Antireflux Procedures in Children With Neurologic Impairment: A National Survey of Physician Perspectives.

OBJECTIVE: Decision-making about antireflux procedures (ARPs) to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease in children with neurologic impairment and gastrostomy tubes is challenging and likely influenced by physicians' experience and perspectives. This study will explore physician attitudes about ARPs and determine if there are relationships to clinical practice and personal characteristics. METHODS: This is a national observational cross-sectional study that used an electronic questionnaire addressing reported practice, attitudes regarding the ARPs, and responses to clinical vignettes. Participants were physicians in Canadian tertiary-care pediatric settings. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze physician attitudes. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to determine associations between physician and practice characteristics and likelihood to consider ARP. RESULTS: Eighty three respondents represented 12 institutions, with a majority from general or complex care pediatrics. There was a wide disparity between likelihood to consider ARP in each clinical scenario. Likelihood to consider ARP ranged from to 19% to 78% depending on the scenario. Two scenarios were equally split in whether the respondent would offer an ARP. None of the demographic characteristics were significantly associated with likelihood to consider ARP. Often, gastrojejunostomy tubes alone were considered (56% to 68%). CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variability in physician attitudes toward and recommendations regarding ARPs to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease. We did not find a significant association with clinical experience or location of practice. More research is needed to define indications and outcomes for ARPs. This is a scenario where shared decision-making, bringing together physician and family knowledge and expertise, is likely the best course of action.

Impact of DREAMS interventions on attitudes towards gender norms among adolescent girls and young women: Findings from a prospective cohort in Kenya.

The DREAMS partnership aims to deliver a comprehensive package to reduce HIV incidence among adolescent girls and young women (AGYW), including through shifting gender norms. We evaluate DREAMS' effect on attitudes towards gender norms in two Kenyan settings. AGYW aged 15-22 in Nairobi (n = 852) and Gem (n = 761) were randomly selected for cohort enrolment in 2017-18 and followed-up to 2019. We described the proportion of AGYW and their male peers with equitable attitudes towards gender norms, using an adapted version of the GEM scale. We estimated the association between self-reported invitation to DREAMS (in 2017-18) and AGYW's attitudes towards two dimensions of gender norms, and then applied a causal inference framework to estimate the difference in the proportion of AGYW with equitable attitudes under the counterfactual scenarios that all versus none were DREAMS beneficiaries. We estimated that overall, 90.2% versus 87.1% of AGYW would have equitable norms around sexual and reproductive health decision-making in Nairobi if all versus none were DREAMS beneficiaries (+3.1; 95%CI:-2.5, +9.0). In Gem, we estimated a risk difference of +1.0 (89.6% vs 88.6%, 95%CI: -3.6,+5.6). There was no evidence for an effect of DREAMS on attitudes towards violence-related norms (Nairobi: 82.7% vs 82.2%, +0.5; 95%CI: -5.3,+6.5; Gem: 44.3% vs 48.2%, -3.9; 95%CI: -11.7,+3.0). We found no evidence of an impact of DREAMS invitation on individual attitudes towards gender norms. In some cases, equitable attitudes at enrolment left limited scope for improvement, and additional effort may be required to shift inequitable violence attitudes among both AGYW and their male peers.