Conectar
by Azusa Kubota, Kentaro Kojima, Shinnosuke Koketsu, Takayuki Kannon, Takehiro Sato, Kazuyoshi Hosomichi, Yoshiaki Shinohara, Atsushi Tajima
Brain asymmetry is a fundamental feature of neural organization. However, the molecular basis of hippocampal lateralization in response to environmental stimuli remains poorly understood. Here, we examined the transcriptomic profiles of the left and right hippocampal CA1 regions in rats reared under isolated or enriched housing conditions to elucidate hemisphere-specific responses and shared molecular adaptations. RNA-sequencing analysis revealed lateralized differences in the number and identity of differentially expressed genes, accompanied by distinct biological themes, as indicated by overrepresentation and gene set enrichment analysis. The left CA1 region was prominently engaged in pathways related to synaptic organization and mitochondrial function, whereas the right CA1 region exhibited enrichment in transcriptional regulation and RNA metabolic processes. Despite these asymmetries, co-expression and protein–protein interaction network analyses revealed shared molecular architectures. Immediate early genes formed consistent central hubs across both hemispheres, and a common Mecp2–Grin2b–Cdkl5–Tet3 protein interaction cluster was identified as a potential integrative regulatory module. Additional enrichment analysis of differentially expressed genes shared between hemispheres further highlighted conserved responses, particularly in synaptic plasticity and cell–cell communication. Together, these findings demonstrate that the left and right CA1 regions employ distinct yet partially convergent transcriptional programs to adapt to environmental stimuli. This coordinated molecular asymmetry provides novel insights into hippocampal lateralization and its role in experience-dependent brain plasticity.Access to general practice in England is a challenging issue of enduring importance. COVID-19 precipitated various abrupt changes, exposing and compounding existing problems. The access as human fit conceptualisation provides a nuanced understanding of access that extends beyond a limited focus on appointment numbers and speed. This qualitative study explored the pandemic’s impact on access to general practice and the experiences of patients and healthcare staff in England using access as human fit as an analytical framework.
A community-based participatory approach underpinned by qualitative semi-structured interviews and focus groups, and observations.
The following were conducted in Northwest England (December 2021—August 2022): interviews (10 participants) with patients, general practice staff and professionals; seven focus groups (42 participants) with patients from general practice patient groups and underserved groups; and twenty observation sessions of non-clinical access encounters (seven general practice and Primary Care Network premises; 45 hours total).
A rapid qualitative analysis methodology facilitated an abductive thematic approach, applying the dimensions of access as human fit to the data.
The access as human fit framework highlighted key areas where there is a lack of fit between patients and staff. Patients expressed that the array of access options and changes made it hard to know how to be a patient; some thought general practice should be ‘back to normal’ and the pandemic was an excuse to restrict access. Providers reported working harder than ever with insufficient resources.
The pandemic created greater distance between staff and patient realities of access. Access as a human fit facilitated in-depth exploration of patient and staff experiences, improving understanding and identifying key issues. Broader adoption and application of this framework, within policy and practice, could focus improvement efforts, optimise access fit and improve patient satisfaction and staff retention.
To critically synthesise current literature on the nurses' experiences in providing care for people presenting with mental health issues to the emergency department (ED).
Mental health-related presentations to EDs are increasing. Understanding nurses' experiences of providing care for this patient group will inform future strategies to enhance the care delivered in the ED.
CINAHL, MEDLINE, APA PsycInfo and Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection were searched from 2009 to 2024 for peer-reviewed qualitative papers exploring emergency nurses' perspectives of providing care for people with mental health issues, published in the English language. Quality was appraised using the JBI Critical Appraisal tool. This review follows the PRISMA checklist for reporting.
Nine papers, reporting eight studies, were included in the review. Three themes emerged: attitudes towards mental illness, education limitations impacting confidence and structural barriers impacting care quality. The review reveals a disconnect between nurses' compassionate intentions and barriers such as unconscious stigma and prioritising physical illness over mental health concerns. The findings highlight the need for targeted mental health education to enhance ED nurses' confidence and competence. Inadequate local mental health policies also impact care delivery, contributing to suboptimal patient outcomes.
This review provides a deeper understanding of ED nurses' experiences of caring for people with mental health issues. A need to implement a multifaceted approach to mental health education, clear policies to guide care delivery and systems that promote prioritisation of patients presenting with mental health concerns was identified.
Insights into nurses' experiences can shape future ED practices and enhance outcomes for patients. Building ED nurses' capacity to deliver high-quality mental health care is critical.
As a review paper, no patient or public consultation took place.
To develop a behavioural intervention package to support non-allergist healthcare workers (HCWs) to remove incorrect penA records from medical and surgical adult inpatients. This paper describes the development of the penicillin allergy de-labelling (PADL) intervention and the implementation intervention that will support non-allergist-delivered PADL.
We combined evidence-based, theory-based and person-based approaches. Qualitative research with healthcare professionals and patients explored barriers and enablers to implementation of the proposed PADL pathway. Key intervention design objectives and the key features of the implementation intervention required to achieve each objective were then developed and captured as guiding principles. We produced a logic model, integrating the theoretical domains framework to identify the behavioural influences on PADL and the behaviour change wheel to show how the implementation intervention is hypothesised to address the target behaviours. The implementation intervention package was then reviewed by stakeholders and topic experts for further refinement and optimisation. Finally, we outline how the implementation intervention will be evaluated.
Single-centre District General Hospital in the SW England servicing a rural community of 575 000 people without local allergy services.
HCWs reported PADL needed to be structured, standardised, evidence based and supported by hospital approved guidelines with easy to access patient information leaflets, supported by a sustained programme of education and training with named PADL leaders and visible PADL champions. Patients wanted a good explanation of the benefits and risks of testing and the benefits of having their ‘penA’ record removed. The identified HCW target behaviours were: taking a penA allergy focused history and to risk assess the patient’s penA history; to then either de-label the patient on history alone (direct de-label; DDL) or prescribe a direct oral challenge (DOC) dose; to perform baseline and post-test observations and counsel the patient on the risks of penA records and on the risks and the benefits of PADL. We identified barriers to target behaviours that we considered both important and modifiable, which included: lack of confidence in taking a penA focused history, PADL not viewed as a priority, low confidence with differentiating low-risk and high-risk penA histories, concerns about the safety of DOC, a requirement for senior support for nurses to deliver the observations and senior support for the other HCWs to deliver PADL, access to an expert for advice when required, a lack of PADL champions to promote PADL, and PADL not being supported by the organisation. The identified patient target behaviours were acceptance of the opportunity to be de-labelled via either DDL or DOC and willingness to take penicillin when prescribed. We developed intervention components to target the HCW and patient target behaviours which included: Education, expert advice made available from Infection specialists, a named PADL champion, hospital endorsed PADL guideline with necessary tools to enable PADL and patient information leaflets. The implementation intervention was further optimised through workshops with PADL researchers and stakeholders. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research outcome addendum was used to define both implementation intervention and PADL intervention outcomes.
We have developed a theory-based and stakeholder-developed implementation intervention to support inpatient PADL delivered by a multiprofession workforce. The intervention will be tested in a single hospital and scalability explored.
FreshRSS 