短暂特发性孤立性生长激素缺乏症患者在青春期中期选择(非)持续生长激素治疗:一项定性分析。

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q3 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Joeri Vliegenthart, Iris Vernooij, Eric J E van der Hijden, Stefan Schuiling, Edmond H H M Rings, Erica L T van den Akker, Danielle C M van der Kaay
{"title":"短暂特发性孤立性生长激素缺乏症患者在青春期中期选择(非)持续生长激素治疗:一项定性分析。","authors":"Joeri Vliegenthart, Iris Vernooij, Eric J E van der Hijden, Stefan Schuiling, Edmond H H M Rings, Erica L T van den Akker, Danielle C M van der Kaay","doi":"10.1159/000552013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Objective The SEENEZ GH trial found no difference in near adult height (NAH) between patients with isolated idiopathic growth hormone deficiency (IIGHD) who continued or discontinued recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) at mid‑puberty after a sufficient GH retest. These findings support revising the guideline to recommend discontinuation for patients with a sufficient mid-pubertal retest result. To enable successful adaptation, insight into stakeholder preferences, perceived (dis)advantages, and factors influencing guideline implementation is crucial. Design A qualitative study based on 25 interviews involving 26 participants: patients with transient IIGHD, parents, healthcare professionals, and organizational employees. Methods Participants were asked to assume no clinical difference between (dis)continuing rhGH. Interviews combined a structured impact analysis tool with open‑ended questions. Results Patients and parents generally preferred rhGH continuation, mainly for reassurance and reduced uncertainty. Patients valued discontinuation for reducing injection‑related pain, whereas continuation aligned with personal treatment goals. Parents perceived rhGH continuation as reducing uncertainty. Healthcare professionals and organizational stakeholders favored discontinuation, citing cost‑effectiveness, reduced workload, and ethical concerns about overtreatment; lower healthcare costs were the main perceived advantage. Facilitators for guideline revision included positive communication, clear and timely information, and sufficient implementation resources. Barriers included old habits among clinicians, limited awareness of new evidence among stakeholders, and a lack of strong drivers for change. Conclusions Patients and parents favored continuing rhGH, whereas professionals and organizational stakeholders preferred discontinuation. Given comparable NAH outcomes after a sufficient mid‑pubertal GH retest, successful guideline revision requires clear communication, adequate resources, and involvement of patients and parents.</p>","PeriodicalId":13025,"journal":{"name":"Hormone Research in Paediatrics","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preferences for (Dis)Continuing Growth Hormone Treatment at Mid-Puberty in Patients with Transient Idiopathic Isolated Growth Hormone Deficiency: A Qualitative Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Joeri Vliegenthart, Iris Vernooij, Eric J E van der Hijden, Stefan Schuiling, Edmond H H M Rings, Erica L T van den Akker, Danielle C M van der Kaay\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000552013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Objective The SEENEZ GH trial found no difference in near adult height (NAH) between patients with isolated idiopathic growth hormone deficiency (IIGHD) who continued or discontinued recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) at mid‑puberty after a sufficient GH retest. These findings support revising the guideline to recommend discontinuation for patients with a sufficient mid-pubertal retest result. To enable successful adaptation, insight into stakeholder preferences, perceived (dis)advantages, and factors influencing guideline implementation is crucial. Design A qualitative study based on 25 interviews involving 26 participants: patients with transient IIGHD, parents, healthcare professionals, and organizational employees. Methods Participants were asked to assume no clinical difference between (dis)continuing rhGH. Interviews combined a structured impact analysis tool with open‑ended questions. Results Patients and parents generally preferred rhGH continuation, mainly for reassurance and reduced uncertainty. Patients valued discontinuation for reducing injection‑related pain, whereas continuation aligned with personal treatment goals. Parents perceived rhGH continuation as reducing uncertainty. Healthcare professionals and organizational stakeholders favored discontinuation, citing cost‑effectiveness, reduced workload, and ethical concerns about overtreatment; lower healthcare costs were the main perceived advantage. Facilitators for guideline revision included positive communication, clear and timely information, and sufficient implementation resources. Barriers included old habits among clinicians, limited awareness of new evidence among stakeholders, and a lack of strong drivers for change. Conclusions Patients and parents favored continuing rhGH, whereas professionals and organizational stakeholders preferred discontinuation. Given comparable NAH outcomes after a sufficient mid‑pubertal GH retest, successful guideline revision requires clear communication, adequate resources, and involvement of patients and parents.