2 research outputs found
Positioning the principles of precision medicine in care pathways for allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis - A EUFOREA-ARIA-EPOS-AIRWAYS ICP statement.
Precision medicine (PM) is increasingly recognized as the way forward for optimizing patient care. Introduced in the field of oncology, it is now considered of major interest in other medical domains like allergy and chronic airway diseases, which face an urgent need to improve the level of disease control, enhance patient satisfaction and increase effectiveness of preventive interventions. The combination of personalized care, prediction of treatment success, prevention of disease and patient participation in the elaboration of the treatment plan is expected to substantially improve the therapeutic approach for individuals suffering from chronic disabling conditions. Given the emerging data on the impact of patient stratification on treatment outcomes, European and American regulatory bodies support the principles of PM and its potential advantage over current treatment strategies. The aim of the current document was to propose a consensus on the position and gradual implementation of the principles of PM within existing adult treatment algorithms for allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). At the time of diagnosis, prediction of success of the initiated treatment and patient participation in the decision of the treatment plan can be implemented. The second-level approach ideally involves strategies to prevent progression of disease, in addition to prediction of success of therapy, and patient participation in the long-term therapeutic strategy. Endotype-driven treatment is part of a personalized approach and should be positioned at the tertiary level of care, given the efforts needed for its implementation and the high cost of molecular diagnosis and biological treatment
Seclusion use with children and adolescents: an Australian experience
Objective: To summarize the current state of knowledge on the use of seclusion and restraint with children and adolescents and to report the findings of an exploratory study to identify factors that place a child or adolescent at increased risk of seclusion during their admission. Method: Literature searches were undertaken on MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases. Articles were identified that focused specifically on seclusion and restraint use with children and adolescents or contained material significant to this population. The study reports findings from a retrospective review of patient charts, seclusion registers and staffing from an Australian acute inpatient facility. Results: The data available in regard to seclusion use in this population is limited and flawed. Further research is needed on the use and outcomes of seclusion and restraint and on alternative measures in the containment of dangerousness. Both the literature and this study find that patients with certain factors are at increased risk of being secluded during an inpatient stay. These factors include being male, diagnoses of disruptive behaviour disorder and a previous history of physical abuse. Staffing factors did not show a relationship to the use of seclusion. Conclusions: There are patient factors that predict increased risk of seclusion; these factors and their interrelationships require further elucidation. Further research is also needed on the outcomes, both positive and negative, of seclusion use and of alternatives to seclusion