PT -期刊文章AU -朱迪Illes盟Viorica Hrincu AU -帕特里克·麦克唐纳盟玛丽Connolly AU -马克·哈里森盟-乔治·易卜拉欣AU -罗伯特Naftel AU -温斯顿Chiong盟Farhad Udwadia AU -乌尔斯Ribary TI -因素指导选择小说Neurotechnological干预儿童癫痫耐药:医生和照顾者的角度(2318)DP - 2021年4月13日TA -神经病学PG - 2318 VI - 96 IP - 15补充4099 - //www.ez-admanager.com/content/96/15_Supplement/2318.short 4100 - //www.ez-admanager.com/content/96/15_Supplement/2318.full所以Neurology2021 4首页月13;96 AB -目的:解决知识缺口和伦理性考量周边采用小说neurotechnological小儿癫痫耐药(DRE)。背景:微创和neuromodulatory干预可以有效替代传统的癫痫手术治疗小儿DRE。采用这些新的治疗方法必须伴随儿童照顾者的优先级和值与DRE。通过医生和家庭确定伦理参数,我们寻求促进决策在这个不断发展的技术格局。设计/方法:我们招募了儿科epileptologists和神经外科医生在加拿大和美国参与的四个焦点小组在国家会议(n = 33)。我们招募了家长和儿童的主要照顾者的衣服三个焦点小组,或个别访谈,通过诊所(n = 22)。讨论分析了使用定性内容分析。结果:主要主题分支——医生:1)临床决策和2)伦理方面的考虑。根据临床决策,科学证据和病人subthemes参选是重要。持续的癫痫发作不干预是神经发育和安全风险。 Under ethical considerations, resource allocation and external financial pressures were significant subthemes, having a profound impact on technology adoption and access.Major thematic branches - families: 1) features of the intervention, 2) decision drivers, and 3) information. Under features of the intervention, parents assessed the overall risk-benefit ratio of the neurotechnology, emphasizing quality of life. Parents acknowledged the risks of doing nothing, but expressed an aversion to invasive procedures. Under decision drivers, trust in the physician was a significant subtheme. Parents were determined to overcome treatment costs; specific access concerns varied by region. Under information, personal research–especially online–dominated the subtheme.Conclusions: Physicians and caregivers identify shared and divergent ethical and contextual factors affecting decision-making for novel neurotechnological interventions for pediatric DRE. Healthcare delivery can be maximized through the alignment of stakeholder treatment perspectives, values, and priorities.Disclosure: The institution of Dr. Illes has received research support from NIH, CIHR, Technical Safety BC, WorkSafeBC, North Growth Foundation, Dana Foundation. Dr. Illes has received intellectual property interests from a publication relating to health care. Dr. Illes has a non-compensated relationship as a Principal Investigator, Canada Research Chair with NIH and CIHR that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Ms. Hrincu has received personal compensation for serving as an employee of LoginRadius. The institution of Patrick McDonald has received research support from National Institutes of Health. Dr. Connolly has nothing to disclose. The institution of Mark Harrison has received research support from Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The institution of Mark Harrison has received research support from Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research. The institution of Mark Harrison has received research support from National Institutes of Health. The institution of Mark Harrison has received research support from Candian Rheumatology Association . George Ibrahim has nothing to disclose. Robert Naftel has nothing to disclose. The institution of Dr. Chiong has received research support from the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Chiong has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a member, NeuroEthics Working Group with National Institutes of Health. Farhad Udwadia has nothing to disclose. Urs Ribary has nothing to disclose.