Learning from difference and similarity: identities and relational reflexive learning

Within organizations there is reciprocal interplay between identity construction and learning. Processes of learning are enabled and constrained by identity practices; concomitantly, the possibilities for learning are shaped by the identity positions available to individuals. There is a dynamic between the impositions of organizations and people’s freedom to shape their identities and learning plays a crucial role in this. Our purpose in this special issue is to contribute to the understanding of the intersection of identity work and learning as a response to experiences of being different. Experiences of difference include moving into a new role, encountering a disjuncture with others while in a role or a difference in broader life which is reacted to as if it were a problem in an organizational setting. Being different produces a variety of challenges and the papers in this special issue trace how people cope with vulnerabilities, develop resilience and often collaborate in their learning. We focus on how people reflect on their own identity and learn and how, by learning together with people who have similar experiences, micro-communities can support, develop and enhance their insight and identity-positions

Trends in incidence and prevalence of osteoarthritis in the United Kingdom:findings from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)

Objective: This study aimed to explore the incidence and prevalence of OA in the UK in 2017 and their trends from 1997 to 2017 using a large nationally representative primary care database. Design: The UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) comprising data on nearly 17.5 million patients was used for the study. The incidence and prevalence of general practitioner diagnosed OA over a 20 years period (1997-2017) were estimated and age-sex and length of data contribution standardized using the 2017 CPRD population structure. Cohort effects were examined through Age-period-cohort analysis. Results: During 1997-2017, there were 494,716 incident OA cases aged ≥20 years. The standardised incidence of any OA in 2017 was 6.8 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 6.7 to 6.9) and prevalence was 10.7% (95% CI 10.7-10.8%). Both incidence and prevalence were higher in women than men. The incidence of any-OA decreased gradually in the past 20 years at an annual rate of -1.6% (95%CI -2.0 to -1.1%), and the reduction speeded up for people born after 1960. The prevalence of any-OA increased gradually at an annual rate of 1.4% (95% CI 1.3-1.6%). Although the prevalence was highest in Scotland and Northern Ireland, incidence was highest in the East Midlands. Both incidence and prevalence reported highest in the knee followed by hip, wrist/hand and ankle/foot. Conclusion: In the UK approximately one in 10 adults have symptomatic clinically diagnosed OA, the knee being the commonest. While prevalence has increased and become static after 2008, incidence is slowly declining. Further research is required to understand these changes

Anticholinergic Drug Exposure and the Risk of Dementia: A Nested Case-Control Study

IMPORTANCE Anticholinergic medicines have short-term cognitive adverse effects, but itis uncertain whether long-term use of these drugs is associated with an increased risk of dementia.OBJECTIVE To assess associations between anticholinergic drug treatments and risk of dementia in persons 55 years or older.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This nested case-control study took place in general practices in England that contributed to the QResearch primary care database. The study evaluated whether exposure to anticholinergic drugs was associated with dementia risk in 58 769 patients with a diagnosis of dementia and 225 574 controls 55 years or older matched by age, sex, general practice, and calendar time. Information on prescriptions for 56 drugs with strong anticholinergic properties was used to calculate measures of cumulative anticholinergic drug exposure. Data were analyzed from May 2016 to June 2018.EXPOSURES The primary exposure was the total standardized daily doses (TSDDs) of anticholinergic drugs prescribed in the 1 to 11 years prior to the date of diagnosis of dementia or equivalent date in matched controls (index date).MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Odds ratios (ORs) for dementia associated with cumulative exposure to anticholinergic drugs, adjusted for confounding variables.RESULTS Of the entire study population (284 343 case patients and matched controls), 179 365 (63.1%) were women, and the mean (SD) age of the entire population was 82.2 (6.8) years. The adjusted OR for dementia increased from 1.06 (95%CI, 1.03-1.09) in the lowest overall anticholinergic exposure category (total exposure of 1-90 TSDDs) to 1.49 (95%CI, 1.44-1.54) in the highest category (>1095 TSDDs), compared with no anticholinergic drug prescriptions in the 1 to 11 years before the index date. There were significant increases in dementia risk for the anticholinergic antidepressants (adjusted OR [AOR], 1.29; 95%CI, 1.24-1.34), antiparkinson drugs (AOR, 1.52; 95%CI, 1.16-2.00), antipsychotics (AOR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.53-1.90), bladder antimuscarinic drugs (AOR, 1.65; 95%CI, 1.56-1.75), and antiepileptic drugs (AOR, 1.39; 95%CI, 1.22-1.57) all for more than 1095 TSDDs. Results were similar when exposures were restricted to exposure windows of 3 to 13 years (AOR, 1.46; 95%CI, 1.41-1.52) and 5 to 20 years (AOR, 1.44; 95%CI, 1.32-1.57) before the index date for more than 1095 TSDDs. Associations were stronger in cases diagnosed before the age of 80 years. The population-attributable fraction associated with total anticholinergic drug exposure during the 1 to 11 years before diagnosis was 10.3%.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Exposure to several types of strong anticholinergic drugs is associated with an increased risk of dementia. These findings highlight the importance of reducing exposure to anticholinergic drugs in middle-aged and older people

