ABSTRACT
Many children in immigrant families may qualify for legal protection-for themselves if unaccompanied, or as a derivative on parents' claims-on humanitarian grounds related to persecution or forced migration. Pediatric providers can offer a spectrum of multidirectional medical-legal supports to increase access to medical-legal services and support children who are undocumented or in mixed-status families. These activities can include providing trusted information, incorporating screening for health-related social needs, establishing networks for multidirectional referrals, and providing letters of support for legal protection. To expand workforce capacity for medical-legal services related to immigration, pediatric providers can also receive training to conduct specialized, trauma-informed forensic evaluations and can advocate at individual, local, state, federal, and global levels to address factors leading to persecution and forced migration while supporting individuals who may be eligible for legal protection. [Pediatr Ann. 2024;53(5):e183-e188.].
Subject(s)
Altruism , Humans , Child , Relief Work/legislation & jurisprudence , United States , Refugees/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Services Accessibility/legislation & jurisprudence , Emigrants and Immigrants/legislation & jurisprudence , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Undocumented Immigrants/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The ripple effect of the Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization has impacted physicians and patients across numerous medical specialties. In pediatric surgery, the patient population ranges from fetus to the pregnant patient. There is a gap in the knowledge of pediatric surgeons regarding abortion laws and access. This project aims to bridge the gap by creating access to reliable resources which may be used to optimize patient care and support physicians. METHODS: We collaborated with the Reproductive Health Coalition, co-founded by the American Medical Women's Association and Doctors for America, to curate a list of resources beneficial to pediatric surgeons. RESULTS: We created a web-based toolkit with the purpose of providing easily accessible and reliable information on reproductive rights in the United States. We identified up-to-date resources on state-by-state abortion laws, legal resources, patient-centered information on obtaining abortion care, and resources for physicians interested in getting involved in advocacy. CONCLUSION: Pediatric surgery rests at a critical juncture with respect to reproductive rights in the United States. Our toolkit enables users to understand the current climate and identify next steps to advocate for patients and physicians amidst a formidable legal environment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.
Subject(s)
Reproductive Rights , Humans , United States , Reproductive Rights/legislation & jurisprudence , Female , Pregnancy , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Abortion, Legal/legislation & jurisprudence , Abortion, Induced/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the biologics license application for the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine (Comirnaty) on August 23, 2021, opened the door to the off-label vaccination of children younger than the age range currently covered by either the biologics license application (16 years old and older) or the emergency use authorization (12 to 15 years old). Although prescribing medications at doses, for conditions, or in populations other than those approved by the FDA is generally legal and is common in pediatrics, the FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the American Academy of Pediatrics have recommended against off-label prescription of the coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine. Several commentaries consider a case in which parents ask their child's pediatrician to prescribe the vaccine for their 11-year-old with special health care needs before approval or authorization in her age group. The first commentary considers the potential benefits and risks to the patient, as well as to the family, the provider, and society, emphasizing the unknown risks in younger patients and the need for adequate informed consent. The second commentary describes an algorithm and principles for evaluating off-label prescribing and argues that the current benefits of prescribing Comirnaty off label to children <12 do not outweigh the risks. The third commentary addresses ethical and legal issues, ultimately calling on federal agencies to remove legal barriers to making the vaccine available to children in age groups that currently lack authorization.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Off-Label Use/ethics , Off-Label Use/legislation & jurisprudence , Bioethical Issues , Humans , Pediatrics/ethics , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudenceSubject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents/administration & dosage , Biomedical Research/trends , Colitis, Ulcerative/drug therapy , Crohn Disease/drug therapy , Drug Development/trends , Immunosuppressive Agents/administration & dosage , Pediatrics/trends , Adolescent , Age Factors , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/adverse effects , Biomedical Research/legislation & jurisprudence , Child , Child, Preschool , Clinical Trials as Topic , Colitis, Ulcerative/diagnosis , Colitis, Ulcerative/epidemiology , Colitis, Ulcerative/immunology , Crohn Disease/diagnosis , Crohn Disease/epidemiology , Crohn Disease/immunology , Diffusion of Innovation , Drug Approval , Drug Development/legislation & jurisprudence , Drug Dosage Calculations , Female , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/adverse effects , Male , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Research Design/trends , Time FactorsABSTRACT
Importance: Medical device companies submit premarket approval (PMA) statements to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval of the highest-risk class of devices. Devices indicated for the pediatric population that use the PMA pathway have not been well characterized or analyzed. Objective: To identify and characterize high-risk devices with pediatric age indications derived from PMA statements. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study of PMA statements, those statements containing the words indicated or intended for medical devices listed in the FDA PMA database as of February 2020 were retrieved. Age indications were manually annotated in these approval statements via PubAnnotation. Based on the PMA identification from the PMA statements, device metadata including product codes, regulation numbers, advisory panels, and approval dates were queried. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was discernment of the distribution of devices indicated for the pediatric population (neonate, infant, child, and adolescent). Secondary measures included outlining the clinical specialties, device types, and lag time between the initial approval date and the first date of an approval statement with a pediatric indication for generic device categories. Results: A total of 297 documents for 149 unique devices were analyzed. Based on the manual age annotations, 102 devices with a pediatric indication, 10 with a neonate age indication, 32 with an infant age indication, 60 with a child age indication, and 94 with an adolescent age indication were identified. For indications for patients from age 17 to 18 years, the number of devices available nearly doubled from 42 devices to 81 devices. Although more than half of the surveyed devices had a pediatric age indication, many were available only for a limited range of the pediatric population (age 18-21 years). For indications for patients from age 0 to 17 years, the mean (SD) number of clinical specialties at each age was 7.27 (1.4), and 12 clinical specialties were represented from ages 18 to 21 years. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study on device PMA statements, a gap was identified in both quantity and diversity of high-risk devices indicated for the pediatric population. Because the current scarcity of pediatric devices may limit therapeutic possibilities for children, this study represents a step toward quantifying this scarcity and identifying clinical specialties with the greatest need for pediatric device innovation and may help inform future device development efforts.
