Early identification and awareness of child abuse and neglect among physicians and teachers.

BACKGROUND: Child abuse and neglect (CAN) causes enormous suffering for those affected. OBJECTIVE: The study investigated the current state of knowledge concerning the recognition of CAN and protocols for suspected cases amongst physicians and teachers. METHODS: In a pilot study conducted in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania from May 2020 to June 2021, we invited teachers and physicians working with children to complete an online questionnaire containing mainly multiple-choice-questions. RESULTS: In total, 45 physicians and 57 teachers responded. Altogether, 84% of physicians and 44% of teachers were aware of cases in which CAN had occurred in the context of their professional activity. Further, 31% of physicians and 23% of teachers stated that specific instructions on CAN did not exist in their professional institution or that they were not aware of them. All physicians and 98% of teachers were in favor of mandatory training on CAN for pediatric residents and trainee teachers. Although 13% of physicians and 49% of teachers considered a discussion of a suspected case of CAN to constitute a breach of confidentiality, 87% of physicians and 60% of teachers stated that they would discuss a suspected case with colleagues. CONCLUSION: Despite the fact that a large proportion of respondents had already been confronted with suspected cases of CAN, further guidelines for reporting procedures and training seem necessary. There is still uncertainty in both professions on dealing with cases of suspected CAN.

How do parents perceive their children's epileptic seizures? Experiences of the first seizure and changes during the course of the epilepsy.

PROBLEM: Experiencing a child's seizure can be challenging for parents. METHODS: We investigated parental experiences of their child's first seizure and how their perception and management of seizures changed over time. From September 2020 to March 2021, we invited parents who had witnessed at least two of their child's seizures to take part in a semi-structured interview. Parents whose children experienced solely absence seizures were excluded. RESULTS: Of the parents, 52/74 (70%) did not recognize their child's first epileptic seizure and assumed the event to be due to a different cause, for instance teething. Parents overwhelmingly reported fear (48/74; 65%) and surprise (13/74; 18%) as the predominant emotional responses to the first seizure. In response to the most recently observed seizure parents reported feelings related to fear (33/74; 45%) and happiness (16/74; 22%), with regard to the latter, especially "being calm" or "feeling safe". Asked for thoughts in response to the first seizure, 22/74 (30%) reported concerns about their child's future, with regard to the most recent seizure, 15/74 (20%) expressed such thoughts. Of the parents, 53/74 (72%) did not know how to respond to the first seizure. Concerning the most recent seizure, 48/74 (65%) said they felt confident in managing the seizure. CONCLUSION: Experiencing the child's first seizure was very challenging for parents. During the course of the epilepsy, changes were observed in both parental perception of and confidence in managing the seizures. Physicians should consider these changes when counselling parents in order to better target their evolving needs.

An Observational Study to Identify Drug-related Problems (DRP) in Routine Care and An Expert Panel Assessment to Rate Clinical Risk and Preventability by Unit-dose Dispensing Systems (UDDS) with Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE) and Clinical Decision-Support Systems (CDSS).

Background and aim: Drug-related problems (DRP) jeopardize patient safety. Unit-dose dispensing systems (UDDS) with computerized-physician-order-entry (CPOE) and clinical-decision-support-systems (CDSS) were reported as a promising concept for preventing DRP. We aimed at identifying and categorizing DRP in peroral drug administration considering their clinical risk and preventability by UDSS/CPOE/CDSS. Investigations: In surgical and internal-medicine departments, we observed routine procedures in peroral drug administration for DRP. An expert panel including pharmaceutical and nursing expertise categorized the identified 18 DRP categories into three levels: DRP that have not yet resulted in medication errors (ME) (Level-I), DRP where ME have occurred but have not yet reached the patient (Level-II), and DRP where ME have occurred and have reached the patient (Level-III). Additionally, the panel categorized DRP according to their clinical risk and whether the implementation of UDSS/CPOE/CDSS can prevent them. Results: In 77 surgical patients, 1,849 peroral drug administration procedures, and in 149 internal-medicine patients, 1,405 procedures were observed. The 18 DRP categories were identified with a frequency of 0.6%-26.7% (Level-I), 0.1%-21.5% (Level-II), and 0.0%-1.0% (Level-III). Of those, four categories were considered of high clinical risk: "Name of the medication is not readable", "Prescribed medication is not prepared for administration", "An incorrect or non-prescribed medication is prepared", and "A medication is prepared for the wrong patient (mix-up)". Twelve DRP categories were categorized as highly preventable by UDSS/CPOE/CDSS. Conclusions:Under routine conditions, we identified a substantial number of DRPs. An expert panel categorized many of those DRPs as clinically highly relevant and highly preventable by UDSS/CPOE/CDSS.

Knowledge and attitudes towards epilepsy: A survey of people with epilepsy.

PROBLEM: Many studies focus on knowledge and attitudes of unaffected people towards epilepsy and people with epilepsy (PWE). The perspective of PWE themselves is much less explored. METHODS: We invited PWE in Germany to answer a questionnaire on their knowledge and attitudes towards epilepsy and PWE. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 230 PWE (median age: 40 years; min./max.: 19/83; 66 % female). Of PWE, 22 % thought that PWE are more helpful, and 10 % thought that PWE are friendlier than other people. Nevertheless, reservations about relationships and friendships with other PWE existed: of the participants, only 74 % would definitely go on a date with another PWE, and 90 % would definitely include another PWE they liked into their circle of friends. Swimming was judged as more dangerous for PWE than for healthy people by 71 % of PWE. Of PWE, 86 % correctly assumed it was not useful to hold a person having a seizure to the ground. Putting a solid object in the mouth was considered not useful by 85 % of PWE. Of PWE, 20 % would definitely administer an available emergency medication if another PWE had a seizure. For 67 % of PWE, certain preconditions should have to be fulfilled such as an available document with instructions. Of PWE, 11 % stated they would not administer an available emergency medication if another PWE had a seizure. CONCLUSION: Although positive attitudes of PWE towards other PWE exist, we also found some reservations calling for psychosocial support. Most PWE had sufficient knowledge about risks of certain activities and about measures to be taken during a seizure. Nevertheless, a small group of PWE showed knowledge gaps. Thus, educational support still seems essential.

