implemented in the French overseas Territories of America (FTA) according to previous experience with dengue and chikungunya and has detected first cases of Zika. General practitioners and medical microbiologists were invited to report all clinically suspected cases of Zika, laboratory investigations were systematically conducted (RT-PCR). On 18 December, the first autochthonous case of Zika virus infection was confirmed by RT-PCR on French Guiana and Martinique, indicating introduction of Zika virus in FTA. The viral circulation of Zika virus was then also confirmed on Guadeloupe and Saint-Martin. We report here early findings on 203 confirmed cases of Zika virus infection identified by RT-PCR or seroneutralisation on Martinique Island between 24 November 2015 and 20 January 2016. All cases were investigated. Common clinical signs were observed (maculopapular rash, arthralgia, fever, myalgia and conjunctival hyperaemia) among these patients, but the rash, the foundation of our case definition, may be absent in a significant proportion of patients (16%). These results are important for the implementation of a suspected case definition, the main tool for epidemiological surveillance, in territories that may be affected by ZIKV emergence, including Europe.
Subject(s)
Communicable Diseases, Emerging/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Population Surveillance , Zika Virus Infection/diagnosis , Zika Virus Infection/epidemiology , Zika Virus/isolation & purification , Humans , Martinique/epidemiology , RNA, Viral/genetics , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , Sequence Analysis, DNA , Zika Virus/genetics , Zika Virus Infection/transmissionABSTRACT
Research aims to improve health outcomes for patients. However, the setting of research priorities is usually performed by clinicians, academics, and funders, with little involvement of patients or caregivers and using processes that lack transparency. A national workshop was convened in Australia to generate and prioritize research questions in chronic kidney disease (CKD) among diverse stakeholder groups. Patients with CKD (n=23), nephrologists/surgeons (n=16), nurses (n=8), caregivers (n=7), and allied health professionals and researchers (n=4) generated and voted on intervention questions across 4 treatment categories: CKD stages 1 to 5 (non-dialysis dependent), peritoneal dialysis, hemodialysis, and kidney transplantation. The 5 highest ranking questions (in descending order) were as follows: How effective are lifestyle programs for preventing deteriorating kidney function in early CKD? What strategies will improve family consent for deceased donor kidney donation, taking different cultural groups into account? What interventions can improve long-term post-transplant outcomes? What are effective interventions for post hemodialysis fatigue? How can we improve and individualize drug therapy to control post-transplant side effects? Priority questions were focused on prevention, lifestyle, quality of life, and long-term impact. These prioritized research questions can inform funding agencies, patient/consumer organizations, policy makers, and researchers in developing a CKD research agenda that is relevant to key stakeholders.
Subject(s)
Caregivers , Consensus , Health Personnel , Patient Participation , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/therapy , Research Personnel , Research , Adult , Aged , Australia , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) is known to be under-recognised in Australia. The use of standard methods to identify when to refer individuals who may have FASD for specialist assessment could help improve the identification of this disorder. The purpose of this study was to develop referral criteria for use in Australia. METHOD: An online survey about FASD screening and diagnosis in Australia, which included 23 statements describing criteria for referral for fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) and FASD based on published recommendations for referral in North America, was sent to 139 health professionals who had expertise or involvement in FASD screening or diagnosis. Survey findings and published criteria for referral were subsequently reviewed by a panel of 14 investigators at a consensus development workshop where criteria for referral were developed. RESULTS: Among the 139 health professionals who were sent the survey, 103 (74%) responded, and 90 (65%) responded to the statements on criteria for referral. Over 80% of respondents agreed that referral for specialist evaluation should occur when there is evidence of significant prenatal alcohol exposure, defined as 7 or more standard drinks per week and at least 3 standard drinks on any one day, and more than 70% agreed with 13 of the 16 statements that described criteria for referral other than prenatal alcohol exposure. Workshop participants recommended five independent criteria for referral: confirmed significant prenatal alcohol exposure; microcephaly and confirmed prenatal alcohol exposure; 2 or more significant central nervous system (CNS) abnormalities and confirmed prenatal alcohol exposure; 3 characteristic FAS facial anomalies; and 1 characteristic FAS facial anomaly, growth deficit and 1 or more CNS abnormalities. CONCLUSION: Referral criteria recommended for use in Australia are similar to those recommended in North America. There is a need to develop resources to raise awareness of these criteria among health professionals and evaluate their feasibility, acceptability and capacity to improve the identification of FASD in Australia.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Consensus , Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders/diagnosis , Referral and Consultation/standards , Alcohol Drinking/adverse effects , Australia , Female , Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders/etiology , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Male , Maternal Behavior , Pregnancy , Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects/diagnosis , Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects/etiology , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is little reliable information on the prevalence of fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD) in Australia and no coordinated national approach to facilitate case detection. The aim of this study was to identify health professionals' perceptions about screening for FASD in Australia. METHOD: A modified Delphi process was used to assess perceptions of the need for, and the process of, screening for FASD in Australia. We recruited a panel of 130 Australian health professionals with experience or expertise in FASD screening or diagnosis. A systematic review of the literature was used to develop Likert statements on screening coverage, components and assessment methods which were administered using an online survey over two survey rounds. RESULTS: Of the panel members surveyed, 95 (73%) responded to the questions on screening in the first survey round and, of these, 81 (85%) responded to the second round. Following two rounds there was consensus agreement on the need for targeted screening at birth (76%) and in childhood (84%). Participants did not reach consensus agreement on the need