Myth, Ritual and Liturgical Drama

A first exploration of the applicability of concepts of myth, ritual and liturgical drama to education and education leadership

Which arts therapy for which client and why?

The Centre, a Charity founded by the Author in 1993, offers arts therapies interventions - Art, Dance Movement, Drama and Music - to clients of all ages and needs. This research represents an attempt to determine which modality of arts therapy should be recommended to any client on referral. A programme of each of the 4 arts therapies in sequence was offered to 109 clients of varying age and needs, in 10 Locations within the local conurbation. Four aims were identified for each client and the effectiveness of the arts therapies intervention was measured both quantitatively and qualitatively. Analysis revealed that although there was no one over all result, an average of 89.6% clients reported over all improvement at the end of the programme. Indications suggested the most successful aim addressed was enjoyment, although the most common aim identified was to be able to work in a group. Interventions of music therapy with male clients were the most effective for enhancement of self-esteem. Other, sometimes unexpected, results provide the basis for recommendations to referrers and guidance for providers of arts therapies services

Genetic testing of children for adult-onset conditions: opinions of the British adult population and implications for clinical practice

This study set out to explore the attitudes of a representative sample of the British public towards genetic testing in children to predict disease in the future. We sought opinions about genetic testing for adult-onset conditions for which no prevention/treatment is available during childhood, and about genetic 'carrier' status to assess future reproductive risks. The study also examined participants' level of agreement with the reasons professional organisations give in favour of deferring such testing. Participants (n=2998) completed a specially designed questionnaire, distributed by email. Nearly half of the sample (47%) agreed that parents should be able to test their child for adult-onset conditions, even if there is no treatment or prevention at time of testing. This runs contrary to professional guidance about genetic testing in children. Testing for carrier status was supported by a larger proportion (60%). A child's future ability to decide for her/himself if and when to be tested was the least supported argument in favour of deferring testing.European Journal of Human Genetics advance online publication, 5 November 2014; doi:10.1038/ejhg.2014.221

Limitations and pitfalls of using family letters to communicate genetic risk: a qualitative study with patients and healthcare professionals

European genetic testing guidelines recommend that healthcare professionals (HCPs) discuss the familial implications of any test with a patient and offer written material to help them share the information with family members. Giving patients these “family letters” to alert any relatives of their risk has become part of standard practice and has gone relatively unquestioned over the years. Communication with at-risk relatives will become an increasingly pressing issue as mainstream and routine practice incorporates broad genome tests and as the number of findings potentially relevant to relatives increases. This study therefore explores problems around the use of family letters to communicate about genetic risk. We conducted 16 focus groups with 80 HCPs, and 35 interviews with patients, recruited from across the UK. Data were analyzed thematically and we constructed four themes: 1) HCPs writing family letters: how to write them and why?, 2) Patients’ issues with handing out family letters, 3) Dissemination becomes an uncontrolled form of communication, and 4) When the relative has the letter, is the patient’s and HCP’s duty discharged? We conclude by suggesting alternative and supplementary methods of communication, for example through digital tools, and propose that in comparison to communication by family letter, direct contact by HCPs might be a more appropriate and successful option

A cluster randomised controlled trial of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a 'whole systems' model of self-management support for the management of long- term conditions in primary care: trial protocol

BackgroundPatients with long-term conditions are increasingly the focus of quality improvement activities in health services to reduce the impact of these conditions on quality of life and to reduce the burden on care utilisation. There is significant interest in the potential for self-management support to improve health and reduce utilisation in these patient populations, but little consensus concerning the optimal model that would best provide such support. We describe the implementation and evaluation of self-management support through an evidence-based 'whole systems' model involving patient support, training for primary care teams, and service re-organisation, all integrated into routine delivery within primary care.MethodsThe evaluation involves a large-scale, multi-site study of the implementation, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of this model of self-management support using a cluster randomised controlled trial in patients with three long-term conditions of diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The outcome measures include healthcare utilisation and quality of life. We describe the methods of the cluster randomised trial.DiscussionIf the 'whole systems' model proves effective and cost-effective, it will provide decision-makers with a model for the delivery of self-management support for populations with long-term conditions that can be implemented widely to maximise 'reach' across the wider patient population.Trial registration numberISRCTN: ISRCTN9094004

