Suchergebnisse

Pediatric clinical research in low-resourced countries involves individuals defined as "vulnerable" in research ethics guidance. Insights from research participants can strengthen the design and oversight of studies. We share family members' perspectives and experiences of an observational clinical study conducted in one Kenyan hospital as part of an integrated empirical ethics study. Employing qualitative methods, we explored how research encounters featured in family members' care-seeking journeys. Our data reveals that children's vulnerability is intricately interwoven with that of their families, and that research processes and procedures can inadvertently add to hidden burdens for families. In research, the potential for layered and intersecting situational and structural vulnerability should be considered, and participants' agency in constrained research contexts actively recognized and protected.

BACKGROUND: Podoconiosis (also known as endemic, non-filarial elephantiasis) affects about 4 million subsistence farmers in tropical Africa. Poor awareness of the condition and inadequate evidence for the efficacy of treatment mean that no government in an endemic country yet offers lymphoedema management for patients with podoconiosis. Among patients with filarial lymphoedema, trials suggest that limb care is effective in reducing the most disabling sequelae: episodes of acute dermatolymphangioadenitis. We aimed to test the hypothesis that a simple, inexpensive lymphoedema management package would reduce the incidence of acute dermatolymphangioadenitis in adult patients with podoconiosis in northern Ethiopia. METHODS: We did a pragmatic randomised controlled trial at health posts and health centres in 18 sub-districts of Aneded woreda (district) in Amhara, northern Ethiopia. Participants were adults aged 18 years and older, had a diagnosis of at least stage 2 podoconiosis (persistent lymphoedema) and a negative antigen test for filariasis, and intended to remain within Aneded woreda for the duration of the trial. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either receive a package containing instructions for foot hygiene, skin care, bandaging, exercises, and use of socks and shoes, with support by lay Community Podoconiosis Agents at monthly meetings (intervention group) or to receive no intervention (control group). Participants were aware of their group assignment, but researchers doing all analyses were masked to treatment group. The primary outcome was incidence of acute dermatolymphangioadenitis episodes in the total period of observation of each participant, measured by use of validated patient self-reported pictorial diaries. This trial was registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number Register, number ISRCTN67805210. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2014, and June 30, 2015, 1339 patients were screened, and 696 patients were enrolled and randomly allocated to treatment groups. We ...

Background Podoconiosis (endemic, non-filarial elephantiasis) affects ~4 million subsistence farmers in tropical Africa. Limited awareness of the condition and lack of evidence for treatment mean that no endemic-country government yet offers lymphoedema management for podoconiosis patients. Among patients with filarial lymphoedema, trials suggest that limb care is effective in reducing the most disabling sequelae: acute dermatolymphangioadenitis (ADLA) episodes. Methods We conducted a pragmatic randomised controlled trial to test the hypothesis that a simple, inexpensive lymphoedema management package would reduce the incidence of ADLA in adult podoconiosis patients in northern Ethiopia. Patients were individually randomised to a package comprising instruction in foot hygiene, skin care, bandaging, exercises, use of socks and shoes, with support by lay Community Podoconiosis Agents at monthly meetings; or no intervention. The primary outcome was incidence of ADLA, measured using a validated patient-held pictorial diary. Assignment was not masked, but those performing the primary analysis were. The trial was registered at the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number Register, number ISRCTN67805210. Findings A total of 350 patients were randomised to the intervention and 346 to the control group, with 93.4% follow-up at one year. During the 12 months of follow up, 16,550 new episodes of ADLA occurred during 765.2 person years observed. The incidence of ADLA was 19.4 (95% CI 18.9 to 19.9) and 23.9 (95% CI 23.4 to 24.4) episodes per person year in the intervention and control groups respectively; incidence rate ratio 0.81 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.96, p=0.02), rate difference -4.5 (95% CI -5.1 to -3.8) episodes per person year. No important adverse events related to the intervention were reported. Interpretation A simple, inexpensive package of lymphoedema self-care is effective in reducing frequency and duration of ADLA. We recommend its implementation by endemic-country governments.

BACKGROUND: Rotavirus (RV) is a major agent of gastroenteritis and an important cause of child death worldwide. Immunization (RVI) has been available since 2006, and the Federation of International Societies of Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (FISPGHAN) identified RVI as a top priority for the control of diarrheal illness. A FISPGHAN working group on acute diarrhea aimed at estimating the current RVI coverage worldwide and identifying barriers to implementation at local level. METHODS: A survey was distributed to national experts in infectious diseases and health-care authorities (March 2015–April 2016), collecting information on local recommendations, costs and perception of barriers for implementation. RESULTS: Forty-nine of the 79 contacted countries (62% response rate) provided a complete analyzable data. RVI was recommended in 27/49 countries (55%). Although five countries have recommended RVI since 2006, a large number (16, 33%) included RVI in a National Immunization Schedule between 2012 and 2014. The costs of vaccination are covered by the government (39%), by the GAVI Alliance (10%) or public and private insurance (8%) in some countries. However, in most cases, immunization is paid by families (43%). Elevated cost of vaccine (49%) is the main barrier for implementation of RVI. High costs of vaccination (rs = −0.39, p = 0.02) and coverage of expenses by families (rs = 0.5, p = 0.002) significantly correlate with a lower immunization rate. Limited perception of RV illness severity by the families (47%), public-health authorities (37%) or physicians (24%) and the timing of administration (16%) are further major barriers to large-scale RVI programs. CONCLUSIONS: After 10 years since its introduction, the implementation of RVI is still unacceptably low and should remain a major target for global public health. Barriers to implementation vary according to setting. Nevertheless, public health authorities should promote education for caregivers and health-care providers and interact with local health ...