Search

Background: The Sarcoma Policy Checklist was created by a multidisciplinary expert group to provide policymakers with priority areas to improve care for sarcoma patients.Main Body: This paper draws on this research, by looking more closely at how France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom are addressing each of these priority areas. It aims to highlight key gaps in research, policy and practice, as well as ongoing initiatives that may impact the future care of sarcoma patients in different European countries. A pragmatic review of the published and web-based literature was undertaken. Telephone interviews were conducted in each country with clinical and patient experts to substantiate findings. Research findings were discussed within the expert group and developed into five core policy recommendations. The five identified priority areas were: the development of designated and accredited centres of reference; more professional training; multidisciplinary care; greater incentives for research and innovation; and more rapid access to effective treatments. Most of the countries studied have ongoing initiatives addressing many of these priorities; however, many are in early stages of development, or require additional funding and resources.Conclusion: Gaps in access to quality care are particularly concerning in many of Europe's lower-resourced countries. Equitable access to information, clinical trials, innovative treatments and quality specialist care should be available to all sarcoma patients. Achieving this across Europe will require close collaboration between all stakeholders at both the national and European level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Local wound infections are a major challenge for patients and health professionals. Various diagnostic and therapeutic options are available. However, a generally accepted standard is still lacking in Europe. The aim was to develop an easy-to-use clinical score for the early detection of local wound infections, as a basis for decisionmaking on antiseptic therapy or decolonisation. Method: An interdisciplinary and interprofessional panel of experts from seven European countries was brought together to discuss the various aspects of diagnosing local wound infections. Results: The result was the adoption of the Therapeutic Index for Local Infections (TILI) score, developed in Germany by Initiative Chronische Wunden e.V., specifically for health professionals not specialised in wound care. Available in six European languages, the TILI score could also be adapted for different European countries, depending on their specific national healthcare requirements. The six clinical criteria for local wound infection are erythema to surrounding skin; heat; oedema, induration or swelling; spontaneous pain or pressure pain; stalled wound healing; and increase and/or change in colour or smell of exudate. Meeting all criteria indicates that antiseptic wound therapy could be started. Regardless of these unspecific clinical signs, there are also health conditions for the clinical situation which are a direct indication for antimicrobial wound therapy. These include the presence of wound pathogens, such as meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, septic surgical wound or the presence of free pus. Conclusion: The development of the new internationally adapted TILI score, which could also be used by any caregiver in daily practice to diagnose local infections in acute and hard-to-heal wounds, is the result of expert consensus. However, the score system has to be validated through a clinical evaluation. This is to be performed in expert centres throughout Europe. Declaration of interest: JD has received research support, lecture fees and travel-cost reimbursements from 4M, Coloplast, Convatec, Draco, Engelhardt, Paul Hartmann, KCI, Lohmann&Rauscher, Mölnlycke, SastoMed and Urgo. RL has received research support, lecture fees and travel-cost reimbursements from Mölnlycke and Urgo. AK has received research support, lecture fees and travel-cost reimbursements from 3M, B. Braun Melsungen, Bode/Paul Hartmann, Ethicon, Lohmann&Rauscher, Mundipharma, Oculus, SastoMed Schülke&Mayr, SERAG-WIESSNER and Urgo. JVS has received research support, lecture fees and travel-cost reimbursements from Mundipharma, Histocell, Quesper and Urgo. This work was supported by an unlimited grant from Urgo Medical. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Urgo Medical. The company had no direct influence on the content of this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The objective of this work was to analyse the prevalence trends of multimorbidity among European community-dwelling adults.Methods: A temporal series study based on waves 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) was conducted, and community-dwelling participants aged 50+ (n = 274,614) from 15 European countries were selected for the period 2004-2017. Prevalence, adjusted by age, Average Annual Percentage Change (APC) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were all calculated. Trend analyses were realised by period, age groups and groups of diseases.Results: The results showed a large variability in the prevalence of multimorbidity in adults aged 50 and over among European countries. Increase in the prevalence of multimorbidity in the countries of central Europe (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany and Switzerland) and Spain in both sexes, and in the Netherlands among men. Stability was observed in northern and eastern European countries. Musculoskeletal and neurodegenerative groups showed more significant changes in the trend analyses.Conclusions: This information can be useful for policy makers when planning health promotion and prevention policies addressing modifiable risk factors in health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]