FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerBMJ Open

Non-physician anaesthesia providers perspectives on task sharing practices in Zambia and Somaliland: a qualitative study

Por: Karydi · K. I. · Kabaghe · S. · Blamey · H. · Mohamed · M. · Shamambo · N. · Edgcombe · H.
Introduction

The 68th World Health Assembly, in 2015, called for surgical and anaesthesia services strengthening. Acknowledging the healthcare staff shortages, they referred to task sharing, among others, as a more effective use of the healthcare workforce. While task sharing has been increasingly proposed as an important strategy to increase the reach and safety of anaesthesia as well as a means of supporting the workforce in low-resource settings, most data on task sharing relate to non-anaesthetic healthcare contexts. The aim of this study was to understand anaesthetic task sharing as currently experienced and/or envisaged by non-physician anaesthesia providers in Zambia and Somaliland.

Methods

An exploratory qualitative research methodology was used. Participants were recruited initially via contacts of the research team, then through snowballing using a purposive sampling strategy. There were 13 participants: 7 from Somaliland and 6 from Zambia. Semistructured interviews took place synchronously, then were recorded, anonymised, transcribed and analysed thematically. Triangulation and respondents’ validation were used to maximise data validity.

Results

Four major themes were identified in relation to task sharing practices: (1) participants recognised variable components of task sharing in their practice; (2) access to task sharing depends both on sources and resources; (3) implicit barriers may inhibit task sharing practices; (4) there is an appetite among participants for amelioration of current task sharing practices.

Conclusions

Empowering task sharing practices can be achieved only by understanding how these practices work, by identifying gaps and areas of improvement, and by addressing them. The findings from this exploratory study could help the global community understand how anaesthetic task sharing in low-resource settings works and inspire further research on the field. This could inform future modelling of workforce planning strategies in low-resource settings to maximise the effectiveness and professional well-being of the workforce.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of individualised (early) patient-directed rehabilitation versus standard rehabilitation after surgical repair of the rotator cuff of the shoulder: protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial with integrated Qui

Por: Mazuquin · B. · Moffatt · M. · Realpe · A. · Sherman · R. · Ireland · K. · Connan · Z. · Tildsley · J. · Manca · A. · Gc · V. S. · Foster · N. E. · Rees · J. · Drew · S. · Bateman · M. · Fakis · A. · Farnsworth · M. · Littlewood · C.
Introduction

Despite the high number of operations and surgical advancement, rehabilitation after rotator cuff repair has not progressed for over 20 years. The traditional cautious approach might be contributing to suboptimal outcomes. Our aim is to assess whether individualised (early) patient-directed rehabilitation results in less shoulder pain and disability at 12 weeks after surgical repair of full-thickness tears of the rotator cuff compared with current standard (delayed) rehabilitation.

Methods and analysis

The rehabilitation after rotator cuff repair (RaCeR 2) study is a pragmatic multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial with internal pilot phase. It has a parallel group design with 1:1 allocation ratio, full health economic evaluation and quintet recruitment intervention. Adults awaiting arthroscopic surgical repair of a full-thickness tear are eligible to participate. On completion of surgery, 638 participants will be randomised. The intervention (individualised early patient-directed rehabilitation) includes advice to the patient to remove their sling as soon as they feel able, gradually begin using their arm as they feel able and a specific exercise programme. Sling removal and movement is progressed by the patient over time according to agreed goals and within their own pain and tolerance. The comparator (standard rehabilitation) includes advice to the patient to wear the sling for at least 4 weeks and only to remove while eating, washing, dressing or performing specific exercises. Progression is according to specific timeframes rather than as the patient feels able. The primary outcome measure is the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index total score at 12-week postrandomisation. The trial timeline is 56 months in total, from September 2022.

Trial registration number

ISRCTN11499185.

❌