Mutations in DONSON disrupt replication fork stability and cause microcephalic dwarfism

To ensure efficient genome duplication, cells have evolved numerous factors that promote unperturbed DNA replication and protect, repair and restart damaged forks. Here we identify downstream neighbor of SON (DONSON) as a novel fork protection factor and report biallelic DONSON mutations in 29 individuals with microcephalic dwarfism. We demonstrate that DONSON is a replisome component that stabilizes forks during genome replication. Loss of DONSON leads to severe replication-associated DNA damage arising from nucleolytic cleavage of stalled replication forks. Furthermore, ATM- and Rad3-related (ATR)-dependent signaling in response to replication stress is impaired in DONSON-deficient cells, resulting in decreased checkpoint activity and the potentiation of chromosomal instability. Hypomorphic mutations in DONSON substantially reduce DONSON protein levels and impair fork stability in cells from patients, consistent with defective DNA replication underlying the disease phenotype. In summary, we have identified mutations in DONSON as a common cause of microcephalic dwarfism and established DONSON as a critical replication fork protein required for mammalian DNA replication and genome stability

Approaching confidentiality at a familial level in genomic medicine: a focus group study with healthcare professionals

OBJECTIVES: Clinical genetics guidelines from 2011 conceptualise genetic information as confidential to families, not individuals. The normative consequence of this is that the family's interest is the primary consideration and genetic information is shared unless there are good reasons not to do so. We investigated healthcare professionals' (HCPs') views about, and reasoning around, individual and familial approaches to confidentiality and how such views influenced their practice.METHOD: 16 focus groups with 80 HCPs working in/with clinical genetics services were analysed, drawing on grounded theory.RESULTS: Participants raised seven problems with, and arguments against, going beyond the individual approach to confidentiality. These problems fell into two overlapping categories: 'relationships' and 'structures'. Most participants had never considered ways to-or thought it was impossible to-treat familial genetic information and personal information differently. They worried that putting the familial approach into practice could disrupt family dynamics and erode patient trust in the health service. They also thought they had insufficient resources to share information and feared that sharing might change the standard of care and make them more vulnerable to liability.CONCLUSIONS: A familial approach to confidentiality has not been accepted or adopted as a standard, but wider research suggests that some of the problems HCPs perceived are surmountable and sharing in the interest of the family can be achieved. However, further research is needed to explore how personal and familial genetic information can be separated in practice. Our findings are relevant to HCPs across health services who are starting to use genome tests as part of their routine investigations.<br/

'Is this knowledge mine and nobody else's? I don't feel that.' Patient views about consent, confidentiality and information-sharing in genetic medicine

In genetic medicine, a patient's diagnosis can mean their family members are also at risk, raising a question about how consent and confidentiality should function in clinical genetics. This question is particularly pressing when it is unclear whether a patient has shared information. Conventionally, healthcare professionals view confidentiality at an individual level and 'disclosure without consent' as the exception, not the rule. The relational joint account model, by contrast, conceptualises genetic information as confidential at the familial level and encourages professionals to take disclosure as the default position. In this study, we interviewed 33 patients about consent and confidentiality and analysed data thematically. Our first theme showed that although participants thought of certain aspects of genetic conditions-for example, the way they affect day-to-day health-as somewhat personal, they perceived genetic information-for example, the mutation in isolation-as familial. Most thought these elements were separable and thought family members had a right to know the latter, identifying a broad range of harms that would justify disclosure. Our second theme illustrated that participants nonetheless had some concerns about what, if any, implications there would be of professionals treating such information as familial and they emphasised the importance of being informed about the way their information would be shared. Based on these results, we recommend that professionals take disclosure as the default position, but make clear that they will treat genetic information as familial during initial consultations and address any concerns therein