A Research Agenda for Helminth Diseases of Humans: Intervention for Control and Elimination

Recognising the burden helminth infections impose on human populations, and particularly the poor, major intervention programmes have been launched to control onchocerciasis, lymphatic filariasis, soil-transmitted helminthiases, schistosomiasis, and cysticercosis. The Disease Reference Group on Helminth Infections (DRG4), established in 2009 by the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR), was given the mandate to review helminthiases research and identify research priorities and gaps. A summary of current helminth control initiatives is presented and available tools are described. Most of these programmes are highly dependent on mass drug administration (MDA) of anthelmintic drugs (donated or available at low cost) and require annual or biannual treatment of large numbers of at-risk populations, over prolonged periods of time. The continuation of prolonged MDA with a limited number of anthelmintics greatly increases the probability that drug resistance will develop, which would raise serious problems for continuation of control and the achievement of elimination. Most initiatives have focussed on a single type of helminth infection, but recognition of co-endemicity and polyparasitism is leading to more integration of control. An understanding of the implications of control integration for implementation, treatment coverage, combination of pharmaceuticals, and monitoring is needed. To achieve the goals of morbidity reduction or elimination of infection, novel tools need to be developed, including more efficacious drugs, vaccines, and/or antivectorial agents, new diagnostics for infection and assessment of drug efficacy, and markers for possible anthelmintic resistance. In addition, there is a need for the development of new formulations of some existing anthelmintics (e.g., paediatric formulations). To achieve ultimate elimination of helminth parasites, treatments for the above mentioned helminthiases, and for taeniasis and food-borne trematodiases, will need to be integrated with monitoring, education, sanitation, access to health services, and where appropriate, vector control or reduction of the parasite reservoir in alternative hosts. Based on an analysis of current knowledge gaps and identification of priorities, a research and development agenda for intervention tools considered necessary for control and elimination of human helminthiases is presented, and the challenges to be confronted are discussed

A plain language summary of what freedom from disease means to people with psoriasis according to doctors, nurses, and people with psoriasis.

What is this summary about? This summary presents findings from recent research involving people with psoriasis, based on an article originally published in the Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. Psoriasis is a condition that primarily affects the skin. However, it can also influence people's mental health, social activities, work, and relationships too. Current assessment tools used by doctors and nurses do not cover the complete experience of people with psoriasis, which often include other medical conditions and can leave these individuals feeling that treatment has not been successful. Researchers conducted a study in which people with psoriasis, doctors, and nurses were asked in virtual meetings and via questionnaires what freedom from disease in psoriasis means to them. What were the results? In addition to skin symptoms, the areas of mental health, well-being, treatment, and relationships with healthcare teams were found to be important aspects to be addressed. What do the results of the study mean? Focusing on all five aspects of freedom from disease will help people with psoriasis manage their psoriasis with confidence

A review of the impact and effectiveness of nurse-led care in dermatology

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To identify systematically, summarize and critically appraise the current evidence regarding the impact and effectiveness of nurse-led care in dermatology. BACKGROUND: A diverse range of nurse-led models of care exist in dermatology. Primary studies have been conducted evaluating these models, but review and synthesis of the findings from these studies have not been undertaken. METHOD: Systematic searches of CINAHL, MEDLINE, British Nursing Index (BNI) and the RCN Library Catalogue from 1990 until March 2005. The searches were supplemented by an extensive hand search of the literature through references identified from retrieved articles and by contact with experts in the field. RESULTS: Fourteen relevant publications were identified and included findings from both primary and secondary care. The evidence indicates that nurses are treating a number of dermatological conditions, primarily using treatment protocols, across a broad range of clinical settings. However, some nurses working in primary care, lack confidence to treat some of these conditions and the educational needs of these nurses are frequently unmet. A reduction in the severity of the condition and more effective use of topical therapies are benefits of nurse interventions on service delivery. Faster access to treatment, a reduction in referrals to the general practitioner or dermatologist and an increase in knowledge of their condition are benefits reported by patients. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of the review are generally positive. However, there are methodological weaknesses and under researched issues, e.g. cost effectiveness of nurse-led care and the prescription of medicines by nurses for patients with dermatological conditions that point to the need for further rigorous evaluation. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurse-led care is an integral element of the dermatology service offered to patients. This review highlights the impact of this care and the issues that require consideration by those responsible for the development of nurse-led models of care in dermatology

Freedom from disease in psoriasis:a Delphi consensus definition by patients, nurses and physicians

Background Physician-reported clinical outcome and quality of life (QoL) measures are currently used to assess outcomes and direct treatment of plaque psoriasis. However, people with psoriasis may have different criteria for judging treatment success. Objectives To build a unified consensus on the definition of 'freedom from disease' from a European stakeholder group, including people with psoriasis, dermatologists and nurses. Methods The modified Delphi consensus methodology was used to define 'freedom from disease', with a consensus group consisting of people with psoriasis, nurses and dermatologists. This methodology involved people with psoriasis during the entire process and consisted of a 15-member Facilitating Consensus Panel to drive the programme content and a larger Voting Consensus Panel to vote on defining 'freedom from disease'. The Facilitating Panel agreed on disease domains, and aspects of each domain were put forward to the Voting Consensus Panel to establish relative importance. Following two voting rounds, a meeting was held to agree on a final consensus statement. Results The Facilitating Panel consisted of six patient advocacy group representatives, three specialist nurses and six dermatologists. Voting rounds 1 and 2 were completed by 166 and 130 respondents from the Voting Consensus Panel, respectively. The outputs from both rounds of voting were similar, focusing on normality of living, symptom control, and a relationship of mutual respect and trust between the individual with psoriasis and their healthcare professional. The consensus statement emphasizes that 'freedom from disease' is multifaceted and includes the following domains 'management of clinical symptoms', 'psychosocial elements', 'QoL and well-being', 'treatment' and 'healthcare team support'. 'Freedom from disease' means all aspects are addressed. Conclusions Freedom from disease in psoriasis is a multicomponent concept including five main domains. This diverse and multifaceted patient perspective will help us to improve understanding of the outcomes of treatment interventions in people with psoriasis