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13025,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hormone Research in Paediatrics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hormone Research in Paediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000552013\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hormone Research in Paediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000552013","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:SEENEZ GH试验发现,分离性特发性生长激素缺乏症(IIGHD)患者在青春期中期继续或停止重组人生长激素(rhGH)后,在充分的GH重新测试后,其近成人身高(NAH)没有差异。这些发现支持修订指南,建议在青春期中期复查结果足够的患者停药。为了实现成功的适应,洞察利益相关者的偏好,感知(不)优势,以及影响指南实施的因素是至关重要的。设计一项基于25次访谈的定性研究,涉及26名参与者:短暂性IIGHD患者、父母、医疗保健专业人员和组织员工。方法参与者被要求假设(不)持续rhGH之间没有临床差异。访谈结合了结构化的影响分析工具和开放式问题。结果患者和家长普遍倾向于继续使用rhGH,主要是为了安心和减少不确定性。患者重视停药以减少注射相关疼痛,而继续治疗则符合个人治疗目标。家长认为持续生长激素可以减少不确定性。医疗保健专业人员和组织利益相关者赞成终止治疗,理由是成本效益、工作量减少以及过度治疗的伦理问题;较低的医疗成本是主要的优势。指南修订的促进因素包括积极的沟通、清晰及时的信息和充足的实施资源。障碍包括临床医生的旧习惯,利益相关者对新证据的认识有限,以及缺乏强有力的变革动力。结论:患者和家长倾向于继续使用rhGH,而专业人员和组织利益相关者倾向于停用。考虑到青春期中期充分的GH复检后可比较的NAH结果,成功的指南修订需要明确的沟通、充足的资源以及患者和家长的参与。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Preferences for (Dis)Continuing Growth Hormone Treatment at Mid-Puberty in Patients with Transient Idiopathic Isolated Growth Hormone Deficiency: A Qualitative Analysis.

Objective The SEENEZ GH trial found no difference in near adult height (NAH) between patients with isolated idiopathic growth hormone deficiency (IIGHD) who continued or discontinued recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) at mid‑puberty after a sufficient GH retest. These findings support revising the guideline to recommend discontinuation for patients with a sufficient mid-pubertal retest result. To enable successful adaptation, insight into stakeholder preferences, perceived (dis)advantages, and factors influencing guideline implementation is crucial. Design A qualitative study based on 25 interviews involving 26 participants: patients with transient IIGHD, parents, healthcare professionals, and organizational employees. Methods Participants were asked to assume no clinical difference between (dis)continuing rhGH. Interviews combined a structured impact analysis tool with open‑ended questions. Results Patients and parents generally preferred rhGH continuation, mainly for reassurance and reduced uncertainty. Patients valued discontinuation for reducing injection‑related pain, whereas continuation aligned with personal treatment goals. Parents perceived rhGH continuation as reducing uncertainty. Healthcare professionals and organizational stakeholders favored discontinuation, citing cost‑effectiveness, reduced workload, and ethical concerns about overtreatment; lower healthcare costs were the main perceived advantage. Facilitators for guideline revision included positive communication, clear and timely information, and sufficient implementation resources. Barriers included old habits among clinicians, limited awareness of new evidence among stakeholders, and a lack of strong drivers for change. Conclusions Patients and parents favored continuing rhGH, whereas professionals and organizational stakeholders preferred discontinuation. Given comparable NAH outcomes after a sufficient mid‑pubertal GH retest, successful guideline revision requires clear communication, adequate resources, and involvement of patients and parents.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Hormone Research in Paediatrics
Hormone Research in Paediatrics ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM-PEDIATRICS
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
88
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The mission of ''Hormone Research in Paediatrics'' is to improve the care of children with endocrine disorders by promoting basic and clinical knowledge. The journal facilitates the dissemination of information through original papers, mini reviews, clinical guidelines and papers on novel insights from clinical practice. Periodic editorials from outstanding paediatric endocrinologists address the main published novelties by critically reviewing the major strengths and weaknesses of the studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书