for universal screening at birth (55%) or in childhood (40%). Support for targeted screening was linked to perceived constraints on service provision and the need to examine the performance, costs and benefits of screening.For targeted screening of high risk groups, we found highest agreement for siblings of known cases of FASD (96%) and children of mothers attending alcohol treatment services (93%). Participants agreed that screening for FASD primarily requires assessment of prenatal alcohol exposure at birth (86%) and in childhood (88%), and that a checklist is needed to identify the components of screening and criteria for referral at birth (84%) and in childhood (90%). CONCLUSIONS: There is an agreed need for targeted but not universal screening for FASD in Australia, and sufficient consensus among health professionals to warrant development and evaluation of standardised methods for targeted screening and referral in the Australian context. Participants emphasised the need for locally-appropriate, evidence-based approaches to facilitate case detection, and the importance of ensuring that screening and referral programs are supported by adequate diagnostic and management capacity.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders/diagnosis , Mass Screening , Australia , Delphi Technique , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/methods , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Pregnancy , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD) are underdiagnosed in Australia, and health professionals have endorsed the need for national guidelines for diagnosis. The aim of this study was to develop consensus recommendations for the diagnosis of FASD in Australia. METHODS: A panel of 13 health professionals, researchers, and consumer and community representatives with relevant expertise attended a 2-day consensus development workshop to review evidence on the screening and diagnosis of FASD obtained from a systematic literature review, a national survey of health professionals and community group discussions. The nominal group technique and facilitated discussion were used to review the evidence on screening and diagnosis, and to develop consensus recommendations for the diagnosis of FASD in Australia. RESULTS: The use of population-based screening for FASD was not recommended. However, there was consensus support for the development of standard criteria for referral for specialist diagnostic assessment. Participants developed consensus recommendations for diagnostic categories, criteria and assessment methods, based on the adaption of elements from both the University of Washington 4-Digit Diagnostic Code and the Canadian guidelines for FASD diagnosis. Panel members also recommended the development of resources to: facilitate consistency in referral and diagnostic practices, including comprehensive clinical guidelines and assessment instruments; and to support individuals undergoing assessment and their parents or carers. CONCLUSIONS: These consensus recommendations provide a foundation for the development of guidelines and other resources to promote consistency in the diagnosis of FASD in Australia. Guidelines for diagnosis will require review and evaluation in the Australian context prior to national implementation as well as periodic review to incorporate new knowledge.
Subject(s)
Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders/diagnosis , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Australia , Evidence-Based Medicine , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Male , Mass ScreeningABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Australia's commitment to consumer and community participation in health and medical research has grown over the past decade. Participatory research models of engagement are the most empowering for consumers. METHODS: As part of a project to develop a diagnostic instrument for fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD) in Australia (FASD Project), the Australian FASD Collaboration (Collaboration), including a consumer advocate and two consumer representatives, was established. On completion of the FASD Project an on-line survey of Collaboration members was conducted to assess their views on consumer involvement. Women in the community were also invited to participate in Community Conversations to discuss real life situations regarding communications with health professionals about alcohol and pregnancy. Community Conversation feedback was analysed qualitatively and attendees were surveyed about their views of the Community Conversation process. RESULTS: The on-line survey was completed by 12 members of the Collaboration (71%). Consumer and community participation was considered important and essential, worked well, and was integral to the success of the project. The 32 women attending the Community Conversations generated 500 statements that made reference to prevention, how information and messages are delivered, and appropriate support for women. Nearly all the attendees at the Community Conversations (93%) believed that they had an opportunity to put forward their ideas and 96% viewed the Community Conversations as a positive experience. CONCLUSIONS: The successful involvement of consumers and the community in the FASD Project can be attributed to active consumer and community participation, which included continued involvement throughout the project, funding of participation activities, and an understanding of the various contributions by the Collaboration members.
Subject(s)
Community Participation , Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders/diagnosis , Prenatal Diagnosis , Australia , Consensus , Cooperative Behavior , Female , Humans , PregnancyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This manuscript describes the novel approach to developing a toolkit to support meaningful consumer involvement in clinical trials in Australia to help guide others in considering the development of similar resources.The toolkit aims to support greater consumer involvement in shaping how clinical research is prioritised, designed and conducted. Type of program or service: A working group of researchers, research organisations and consumers was established to co-develop the Consumer Involvement and Engagement Toolkit (the 'Toolkit'), a digital resource to guide researchers and organisations regarding consumer involvement in clinical trials. FINDINGS: A literature review and international scan of best practice revealed numerous resources outlining best practice for consumer involvement in clinical research and clear evidence of its impact and value. Through a novel content-sharing process, we were able to utilise these resources to develop a comprehensive Toolkit for researchers and research organisations that provides world-class guidance. LESSONS LEARNT: There is a growing movement to ensure consumer involvement in healthcare, including in clinical research. We discovered its proponents were willing to share their tools and resources to promote international consumer involvement. Although these international tools and resources needed adaptation to suit the Australian research environment, this was achievable with far less effort than developing them from scratch.