RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Major infectious disease outbreaks are a constant threat to human health. Clinical research responses to outbreaks generate evidence to improve outcomes and outbreak control. Experiences from previous epidemics have identified multiple challenges to undertaking timely clinical research responses. This scoping review is a systematic appraisal of political, economic, administrative, regulatory, logistical, ethical and social (PEARLES) challenges to clinical research responses to emergency epidemics and solutions identified to address these. METHODS: A scoping review. We searched six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, PsycINFO, Scopus and Epistemonikos) for articles published from 2008 to July 2018. We included publications reporting PEARLES challenges to clinical research responses to emerging epidemics and pandemics and solutions identified to address these. Two reviewers screened articles for inclusion, extracted and analysed the data. RESULTS: Of 2678 articles screened, 76 were included. Most presented data relating to the 2014-2016 Ebola virus outbreak or the H1N1 outbreak in 2009. The articles related to clinical research responses in Africa (n = 37), Europe (n = 8), North America (n = 5), Latin America and the Caribbean (n = 3) and Asia (n = 1) and/or globally (n = 22). A wide range of solutions to PEARLES challenges was presented, including a need to strengthen global collaborations and coordination at all levels and develop pre-approved protocols and equitable frameworks, protocols and standards for emergencies. Clinical trial networks and expedited funding and approvals were some solutions implemented. National ownership and community engagement from the outset were a key enabler for delivery. Despite the wide range of recommended solutions, none had been formally evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: To strengthen global preparedness and response to the COVID-19 pandemic and future epidemics, identified solutions for rapid clinical research deployment, delivery, and dissemination must be implemented. Improvements are urgently needed to strengthen collaborations, funding mechanisms, global and national research capacity and capability, targeting regions vulnerable to epidemics and pandemics. Solutions need to be flexible to allow timely adaptations to context, and research led by governments of affected regions. Research communities globally need to evaluate their activities and incorporate lessons learnt to refine and rehearse collaborative outbreak response plans in between epidemics.
Asunto(s)
Investigación Biomédica , Brotes de Enfermedades , Epidemias , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud/tendencias , Pandemias , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Atención a la Salud/organización & administración , Ebolavirus , Salud Global , Humanos , Subtipo H1N1 del Virus de la Influenza A , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The epidemiology of CNS infections in Europe is dynamic, requiring that clinicians have access to up-to-date clinical management guidelines (CMGs) to aid identification of emerging infections and for improving quality and a degree of standardisation in diagnostic and clinical management practices. This paper presents a systematic review of CMGs for community-acquired CNS infections in Europe. METHODS: A systematic review. Databases were searched from October 2004 to January 2019, supplemented by an electronic survey distributed to 115 clinicians in 33 European countries through the CLIN-Net clinical network of the COMBACTE-Net Innovative Medicines Initiative. Two reviewers screened records for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the quality using the AGREE II tool. RESULTS: Twenty-six CMGs were identified, 14 addressing bacterial, ten viral and two both bacterial and viral CNS infections. Ten CMGs were rated high quality, 12 medium and four low. Variations were identified in the definition of clinical case definitions, risk groups, recommendations for differential diagnostics and antimicrobial therapy, particularly for paediatric and elderly populations. CONCLUSION: We identified variations in the quality and recommendations of CMGs for community-acquired CNS infections in use across Europe. A harmonised European "framework-CMG" with adaptation to local epidemiology and risks may improve access to up-to-date CMGs and the early identification and management of (re-)emerging CNS infections with epidemic potential.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones del Sistema Nervioso Central/terapia , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/terapia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Adulto , Anciano , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Preescolar , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is an emerging respiratory pathogen with a high mortality rate and no specific treatments available to date. The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of convalescent plasma therapy for MERS-CoV-infected patients by using MERS-CoV-specific convalescent plasma obtained from previously recovered patients. METHODS: A survey was adapted from validated questionnaire originally aimed to measure network capacities and capabilities within the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC). The questionnaire was modified for this study to include 26 items that were divided into three main domains of interest: (1) the ability to care for critically ill MERS-CoV patients; (2) laboratory capacity to diagnose MERS-CoV and blood bank ability to prepare convalescent plasma; and (3), research capacity to conduct randomized controlled trials. The questionnaire was emailed to physicians. RESULTS: Of 582 physicians who were invited to the survey, 327 responded (56.2 %). The professional focus of the majority of respondents was critical care (106/249 (43 %)), pediatrics (59/249, (24 %)) or internal medicine (52/249 (21 %)) but none was blood banking. Nearly all respondents (251/263 (95 %)) reported to have access to ICU facilities within their institutions. Most respondents (219/270 (81 %)) reported that intensivists were the most physician group responsible for treatment decisions about critically ill SARI patients. While 125/165 respondents (76 %) reported that they conduct research in ICUs, and 80/161 (49.7 %) had been involved in the conduct of RCTs, including using a placebo comparison (60/161 (37 %)), only 49/226 (21 %) of respondents regularly participated in research networks. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey indicated that in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), ICUs are the most likely clinical locations for conducting a clinical trial of convalescent plasma therapy for MERS-CoV, and that most ICUs have experience with such research designs.
Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Infecciones por Coronavirus/sangre , Infecciones por Coronavirus/terapia , Médicos/psicología , Intercambio Plasmático , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/métodos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Infecciones por Coronavirus/virología , Cuidados Críticos/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios de Factibilidad , Humanos , Coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio de Oriente Medio , Arabia SauditaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Noncommunicable diseases including cancer are widespread amongst the 5.6 million Syrian refugees currently hosted in the Middle East. Given its prevalence as the third leading cause of death in Syria, cancer is likely to be an important health burden among Syrian refugees. Against this background, our aim was to describe the clinical, ethical and policy decision-making experiences of health actors working within the current refugee cancer care system; the impact of refugee cancer care health policies on health care providers and policy makers in this context; and provide suggestions for the way delivery of care should be optimised in a sustained emergency situation. METHODS: From April-July 2016, we conducted in-depth interviews with 12 purposively sampled health officials and health care workers from the Jordanian Ministry of Health, multilateral donors and international non-governmental organisations. Data were analysed using a framework analysis approach to identify systemic, practical and ethical challenges to optimising care for refugees, through author agreement on issues emerging from the data and those linked more directly to areas of questioning. RESULTS: As has been previously reported, central challenges for policy makers and health providers were the lack of quality cancer prevalence data to inform programming and care delivery for this refugee population, and insufficient health resource allocation to support services. In addition, limited access to international funding for the host country, the absence of long-term funding schemes, and barriers to coordination between institutions and frontline clinicians were seen as key barriers. In this context where economic priorities inevitably drive decision-making on public health policy and individual care provision, frontline healthcare workers and policy makers experienced significant moral distress where duties of care and humanitarian values were often impossible to uphold. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings confirm and expand understanding of the challenges involved in resource allocation decisions for cancer care in refugee populations, and highlight these for the particular situation of long term Syrian refugees in Jordan. The insights offered by frontline clinicians and policy makers in this context reveal the unintended personal and moral impact of resource allocation decisions. With many countries facing similar challenges in the provision of cancer care for refugees, the lessons learned from Jordan suggest key areas for policy revision and international investment in developing cancer care policies for refugees internationally.