Reducing Hospital-Acquired Pressure Injury in an Inpatient Medical-Surgical Telemetry Adult Unit by Educating and Encouraging Basic Wound Care Prior to Wound Care Consult

Problem: A medical center in the Diablo Service Area had one of the highest rates in hospital-acquired pressure injury (HAPI), benchmarking with other facilities, with the project unit one of the top offenders. The patients and the medical center both suffered from the harm. Barriers to HAPI prevention included lack of patient turnings, skin assessment, and early standard wound care treatment. Context: This project focused on the primary care team standardizing early wound care treatment to avoid wound progression. Interventions: Interventions included re-educating the primary care team on early basic wound care using a standard wound care guideline created by a multidisciplinary team. Measures: The outcome measure of the project was the monthly HAPI incidence on the unit. The process measures included wounds treated by the primary care team appropriately and nursing knowledge on basic wound care. The balancing measure included wounds treated by the primary care team inappropriately. Result: The outcome measure was met in both May and June, with zero HAPI incidence. The process measure of wound treatment was not met in May (5%), but it was met in June (26%). Nursing knowledge on basic wound care increased from 70% to 90% (post project). The balancing measure remained at 0% throughout the 2 months. Conclusions: HAPI prevention should continue to be a focus in the medical center. Patient harm was reduced, hospital’s financial burden was lessened, and the frontline staff were inspired due to ownership of the project. Further efforts will be made to spread the performance improvement project to other units to align with the medical center’s Magnet journey

EUPATI Guidance for Patient Involvement in Medicines Research and Development (R&D); Guidance for Pharmaceutical Industry-Led Medicines R&D

The importance and merits of greater patient involvement in medicines research and development (R&D) are commonly acknowledged and are thought to offer benefits for all involved parties. It helps to improve discovery, development, and evaluation of new effective medicines, based on the collaborative identification and understanding of unmet needs, research priorities, optimization of clinical study design, outcome measures, and endpoint development. It can result in increased transparency, trust and mutual respect between patients and other stakeholders. This applies to all stages of medicines R&D, from industry-led research, to regulation and licensing of medicines, to appraisal by health technology assessment (HTA) bodies. Integration of patients into the medicines development process needs to be structured and governed by clear rules and modes of operation to be effective and yield the best results for all stakeholders. Existing codes of practice for patient involvement with various stakeholders do not comprehensively cover the full scope of R&D, with the exception of more general statements applicable to interaction. Overarching guidance on meaningful and ethical interaction is missing. One specific aim of the European Patients' Academy on Therapeutic Innovation (EUPATI) was to close this gap through the development of guidance documents for selected stakeholders. Four separate guidance documents were developed, incorporating the results from comprehensive internal and external consultation. They cover patient involvement in: pharmaceutical industry-led medicines R&D; ethics committees; regulatory authorities; HTA. Each guidance suggests where patient involvement could be adopted or strengthened. The EUPATI guidance document for patient involvement in industry-led medicines research and development covers the interaction between patients and the pharmaceutical industry within all functions throughout the medicines R&D lifecycle in relation to medicines for human use. It relates to activities pre-approval and post approval, involving individuals and groups of patients. The guideline distinguishes between the level of expertise in a disease area that is required and the different areas where patient involvement can take place; however, this is not meant to limit involvement, and these opportunities may change and increase over time. This EUPATI guidance document is aimed at the pharmaceutical industry who want to engage patients in R&D activities, however all stakeholders involving patients in pharmaceutical-led medicines R&D should understand and use this EUPATI guidance document

EUPATI and Patients in Medicines Research and Development: Guidance for Patient Involvement in Ethical Review of Clinical Trials

Involvement of patients in the research and development process (R&D) of new medicines—in all areas of indications—today is a widely accepted strategy in pharmaceutical industry to ensure relevance and suitability of the treatment under development. This may consist in, but is not limited to, patient input to achieve more patient-friendly protocol design, endpoint, and comparator selection as well as disease-adapted study conditions in a pre- or post-marketing clinical trial. Ethical aspects and especially the balance of benefit and risk in a clinical trial are frequently judged differently by clinical researchers, regulators, ethics committees, and patients due to their different focus. The final assessment of the ethical aspects of a planned clinical trial is provided by an independent ethics committee consisting of physicians and other experts in healthcare and clinical trial methodology as well as of lay persons. The participation of patients in ethics committees is a much-discussed concept, its suitability disputed in many countries, and only limited experience on best practices is available. In order to be effective and yield the best results for all stakeholders, integration of patients into the medicines development process needs to be structured and governed by clear, mutually agreed rules and modes of operation. Communication and collaboration processes need to be systematically implemented to establish transparency, trust and respect between those developing new medicines and their users, respectively between those involved in design and approval of clinical trials and participants. In particular agreement on the ethical aspects of a clinical trial and/or its overall ethical acceptability is a prerequisite before the start of a clinical trial. Existing codes of practice for patient involvement with various stakeholders do not comprehensively cover the full scope of R&D, with the exception of more general statements on interaction. Overarching guidance on meaningful and ethical interaction is missing. One specific aim of the European Patients' Academy on Therapeutic Innovation (EUPATI) was to close this gap through the development of guidance documents for ethics committees, pharmaceutical industry-led medicines R&D, regulatory authorities, and health technology assessment (HTA). This EUPATI “Guidance for patient involvement in ethical review of clinical trials” gives practical recommendations for ground rules and lists options for conditions and practices for involving patients in the work of ethics committees to enable trustful and constructive collaboration whatever the national (legal) framework for patient involvement in ethics committees might be. The guidance sets the collaboration of patients in ethics committees in the broader context of relevance and opportunities for patient input on ethics in the overall medicines R&D and specifically the overall clinical trial process from concept development to trial result reporting in lay summaries. In addition to a presentation of the full text of the Guidance, this article aims at providing additional background information on the development process of the Guidance, as well as insight into the current debate on this topic