Cycling infrastructure for reducing cycling injuries in cyclists

Background: Cycling is an attractive form of transport. It is beneficial to the individual as a form of physical activity that may fit more readily into an individual’s daily routine, such as for cycling to work and to the shops, than other physical activities such as visiting a gym. Cycling is also beneficial to the wider community and the environment as a result of fewer motorised journeys. Cyclists are seen as vulnerable road users who are frequently in close proximity to larger and faster motorised vehicles. Cycling infrastructure aims to make cycling both more convenient and safer for cyclists. This review is needed to guide transport planning. Objectives: To: 1. evaluate the effects of different types of cycling infrastructure on reducing cycling injuries in cyclists, by type of infrastructure; 2. evaluate the effects of cycling infrastructure on reducing the severity of cycling injuries in cyclists; 3. evaluate the effects of cycling infrastructure on reducing cycling injuries in cyclists with respect to age, sex and social group. Search methods: We ran the most recent search on 2nd March 2015. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase Classic + Embase(OvidSP), PubMed and 10 other databases. We searched websites, handsearched conference proceedings, screened reference lists of included studies and previously published reviews and contacted relevant organisations. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials, cluster randomised controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series studies which evaluated the effect of cycling infrastructure (such as cycle lanes, tracks or paths, speed management, roundabout design) on cyclist injury or collision rates. Studies had to include a comparator, that is, either no infrastructure or a different type of infrastructure. We excluded studies that assessed collisions that occurred as a result of competitive cycling. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors examined the titles and abstracts of papers obtained from searches to determine eligibility. Two review authors extracted data from the included trials and assessed the risk of bias. We carried out a meta-analysis using the random-effects model where at least three studies reported the same intervention and outcome. Where there were sufficient studies, as a secondary analysis we accounted for changes in cyclist exposure in the calculation of the rate ratios. We rated the quality of the evidence as ‘high’, ‘moderate’,‘low’ or ‘very low’ according to the GRADE approach for the installation of cycle routes and networks. Main results: We identified 21 studies for inclusion in the review: 20 controlled before-after (CBA) studies and one interrupted time series (ITS) study. These evaluated a range of infrastructure including cycle lanes, advanced stop lines, use of colour, cycle tracks, cycle paths, management of the road network, speed management, cycle routes and networks, roundabout design and packages of measures. No studies reported medically-attended or self-reported injuries. There was no evidence that cycle lanes reduce the rate of cycle collisions (rate ratio 1.21, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.08). Taking into account cycle flow, there was no difference in collisions for cyclists using cycle routes and networks compared with cyclists not using cycle routes and networks (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.05). There was statistically significant heterogeneity between the studies (I² = 75%, Chi² = 8.00 df = 2, P = 0.02) for the analysis adjusted for cycle flow. We judged the quality of the evidence regarding cycle routes and networks as very low and we are very uncertain about the estimate. These analyses are based on findings from CBA studies. From data presented narratively, the use of 20 mph speed restrictions in urban areas may be effective at reducing cyclist collisions. Redesigning specific parts of cycle routes that may be particularly busy or complex in terms of traffic movement may be beneficial to cyclists in terms of reducing the risk of collision. Generally, the conversion of intersections to roundabouts may increase the number of cycle collisions. In particular, the conversion of intersections to roundabouts with cycle lanes marked as part of the circulating carriageway increased cycle collisions. However, the conversion of intersections with and without signals to roundabouts with cycle paths may reduce the odds of collision. Both continuing a cycle lane across the mouth of a side road with a give way line onto the main road, and cycle tracks, may increase the risk of injury collisions in cyclists. However, these conclusions are uncertain, being based on a narrative review of findings from included studies. There is a lack of evidence that cycle paths or advanced stop lines either reduce or increase injury collisions in cyclists. There is also insufficient evidence to draw any robust conclusions concerning the effect of cycling infrastructure on cycling collisions in terms of severity of injury, sex, age, and level of social deprivation of the casualty. In terms of quality of the evidence, there was little matching of intervention and control sites. In many studies, the comparability of the control area to the intervention site was unclear and few studies provided information on other cycling infrastructures that may be in place in the control and intervention areas. The majority of studies analysed data routinely collected by organisations external to the study team, thus reducing the risk of bias in terms of systematic differences in assessing outcomes between the control and intervention groups. Some authors did not take regression-to-mean effects into account when examining changes in collisions. Longer data collection periods pre- and post-installation would allow for regression-to-mean effects and also seasonal and time trends in traffic volume to be observed. Few studies adjusted cycle collision rates for exposure. Authors’ conclusions: Generally, there is a lack of high quality evidence to be able to draw firm conclusions as to the effect of cycling infrastructure on cycling collisions. There is a lack of rigorous evaluation of cycling infrastructure

Community falls prevention for people who call an emergency ambulance after a fall: randomised controlled trial

Objective To evaluate whether a service to prevent falls in the community would help reduce the rate of falls in older people who call an emergency ambulance when they fall but are not taken to hospital