Knowledge of epilepsy among German pharmacists.

PROBLEM: Pharmacists can have a large impact on attitude, acceptance and adherence in patients with long-term conditions. They should be able to give appropriate advice. METHODS: We invited pharmacists in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Saxony, Germany, to complete a questionnaire mainly containing multiple-choice-questions. RESULTS: Overall, 238 pharmacists took part in the survey. 199 (84%) said they were insecure counselling people with epilepsy or had no experience at all. 205 (86%) rightly assumed a seizure can result in death. Concerning an acute seizure, administration of a rescue medication was considered as possible useful measure by 127 (53%) participants. Of the participants, 206 (87%) stated a physician should be consulted for every first afebrile seizure, 188 (79%) for every first febrile seizure. Exanthema as especially clinically relevant adverse drug event was rightly chosen for carbamazepine by 18 (8%) and for lamotrigine by 12 (5%) participants. 60 (25%) rightly chose liver toxicity for valproate. The increase of carbamazepine plasma concentration when adding erythromycin was chosen by 66 (28%) of pharmacists. 13 (5%) knew about the reduction of effectiveness of lamotrigine when adding hormonal contraceptives. For valproate, 201 (84%) stated that it is important to counsel patients concerning contraception. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists are insecure counselling people with epilepsy. Some of them would not suggest to seek medical advice for every first seizure. This can lead to reduced patient safety. The adverse drug events of valproate are well known, important adverse drug events and interactions of other anticonvulsants are less present to the pharmacists and should be regularly addressed in training courses.

Incompatibilities in paediatric intensive care - pitfalls in drug information.

Drug incompatibilities can lead to loss of effectiveness of drugs or to increased risk for undesirable effects that can even be life-threatening. Especially children are at high risk. Databases are an important source of information in routine care to avoid incompatibilities. However, they were supposedly developed considering drugs for use in adults. Thus, we analysed to what extent databases are appropriate for the identification of incompatibilities in intravenous (i.v.) drug therapy in paediatric intensive care. We analysed the information provided by two databases (Database A and B) on all pairs of two drugs prescribed to be administered via the same i.v. access line in a university paediatric intensive care unit during the study period of 50 days. A total of 50 different i.v. drugs was prescribed in 318 different combinations (drug pairs). We found information on (in)compatibilities in 23.0 % (73/318) in Database A and in 31.1 % (99/318) in Database B. Only in 11.0 % (35/318) of the drug pairs, both databases provided information. Considering those drug pairs, in 17.1 % (6/35) Database B indicated compatibility whereas Database A indicated incompatibility. Compatibility information delivered by databases on drugs used in paediatric intensive care is incomplete, heterogeneous, and partly contradictory. Thus, an increased awareness on the strengths and limitations of different databases is necessary to avoid patient harm.

How do parents perceive adverse drug events of their children's anticonvulsant medication?

BACKGROUND: The main source of knowledge on adverse drug events (ADE) are physicians' reports in controlled clinical trials. In contrast, little is known about the parents' perception of ADE of anticonvulsants their children receive. METHODS: After approval by the local ethics committee, we performed a survey in a neuropediatric outpatient clinic of a university hospital. Based on a structured questionnaire, we interviewed parents of children with current anticonvulsant treatment regarding (i) their fears about potential ADE, (ii) experienced ADE according to parents, and (iii) implications of ADE on the child's life. RESULTS: Parents of 150 patients took part in the interview. (i) 95 (63.3%) parents expressed fears concerning ADE, mostly liver injury/liver failure (33 [22%]). (ii) 129 (86%) parents reported experienced ADE, mostly sedation (65 [43.3%]) and abnormal behavior (54 [36%]). (iii) Parents reported substantial implications of ADE on the child's daily life for 84 (56%) children, and 63 (42%) parents expressed a negative impact on the child's development. CONCLUSION: We recognized a great discrepancy between those ADE that were feared and those that were experienced. Parents feared life-threatening ADE and experienced less severe ADE that nevertheless have a negative impact on the child's daily life.

Ambulatory care of children treated with anticonvulsants - pitfalls after discharge from hospital.

BACKGROUND: Anticonvulsants require special consideration particularly at the interface from hospital to ambulatory care. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Observational study for 6 months with prospectively enrolled consecutive patients in a neuropediatric ward of a university hospital (age 0-<18 years) with long-term therapy of at least one anticonvulsant. Assessment of outpatient prescriptions after discharge. Parent interviews for emergency treatment for acute seizures and safety precautions. RESULTS: We identified changes of the brand in 19/82 (23%) patients caused by hospital's discharge letters (4/82; 5%) or in ambulatory care (15/82; 18%). In 37/76 (49%) of patients who were deemed to require rescue medication, no recommendation for such a medication was included in the discharge letters. 17/76 (22%) of the respective parents stated that they had no immediate access to rescue medication. Safety precautions were applicable in 44 epilepsy patients. We identified knowledge deficits in 27/44 (61%) of parents. CONCLUSION: Switching of brands after discharge was frequent. In the discharge letters, rescue medications were insufficiently recommended. Additionally, parents frequently displayed knowledge deficits in risk management.