EUPATI Guidance for Patient Involvement in Medicines Research and Development: Health Technology Assessment

The main aim of health technology assessment (HTA) is to inform decision making by health care policy makers. It is a systematic process that evaluates the use of health technologies and generally involves a critical review of international evidence related to clinical effectiveness of the health technology vs. the best standard of care. It can also include an evaluation of cost effectiveness, and social and ethical impacts in the local health care system. The HTA process advises whether or not a health technology should be used, and if so, how it is best used and which patients are most likely to benefit from it. The importance of patient involvement in HTA is becoming widely recognized, for scientific and democratic reasons. The extent of patient involvement in HTA varies considerably across Europe. Commonly HTA is still focused on quantitative evidence to determine clinical and/or cost effectiveness, but the interest in understanding patients' experiences and preferences is increasing. Some HTA bodies provide support for participation in their processes, but again this varies widely across Europe. The involvement of patients in HTA is determined at the national and regional level, and is not subject to any European-wide legislation. The guidance text presented in this article was developed as part of the work of the European Patients' Academy on Therapeutic Innovation (EUPATI) and covers the interaction between HTA bodies and patients and their representatives when medicines are being assessed. Other EUPATI guidance documents relate to patient involvement in pharmaceutical industry-led research and development, ethics committees, and regulatory authorities. The guidance provides recommendations for activities to support patient involvement in HTA bodies and specific guidance for individual HTA processes. It seeks to improve patient involvement, using the outcomes of published research and consensus-building exercises. It also draws on good practice examples from individual HTA bodies. The guidance is not intended to be prescriptive and should be used according to specific circumstances, national legislation, or the unique needs of each interaction. This article represents the formal publication of the HTA guidance text with discussion about recent progress in, and continuing barriers to, patient involvement in HTA

Administration of Murine Stromal Vascular Fraction Ameliorates Chronic Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis

Administration of adipose-derived stromal/stem cells (ASCs) represents a promising therapeutic approach for autoimmune diseases since they have been shown to have immunomodulatory properties. The uncultured, nonexpanded counterpart of ASCs, the stromal vascular fraction (SVF), is composed of a heterogeneous mixture of cells. Although administration of ex vivo culture-expanded ASCs has been used to study immunomodulatory mechanisms in multiple models of autoimmune diseases, less is known about SVF-based therapy. The ability of murine SVF cells to treat myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein35-55-induced experimental autoimmune encephalitis (EAE) was compared with that of culture-expanded ASCs in C57Bl/6J mice. A total of 1 x 106 SVF cells or ASCs were administered intraperitoneally concomitantly with the induction of disease. The data indicate that intraperitoneal administration of ASCs significantly ameliorated the severity of disease course. They also demonstrate, for the first time, that the SVF effectively inhibited disease severity and was statistically more effective than ASCs. Both cell therapies also demonstrated a reduction in tissue damage, a decrease in inflammatory infiltrates, and a reduction in sera levels of interferon-γ and interleukin-12. Based on these data, SVF cells effectively inhibited EAE disease progression more than culture-expanded ASCs

Comparison of the Therapeutic Effects of Human and Mouse Adipose-Derived Stem Cells in a Murine Model of Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Acute Lung Injury

Introduction. Adipose-derived stem cells (ASCs) have emerged as important regulators of inflammatory/immune responses in vitro and in vivo and represent attractive candidates for cell-based therapies for diseases that involve excessive inflammation. Acute lung injury (ALI) is an inflammatory condition for which treatment is mainly supportive due to lack of effective therapies. In this study, the therapeutic effects of ASC-based therapy were assessed in vivo by comparison of the anti-inflammatory properties of both human and murine ASCs in a mouse model of lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced ALI. Methods. Human ASCs (hASCs) or mouse ASCs (mASCs) were delivered to C57Bl/6 mice (7.5 x 105 total cells/mouse) by oropharyngeal aspiration (OA) four hours after the animals were challenged with lipopolysaccharide (15 mg/kg). Mice were sacrificed 24 and 72 hours after LPS exposure, and lung histology examined for evaluation of inflammation and injury. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) was analyzed to determine total and differential cell counts, total protein and albumin concentrations, and myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity. Cytokine expression in the injured lungs was measured at the steady-state mRNA levels and protein levels for assessment of the degree of lung inflammation. Results: Both human and mouse ASC treatments provided protective anti-inflammatory responses. There were decreased levels of leukocyte (for example neutrophil) migration into the alveoli, total protein and albumin concentrations in BALF, and MPO activity after the induction of ALI following both therapies. Additionally, cell therapy with both cell types effectively suppressed the expression of proinflammatory cytokines and increased the anti-inflammatory cytokine interleukin 10 (IL-10). Overall, the syngeneic mASC therapy had a more potent therapeutic effect than the xenogeneic hASC therapy in this model. Conclusions: Treatment with hASCs or mASCs significantly attenuated LPS-induced acute lung injury in mice. These results suggest a potential benefit for using an ASC-based therapy to treat clinical ALI and may possibly prevent the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)