Search

_Objective:_ Leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin (SDRPEP) has proven effective and feasible, and is recommended by WHO since 2018. This SDR-PEP toolkit was developed through the experience of the leprosy postexposure prophylaxis (LPEP) programme. It has been designed to facilitate and standardise the implementation of contact tracing and SDR-PEP administration in regions and countries that start the intervention. _Results:_ Four tools were developed, incorporating the current evidence for SDRPEP and the methods and learnings from the LPEP project in eight countries. (1) the

AIM: To assess the relevance and generalizability across countries of concepts of the impact of Dravet syndrome beyond seizures, as recognized by families. METHOD: Caregivers of children with Dravet syndrome in four countries (Australia [n=8]; USA, UK, and Italy [all n=4]) participated in 1-hour qualitative telephone interviews, identifying key Dravet syndrome concepts. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and, where necessary, translated into English for thematic analysis. Conceptual saturation was assessed and findings compared to the previously developed French conceptual disease model. RESULTS: The most common seizure types reported by caregivers were tonic-clonic, absence, or focal-impaired awareness (localized/partial). Fever and physical activity were the most commonly reported triggers. Patient-relevant impacts included impairment in cognition, motor skills, communication, social skills, and behavioural functioning. Caregivers consistently reported negative social, physical, and family impacts. Concepts identified in the interviews showed similarity with the French conceptual model. Minor differences between countries are likely to reflect variations in health care systems. INTERPRETATION: Findings in Italy, Australia, UK, and USA confirm that the key impacts of Dravet syndrome on children and caregivers identified in France are generalizable across countries. Key symptom and impact concepts relevant to children and parents should be targeted as critical outcomes in new therapy evaluations. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Relevance of the impact of Dravet syndrome on children and caregivers was confirmed across countries. Patient and caregiver-relevant Dravet syndrome impacts contribute to poorer health-related quality of life. Indirect seizure impacts were reported to be as important as direct impacts. Country-specific differences in concepts probably reflect differences in health care systems.

BACKGROUND: Clinical audit may improve practice in cancer service provision. The UK National Lung Cancer Audit (NLCA) collects data for all new cases of thoracic cancers. AIM: To collect similar data for our Victorian patients from six hospitals within the Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre and associated Western and Central Melbourne Integrated Cancer Service. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective audit of all newly diagnosed patients with lung cancer and mesothelioma in 2013 across the six Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre/Western and Central Melbourne Integrated Cancer Service hospitals. The objectives were to adapt the NLCA data set for use in the Australian context, to analyse the findings using descriptive statistics and to determine feasibility of implementing a routine, ongoing audit similar to that in the UK. Individual data items were adapted from the NLCA by an expert steering committee. Data were collated from the Victorian Cancer Registry, Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset and individual hospital databases. Individual medical records were audited for missing data. RESULTS: Eight hundred and forty-five patients were diagnosed across the sites in 2013. Most were aged 65-80 (55%) and were male (62%). Most had non-small-cell lung cancer (81%) with 9% diagnosed with small cell lung cancer and 2% with mesothelioma. Data completeness varied significantly between fields. For those with higher levels of completeness, headline indicators of clinical care were comparable with NLCA data. The Victorian population seem to lack access to specialist lung cancer nurse services. CONCLUSION: Lung cancer care at participating hospitals appeared to be comparable with the UK in 2013. In future, prospective data collection should be harmonised across sites and correlated with survival outcomes. One area of concern was a lack of documented access to specialist nursing services.