At-home use of parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for pediatric voiding dysfunction: a randomized controlled trial to assess its safety and feasibility

IntroductionTreating pediatric voiding dysfunction involves behavioral changes that require significant time or medications that are often avoided or discontinued due to side effects. Using parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (PTENS) has shown to have reasonable efficacy, but the safety and feasibility of its off-label use for pediatric voiding dysfunction are not well-established. Concerns have also been raised over treatment adherence. In-home therapy might improve adherence compared with office-based therapy; however, no studies have evaluated in-home feasibility to date. This study aims to assess the safety and feasibility of off-label use of PTENS for pediatric voiding dysfunction.Materials and methodsA single-institution prospective, randomized controlled study was conducted from March 2019 to March 2020. Participants aged 6–18 years diagnosed with voiding dysfunction, overactive bladder, or urinary incontinence were eligible for the study. Those with known neurologic disorders, implanted electrical devices, anatomic lower urinary tract abnormality, and recurrent urinary tract infections and those taking bladder medications were excluded. Children with primary monosymptomatic nocturnal enuresis were also excluded due to previous work suggesting a lack of efficacy. Participants were randomly assigned to receive 12 weeks of urotherapy alone (control) or urotherapy plus at-home PTENS treatment. Families were contacted weekly to assess for adverse events (AEs) and treatment adherence. The primary and secondary outcomes were safety, defined as the absence of AEs and treatment adherence, respectively.ResultsA total of 30 eligible participants were divided into two groups, with 15 participants in each arm. The median age was 9.4 years (interquartile range: 7.7–10.6). In total, 60% were male. Baseline demographics and urotherapy compliance were similar between the two groups. With PTENS use, two AEs were reported, including mild pruritus at the pad site and discomfort when removing pads, while no AEs were noted in the control group. In total, 60% of patients completed three 30-min sessions per week, and all participants were able to complete treatment sessions for at least 10 weeks, involving 30 min of PTENS treatment each time.ConclusionThis randomized controlled study confirms that at-home use of PTENS is feasible with reasonable treatment adherence and minimal AEs. Future collaborative, multi-institutional studies may better determine the efficacy of this treatment modality

Workplace health promotion and safety in state and territorial health departments in the United States: a national mixed-methods study of activity, capacity, and growth opportunities

Abstract Background State and Territorial Health Departments (SHDs) have a unique role in protecting and promoting workers’ health. This mixed-methods study presents the first systematic investigation of SHDs’ activities and capacity in both Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) and Workplace Health Promotion (WHP) in the United States (US). Methods National survey of OSH and WHP practitioners from each of 56 SHDs, followed by in-depth interviews with a subset of survey respondents. We calculated descriptive statistics for survey variables and conducted conventional content analysis of interviews. Results Seventy percent (n = 39) of OSH and 71% (n = 40) of WHP contacts responded to the survey. Twenty-seven (n = 14 OSH, n = 13 WHP) participated in follow-up interviews. Despite limited funding, staffing, or organizational support, SHDs reported a wide array of activities. We assessed OSH and WHP surveillance activities, support that SHDs provided to employers to implement OSH and WHP interventions (implementation support), OSH and WHP services provided directly to workers, OSH follow-back investigations, and OSH standard and policy development. Each of the categories we asked about (excluding OSH standard and policy development) were performed by more than half of responding SHDs. Surveillance was the area of greatest OSH activity, while implementation support was the area of greatest WHP activity. Respondents characterized their overall capacity as low. Thirty percent (n = 9) of WHP and 19% (n = 6) of OSH respondents reported no funds at all for OSH/WHP work, and both groups reported a median 1.0 FTEs working on OSH/WHP at the SHD. Organizational support for OSH and WHP was characterized as “low” to “moderate”. To increase SHDs’ capacity for OSH and WHP, interview respondents recommended that OSH and WHP approaches be better integrated into other public health initiatives (e.g., infectious disease prevention), and that federal funding for OSH and WHP increase. They also discussed specific recommendations for improving the accessibility and utility of existing funding mechanisms, and the educational resources they desired from the CDC. Conclusions Results revealed current activities and specific strategies for increasing capacity of SHDs to promote the safety and health of workers and workplaces – an important public health setting for reducing acute injury and chronic disease