Key outcomes from stakeholder workshops at a symposium to inform the development of an Australian national plan for rare diseases

BackgroundCalls have been made for governments to adopt a cohesive approach to rare diseases through the development of national plans. At present, Australia does not have a national plan for rare diseases. To progress such a plan an inaugural Australian Rare Diseases Symposium was held in Western Australia in April 2011. This paper describes the key issues identified by symposium attendees for the development of a national plan, compares these to the content of EUROPLAN and national plans elsewhere and discusses how the outcomes might be integrated for national planning.MethodsThe symposium was comprised of a series of plenary sessions followed by workshops. The topics covered were; 1) Development of national plans for rare diseases; 2) Patient empowerment; 3) Patient care, support and management; 4) Research and translation; 5) Networks, partnerships and collaboration. All stakeholders within the rare diseases community were invited to participate, including: people affected by rare diseases such as patients, carers, and families; clinicians and allied health practitioners; social and disability services; researchers; patient support groups; industry (e.g. pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device companies); regulators and policy-makers.ResultsAll of these stakeholder groups were represented at the symposium. Workshop participants indicated the need for a national plan, a national peak body, a standard definition of ‘rare diseases’, education campaigns, lobbying of government, research infrastructure, streamlined whole-of-lifetime service provision, case co-ordination, early diagnosis, support for health professionals and dedicated funding.ConclusionsThese findings are consistent with frameworks and initiatives being undertaken internationally (such as EUROPLAN), and with national plans in other countries. This implies that the development of an Australian national plan could plausibly draw on frameworks for plan development that have been proposed for use in other jurisdictions. The translation of the symposium outcomes to government policy (i.e. a national plan) requires the consideration of several factors such as the under-representation of some stakeholder groups (e.g. clinicians) and the current lack of evidence required to translate some of the symposium outcomes to policy options. The acquisition of evidence provides a necessary first step in a comprehensive planning approach.

[1]  P. Baiardi,et al.  Access to information supporting availability of medicines for patients suffering from rare diseases looking for possible treatments: the EuOrphan Service. , 2007, Medicina.

[2]  M. Baker,et al.  The impact of parent advocacy groups, the Internet, and social networking on rare diseases: The IDEA League and IDEA League United Kingdom example , 2011, Epilepsia.

[3]  R. Hennekam Care for patients with ultra-rare disorders. , 2011, European journal of medical genetics.

[4]  M. Hansson Taking the patient's side: the ethics of pharmacogenetics. , 2010, Personalized medicine.

[5]  A. M. Moliner Creating a European Union framework for actions in the field of rare diseases. , 2010, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[6]  Caroline Huyard,et al.  How did uncommon disorders become 'rare diseases'? History of a boundary object. , 2009, Sociology of health & illness.

[7]  Peter A Merkel,et al.  Clinical research for rare disease: opportunities, challenges, and solutions. , 2009, Molecular genetics and metabolism.

[8]  H. Dawkins,et al.  Blueprint for a deliberative public forum on biobanking policy: were theoretical principles achievable in practice? , 2013, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[9]  A. Kole,et al.  Rare diseases social epidemiology: analysis of inequalities. , 2010, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[10]  R. Battista,et al.  Genetics in Health Care: An Overview of Current and Emerging Models , 2011, Public Health Genomics.

[11]  Ségolène Aymé,et al.  Networking for rare diseases: a necessity for Europe , 2007, Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz.

[12]  Xavier Badia Article 45 de la loi n° 2005-102 du 11 février 2005 pour l'égalité des droits et des chances, la participation et la citoyenneté des personnes handicapées. Propositions pour l'application aux transports collectifs du Département de la Nièvre , 2006 .

[13]  Domenica Taruscio,et al.  National plans and strategies on rare diseases in Europe. , 2010, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[14]  H. Dawkins,et al.  Awakening Australia to Rare Diseases: Symposium report and preliminary outcomes , 2011, Orphanet journal of rare diseases.

[15]  Y. Zurynski,et al.  Call for a national plan for rare diseases , 2010, Journal of paediatrics and child health.

[16]  D. Taruscio,et al.  Tackling the Problem of Rare Diseases in Public Health: The Italian Approach , 2003, Public Health Genomics.

[17]  Arrigo Schieppati,et al.  Why rare diseases are an important medical and social issue , 2008, The Lancet.

[18]  S. Terry,et al.  International Rare Disease Research Consortium commits to aggressive goals. , 2011, Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers.

[19]  Y. Zurynski,et al.  Rare childhood diseases: how should we respond? , 2008, Archives of Disease in Childhood.

[20]  Jane M. Young,et al.  What are the current barriers to effective cancer care coordination? A qualitative study , 2010, BMC health services research.

[21]  M. Haffner,et al.  Orphan Drug Designation and Pharmacogenomics , 2012, BioDrugs.

[22]  M. Strandberg-Larsen Measuring integrated care. , 2011, Danish medical bulletin.

[23]  R. Schade,et al.  The Use of the Internet in Data Assimilation in Rare Diseases , 2007, Digestive Diseases and Sciences.

[24]  Ségolène Aymé,et al.  Empowerment of patients: lessons from the rare diseases community , 2008, The Lancet.

[25]  Y. Zurynski,et al.  International conferences on rare diseases: initiatives in commitment, patient care and connections , 2007, The Medical journal of Australia.

[26]  H. Tuomainen,et al.  Meeting the Needs of Parents Around the Time of Diagnosis of Disability Among Their Children: Evaluation of a Novel Program for Information, Support, and Liaison by Key Workers , 2004, Pediatrics.

[27]  R. Stefanov,et al.  Tackling rare diseases at European level: why do we need a harmonized framework? , 2007, Folia medica.

[28]  C. Epstein,et al.  Developing a national collaborative study system for rare genetic diseases , 2008, Genetics in Medicine.

[29]  S. Groft,et al.  Rare diseases - avoiding misperceptions and establishing realities: the need for reliable epidemiological data. , 2010, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[30]  B. Jack,et al.  From symptom onset to a diagnosis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease (ALS/MND): Experiences of people with ALS/MND and family carers – a qualitative study , 2011, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis : official publication of the World Federation of Neurology Research Group on Motor Neuron Diseases.

[31]  A. Knight,et al.  The common problem of rare disease in general practice , 2006, The Medical journal of Australia.

[32]  W. A. van der Kloot,et al.  Diagnostic delay in sternocostoclavicular hyperostosis: Impact on various aspects of quality of life , 2010, Arthritis care & research.

[33]  M. Somerville,et al.  Report of an International Survey of Molecular Genetic Testing Laboratories , 2007, Public Health Genomics.

[34]  Jane S. Paulsen,et al.  Huntington disease: families' experiences of healthcare services. , 2010, Journal of advanced nursing.

[35]  Kendra Vehik,et al.  Patient registries: utility, validity and inference. , 2010, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[36]  Mohamed Ben Saïd,et al.  CEMARA an information system for rare diseases , 2010, MedInfo.