Subject(s)
Device Approval/legislation & jurisprudence , Device Approval/standards , Equipment and Supplies/standards , Guidelines as Topic , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Pediatrics/standards , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence , United States Food and Drug Administration/standards , Adolescent , Child , Child, Preschool , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , United StatesABSTRACT
Las reclamaciones judiciales en Pediatría son menos frecuentes que en otras especialidades médicas. Además, en la mayoría de los casos es posible demostrar que la actuación se ajustó a lex artis ad hoc. Sin embargo, es posible que una serie de errores durante la realización de la historia clínica compliquen el proceso judicial, aunque la praxis fuera correcta en todo momento. Por ello, es importante difundir entre los pediatras la importancia de la correcta redacción de la historia clínica, una herramienta que debemos saber utilizar no solo en beneficio de nuestros pacientes, sino también para evitar acciones judiciales que pueden perjudicar seriamente nuestra vida personal y nuestra carrera profesional. Basándome en mi propia experiencia como perito judicial desde 2009, en las siguientes líneas daré algunos consejos para vigilar lo que escribimos en la historia clínica, expondré en qué consiste un dictamen pericial y definiré cuáles son los principales tipos de reclamaciones a las que un médico puede estar expuesto (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Medical Records/legislation & jurisprudence , Medical Records/standards , Medical Errors/legislation & jurisprudence , Medical Errors/prevention & control , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Judicial DecisionsSubject(s)
Gender Dysphoria/therapy , Legislation, Medical , Transgender Persons/legislation & jurisprudence , Adolescent , Arkansas , Child , Evidence-Based Medicine , Female , Gender Dysphoria/psychology , Gender Identity , Humans , Male , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Puberty/drug effects , Transgender Persons/psychology , United StatesSubject(s)
Decision Making, Shared , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , United StatesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to identify the extent of diagnostic error lawsuits related to point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in internal medicine, paediatrics, family medicine and critical care, of which little is known. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of the Westlaw legal database for indexed state and federal lawsuits involving the diagnostic use of POCUS in internal medicine, paediatrics, family medicine and critical care. Retrieved cases were reviewed independently by three physicians to identify cases relevant to our study objective. A lawyer secondarily reviewed any cases with discrepancies between the three reviewers. RESULTS: Our search criteria returned 131 total cases. Ultrasound was mentioned in relation to the lawsuit claim in 70 of the cases returned. In these cases, the majority were formal ultrasounds performed and reviewed by the radiology department, echocardiography studies performed by cardiologists or obstetrical ultrasounds. There were no cases of internal medicine, paediatrics, family medicine or critical care physicians being subjected to adverse legal action for their diagnostic use of POCUS. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that concerns regarding the potential for lawsuits related to POCUS in the fields of internal medicine, paediatrics, family medicine and critical care are not substantiated by indexed state and federal filed lawsuits.
Subject(s)
Diagnostic Errors/legislation & jurisprudence , Point-of-Care Systems/legislation & jurisprudence , Ultrasonography , Critical Care/legislation & jurisprudence , Databases, Factual , Family Practice/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Internal Medicine/legislation & jurisprudence , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Retrospective Studies , United StatesSubject(s)
Electronic Health Records/legislation & jurisprudence , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Adolescent , Child , Data Management/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Information Exchange/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Information Dissemination/legislation & jurisprudence , Mobile Applications , Privacy/legislation & jurisprudence , United StatesSubject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Drug Approval/legislation & jurisprudence , Medical Oncology/legislation & jurisprudence , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Off-Label Use/legislation & jurisprudence , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Policy Making , Adolescent , Age of Onset , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Child , Child, Preschool , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Patient Safety , Risk Assessment , Young AdultABSTRACT
One of the earliest controversies in the modern history of bioethics was known at the time as "the Hopkins Mongol case," involving an infant with Trisomy 21 and duodenal atresia whose parents declined to consent to surgery. Fluids and feeding were withheld, and the infant died of dehydration after 15 days. The child's short life had a profound impact on the author's career and that of several others and ultimately led to changes in the care of children and adults with disabilities and the way difficult end-of-life decisions are made in US hospitals today. It also contributed to the growth of the modern bioethics movement and scholarship focused on pediatric bioethics issues.
