An association between deep sedation and adverse short-term outcomes has been demonstrated although this evidence has been inconsistent. The A2B (alpha-2 agonists for sedation in critical care) sedation trial is designed to determine whether the alpha-2 agonists clonidine and dexmedetomidine, compared with usual care, are clinically and cost-effective. The A2B intervention is a complex intervention conducted in 39 intensive care units (ICUs) in the UK. Multicentre organisational factors, variable cultures, perceptions and practices and the involvement of multiple members of the healthcare team add to the complexity of the A2B trial. From our pretrial contextual exploration it was apparent that routine practices such as type and frequency of pain, agitation and delirium assessment, as well as the common sedative agents used, varied widely across the UK. Anticipated challenges in implementing A2B focused on the impact of usual practice, perceptions of risk, ICU culture, structure and the presence of equipoise. Given this complexity, a process evaluation has been embedded in the A2B trial to uncover factors that could impact successful delivery and explore their impact on intervention delivery and interpretation of outcomes.
This is a mixed-methods process evaluation guided by the A2B intervention logic model. It includes two phases of data collection conducted during and at the end of trial. Data will be collected using a combination of questionnaires, stakeholder interviews and routinely collected trial data. A framework approach will be used to analyse qualitative data with synthesis of data within and across the phases. The nature of the relationship between delivery of the A2B intervention and the trial primary and secondary outcomes will be explored.
All elements of the A2B trial, including the process evaluation, are approved by Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (Ref. 18/SS/0085). Dissemination will be via publications, presentations and media engagement.
To determine and identify distance patterns in the movements of medical students and junior doctors between their training locations.
A retrospective cohort study of UK medical students from 2002 to 2015 (UKMED data).
All UK medical schools, foundations and specialty training organisation.
All UK medical students from 2002 to 2015, for a total of 97 932 participants.
Individual movements and number of movements by county of students from family home to medical school training, from medical school to foundation training and from foundation to specialty training.
Leslie matrix, principal components analysis, Gini coefficient, 2 test, generalised linear models and variable selection methods were employed to explore the different facets of students’ and junior doctors’ movements from the family home to medical school and for the full pathway (from family home to specialty training).
The majority of the movements between the different stages of the full pathway were restricted to a distance of up to 50 km; although the proportion of movements changed from year-to-year, with longer movements during 2007–2008. At the individual level, ethnicity, socioeconomic class of the parent(s) and the deprivation score of the family home region were found to be the most important factors associated with the length of the movements from the family home to medical school. Similar results were found when movements were aggregated at the county level, with the addition of factors such as gender and qualification at entry (to medical school) being statistically associated with the number of new entrant students moving between counties.
Our findings show that while future doctors do not move far from their family home or training location, this pattern is not homogeneous over time. Distances are influenced by demographics, socioeconomic status and deprivation. These results may contribute in designing interventions aimed at solving the chronic problems of maldistribution and underdoctoring in the UK.
Pregnant women have been historically excluded from interventional research. While recent efforts have been made to improve their involvement, there remains a disparity in the evidence base for treatments available to pregnant women compared with the non-pregnant population. A significant barrier to the enrolment of pregnant women within research is risk perception and a poor understanding of decision-making in this population.
Assess the risk perception and influences on decision-making in pregnant women, when considering whether to enrol in a hypothetical interventional research study.
Semistructured interviews were undertaken, and thematic analysis was undertaken of participant responses.
Twelve pregnant women were enrolled from an antenatal outpatient clinic.
Participants were unanimously positive about enrolling in the proposed hypothetical interventional study. Risk perception was influenced by potential risks to their fetus and their previous experiences of healthcare and research. Participants found the uncertainty in quantifying risk for new research interventions challenging. They were motivated to enrol in research by altruism and found less invasive research interventions more tolerable.
It is vital to understand how pregnant women balance the perceived risks and benefits of interventional research. This may help clinicians and scientists better communicate risk to pregnant women and address the ongoing under-representation of pregnant women in interventional research.
To shed light on the process of advocacy in the context of community health nursing, through a methodology inspired by the epistemologies of the South.
We conducted a collaborative ethnography in a community health centre in Canada.
de Sousa Santos' epistemologies of the South, a typology of advocacy and main themes from historic research informed the methodology. Data were collected between 2016 and 2018 through 420 h of fieldwork observations and three group discussions, including a collective process to co-construct interpretations with participants. Twenty-one nurses participated in the study.
Nurses had sufficient work flexibility to practice advocacy actions focused on individuals and groups. They also engaged in attempts at policy reform in the form of defending access to appropriate care and changing the mode of care organization. However, these were curbed by bureaucracy and administrative rules, resulting in the eventual dismissal of health promotion actions and experiences of moral distress.
Despite the political climate of their work environment impeding social justice agendas, nurses' advocacy practices showed a persistence of moral values and ideals in coherence with the regional nursing legacy.
Acting at the organizational level and involving field nurses in decision making are potential avenues for increasing policy advocacy efficacy.
Examining contexts through another epistemic lens and methods of research drawing on history and anthropology has shed light on a process of advocacy. This research shows that organizations need to equip themselves with mechanisms to promote the sharing of realities between nurses, thereby building collective advocacy.
The research adheres to the EQUATOR guidelines with SRQR and COREQ methods.
No patient or public contribution.
It is common for community-based healthcare providers (CHPs)—many of whom have not received specialised training in wound care—to deliver initial and ongoing management for various wound types and diverse populations. Wounds in any setting can rapidly transition to a stalled, hard-to-heal wound (HTHW) that is not following a normal healing trajectory. Failure to recognise or address issues that cause delayed healing can lead to increased costs, healthcare utilisation and suffering. To encourage early intervention by CHPs, a panel of wound care experts developed actionable evidence-based recommendations for CHPs delineating characteristics and appropriate care in identifying and treating HTHWs. A HTHW is a wound that fails to progress towards healing with standard therapy in an orderly and timely manner and should be referred to a qualified wound care provider (QWCP) for advanced assessment and diagnosis if not healed or reduced in size by 40%–50% within 4 weeks. HTHWs occur in patients with multiple comorbidities, and display increases in exudate, infection, devitalised tissue, maceration or pain, or no change in wound size. CHPs can play an important initial role by seeing the individual's HTHW risk, addressing local infection and providing an optimal wound environment. An easy-to-follow one-page table was developed for the CHP to systematically identify, evaluate and treat HTHWs, incorporating a basic toolkit with items easily obtainable in common office/clinic practice settings. A flow chart using visual HTHW clinical cues is also presented to address CHPs with different learning styles. These tools encourage delivery of appropriate early interventions that can improve overall healthcare efficiency and cost.