Feasibility of a peer-led, school-based asthma education programme for adolescents in Jordan.

The Adolescent Asthma Action programme (Triple A) has been used successfully to promote asthma knowledge, awareness and quality of life in adolescents with asthma in Australia. We describe the feasibility and acceptability of an adaptation of this English-language, peer-led, asthma education programme in a girls' high school in Northern Jordan. The pilot was conducted by bilingual health workers. Feasibility, acceptability and adaptability were measured through participation rates, open-ended questionnaires completed by peer leaders, a focus group for junior students and reflective journal notes. The programme was well-received by staff and students, with high levels of participation. The peer-led approach was viewed positively. Students reported that they enjoyed the interactive learning activities and the opportunity to practise English. The students reported increased asthma knowledge and awareness, with students with asthma reporting receiving more support from peers. A peer-led asthma education programme is feasible and acceptable in the Jordanian school context.

Concomitant botanical medicine use among patients participating in commercial prostate cancer trials.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with cancer frequently use botanical medications. The concomitant use of such medications by patients on commercial trials has not been well-described, despite the importance of these trials for evaluating the safety and efficacy of new agents. We sought to describe the use of botanical medications taken by patients with prostate cancer enrolled on global commercial trials. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Regulatory repository of commercial clinical trial data. INTERVENTIONS: Anti-cancer therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Botanical and medication use data were pooled across six international commercial randomized trials for metastatic prostate cancer with detailed information on medication and indications. Botanical products were considered to have potential for drug interaction if they led to a change in drug exposure in human trials. Potential for interaction was ascertained by PubMed review. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. RESULTS: Of 7318 enrolled patients, 700 (10 %) reported botanical use at any time and 653 (9%) reported use of botanical products while on trial. Nearly half of botanical product types were not classified by plant (43 %). The highest proportion of botanical use was among patients in Asian countries (32 %), followed by patients in North America (13 %). Eighty-six different types of botanical products were used; of these, nineteen had a patient-reported anti-cancer indication. CONCLUSIONS: Botanical medicine use among patients with prostate cancer in commercial trials is moderate, although it varies by region. Practitioners should be aware of the use of botanical interventions in a clinical trial context.