Subject(s)
Bioethical Issues , Clinical Decision-Making/ethics , Down Syndrome/therapy , Pediatrics/ethics , Withholding Treatment/ethics , Advisory Committees/ethics , Bioethical Issues/history , Bioethical Issues/legislation & jurisprudence , Disabled Children/legislation & jurisprudence , Down Syndrome/history , Esophageal Atresia/history , Esophageal Atresia/therapy , Foundations , History, 20th Century , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Parental Consent/ethics , Parental Consent/legislation & jurisprudence , Parents , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Terminal Care/ethics , Withholding Treatment/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
Pediatric organ donation represents only a low proportion of overall organ donation in many parts of world, unable to match the needs for pediatric organ transplantation. Pediatric organ donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD) is increasingly explored in pediatric transplantation, as it increases the availability of organ grafts. A 6-year-old Caucasian boy with a history of arteriovenous malformation presented with a catastrophic intracranial bleed, resulting in severe brainstem dysfunction despite maximal medical and surgical measures. He did not fulfill the criteria for brain death, which must be met for pediatric organ donation in Singapore. Due to parental request, his organs were donated after withdrawal of life support and determination of death by circulatory criteria. Pediatric organ DCD poses many challenges in the pediatric population, especially in the absence of a local practice guideline. We present the first case of a pediatric organ DCD that has occurred in Singapore. Further work is needed, particularly in establishing a national policy for pediatric organ DCD and increasing overall awareness and acceptance toward pediatric organ donations.
Subject(s)
Tissue Donors , Tissue and Organ Harvesting/methods , Tissue and Organ Procurement/legislation & jurisprudence , Tissue and Organ Procurement/methods , Arteriovenous Malformations/complications , Arteriovenous Malformations/surgery , Brain Death , Child , Death , Humans , Intracranial Hemorrhages/mortality , Male , Organ Transplantation/methods , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Pediatrics/methods , Practice Guidelines as Topic , SingaporeABSTRACT
The Research to Accelerate Cures and Equity (RACE) for Children Act was enacted in 2017 to authorize the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to require pediatric studies for new cancer drugs that have a molecular target relevant to the growth or progression of a pediatric cancer. To assess the possible scope of this new policy, we examined all 78 adult cancer drugs approved by the FDA from 2007 to 2017. Only 17 (21.8%) drugs received any pediatric labeling information. Based on the FDA's Pediatric Molecular Target List, we found that the RACE Act could have increased the proportion of cancer drugs potentially subject to pediatric study requirements from 0% to 78.2%. However, the actual effect of the legislation will depend on how often regulators require pediatric trials and on timely completion of such trials.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage , Clinical Trials as Topic/methods , Legislation, Drug , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Age Factors , Child , Clinical Trials as Topic/legislation & jurisprudence , Drug Approval , Drug Labeling , Health Policy , Humans , Medical Oncology/legislation & jurisprudence , Molecular Targeted Therapy , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , United States , United States Food and Drug AdministrationABSTRACT
In October 2018, National Health Service England published new operational guidance for reviewing child deaths, which covers all children who die less than 18 years of age regardless of the cause of death. The Guidance is for all healthcare professionals caring for children as well as senior leaders who commission, provide or regulate children's services. It does not aim to be prescriptive but instead sets out a framework of expectations that intends to be flexible and proportionate. Its essential building blocks will be familiar to practising paediatricians: notification, investigation, review and reporting. It should be regarded as a key pillar in the hospital's governance program.
Subject(s)
Cause of Death , Child Mortality , Guidelines as Topic , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Pediatrics/standards , State Medicine/legislation & jurisprudence , State Medicine/standards , Adolescent , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , United KingdomABSTRACT
In China, child and adolescent pediatricians often face challenges in treating children with the appropriate medications. Within the last 8 years, the Chinese government has already initiated a series of policies to promote development of age-appropriate medicines for children. In this study,we introduced the current status of pediatric drugs, obstacles for pediatric drugs development and regulatory reforms in China. The lack of label information in drugs for children, inadequacy of age-appropriate dosage forms and strengths, and shortage of pediatric drugs are some of the problems commonly faced. There exists neither mandatory requirements nor enough financial drivers for development of pediatric medicines. Though some progress in terms of pediatric drugs development as well as distribution have been made by Chinese government over past years, further efforts are necessary to improve availability of pediatric medications.