Perceived barriers and facilitators to attendance for cervical cancer screening in EU member states: A systematic review and synthesis using the Theoretical Domains Framework

AIMS: To identify and synthesise peer-reviewed, published literature reporting perceived barriers and facilitators associated with cervical cancer screening attendance in EU member states with organised population-based screening programmes. METHODS: Quantitative and qualitative studies reporting perceived barriers/facilitators to attendance for cervical cancer screening were searched for in databases Embase, HMIC, Medline and PsycInfo. Data were extracted and deductively coded to the Theoretical Domains Framework domains and inductive thematic analysis within domains was employed to identify specific barriers or facilitators to attendance for cervical cancer screening. RESULTS: 38 studies were included for data extraction. Five theoretical domains [‘Emotion’ (89% of the included studies), ‘Social influences’ (79%), ‘Knowledge’ (76%), ‘Environmental Context and Resources’ (74%) and ‘Beliefs about Consequences’ (68%)] were identified as key domains influencing cervical cancer screening attendance. CONCLUSION: Five theoretical domains were identified as prominent influences on cervical cancer screening attendance in EU member states with organised population-based screening programmes. Further research is needed to identify the relative importance of different influences for different sub-populations and to identify the influences that are most appropriate and feasible to address in future interventions

Patient safety and quality of care in mental health: a world of its own?

Quality and safety in healthcare, as an academic discipline, has made significant progress over recent decades, and there is now an active and established community of researchers and practitioners. However, work has predominantly focused on physical health, despite broader controversy regarding the attention paid to, and significance attributed to, mental health. Work from both communities is required in order to ensure that quality and safety is actively embedded within mental health research and practice and that the academic discipline of quality and safety accurately represents the scientific knowledge that has been accumulated within the mental health community

A systematic review of patient safety in mental health: a protocol based on the inpatient setting

BACKGROUND: Despite the growing international interest in patient safety as a discipline, there has been a lack of exploration of its application to mental health. It cannot be assumed that findings based upon physical health in acute care hospitals can be applied to mental health patients, disorders and settings. To the authors' knowledge, there has only been one review of the literature that focuses on patient safety research in mental health settings, conducted in Canada in 2008. We have identified a need to update this review and develop the methodology in order to strengthen the findings and disseminate internationally for advancement in the field. This systematic review will explore the existing research base on patient safety in mental health within the inpatient setting. METHODS: To conduct this systematic review, a thorough search across multiple databases will be undertaken, based upon four search facets ("mental health", "patient safety", "research" and "inpatient setting"). The search strategy has been developed based upon the Canadian review accompanied with input from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) taxonomy of patient safety incidents and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (fifth edition). The screening process will involve perspectives from at least two researchers at all stages with a third researcher invited to review when discrepancies require resolution. Initial inclusion and exclusion criteria have been developed and will be refined iteratively throughout the process. Quality assessment and data extraction of included articles will be conducted by at least two researchers. A data extraction form will be developed, piloted and iterated as necessary in accordance with the research question. Extracted information will be analysed thematically. DISCUSSION: We believe that this systematic review will make a significant contribution to the advancement of patient safety in mental health inpatient settings. The findings will enable the development and implementation of interventions to improve the quality of care experienced by patients and support the identification of future research priorities. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016034057

A systematic review of Patient Safety in Mental Health: a protocol based on the Inpatient Setting

Background Despite the growing international interest in patient safety as a discipline, there has been a lack of exploration of its application to mental health. It cannot be assumed that findings based upon physical health in acute care hospitals can be applied to mental health patients, disorders and settings. To the authors’ knowledge, there has only been one review of the literature that focuses on patient safety research in mental health settings, conducted in Canada in 2008. We have identified a need to update this review and develop the methodology in order to strengthen the findings and disseminate internationally for advancement in the field. This systematic review will explore the existing research base on patient safety in mental health within the inpatient setting. Methods To conduct this systematic review, a thorough search across multiple databases will be undertaken, based upon four search facets (“mental health”, “patient safety”, “research” and “inpatient setting”). The search strategy has been developed based upon the Canadian review accompanied with input from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) taxonomy of patient safety incidents and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th edition). The screening process will involve perspectives from at least two researchers at all stages with a third researcher invited to review when discrepancies require resolution. Initial inclusion and exclusion criteria have been developed and will be refined iteratively throughout the process. Quality assessment and data extraction of included articles will be conducted by at least two researchers. A data extraction form will be developed, piloted and iterated as necessary in accordance with the research question. Extracted information will be analysed thematically. Discussion We believe that this systematic review will make a significant contribution to the advancement of patient safety in mental health inpatient settings. The findings will enable the development and implementation of interventions to improve the quality of care experienced by patients and support the identification of future research priorities. Registration This systematic review was registered to the PROSPERO database on the 15th February 2016 (registration number CRD42016034057) and updated on 26th April 2016

Mesenchymal progenitor cell markers in human articular cartilage: normal distribution and changes in osteoarthritis

INTRODUCTION: Recent findings suggest that articular cartilage contains mesenchymal progenitor cells. The aim of this study was to examine the distribution of stem cell markers (Notch-1, Stro-1 and VCAM-1) and of molecules that modulate progenitor differentiation (Notch-1 and Sox9) in normal adult human articular cartilage and in osteoarthritis (OA) cartilage. METHODS: Expression of the markers was analyzed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and flow cytometry. Hoechst 33342 dye was used to identify and sort the cartilage side population (SP). Multilineage differentiation assays including chondrogenesis, osteogenesis and adipogenesis were performed on SP and non-SP (NSP) cells. RESULTS: A surprisingly high number (>45%) of cells were positive for Notch-1, Stro-1 and VCAM-1 throughout normal cartilage. Expression of these markers was higher in the superficial zone (SZ) of normal cartilage as compared to the middle zone (MZ) and deep zone (DZ). Non-fibrillated OA cartilage SZ showed reduced Notch-1 and Sox9 staining frequency, while Notch-1, Stro-1 and VCAM-1 positive cells were increased in the MZ. Most cells in OA clusters were positive for each molecule tested. The frequency of SP cells in cartilage was 0.14 +/- 0.05% and no difference was found between normal and OA. SP cells displayed chondrogenic and osteogenic but not adipogenic differentiation potential. CONCLUSIONS: These results show a surprisingly high number of cells that express putative progenitor cell markers in human cartilage. In contrast, the percentage of SP cells is much lower and within the range of expected stem cell frequency. Thus, markers such as Notch-1, Stro-1 or VCAM-1 may not be useful to identify progenitors in cartilage. Instead, their increased expression in OA cartilage implicates involvement in the abnormal cell activation and differentiation process characteristic of OA

Patient safety in inpatient mental health settings: a systematic review

Objectives: Patients in inpatient mental health settings face similar risks (eg, medication errors) to those in other areas of healthcare. In addition, some unsafe behaviours associated with serious mental health problems (eg, self-harm), and the measures taken to address these (eg, restraint), may result in further risks to patient safety. The objective of this review is to identify and synthesise the literature on patient safety within inpatient mental health settings using robust systematic methodology. Design: Systematic review and meta-synthesis. Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Health Management Information Consortium, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science were systematically searched from 1999 to 2019. Search terms were related to ‘mental health’, ‘patient safety’, ‘inpatient setting’ and ‘research’. Study quality was assessed using the Hawker checklist. Data were extracted and grouped based on study focus and outcome. Safety incidents were meta-analysed where possible using a random-effects model. Results Of the 57 637 article titles and abstracts, 364 met inclusion criteria. Included publications came from 31 countries and included data from over 150 000 participants. Study quality varied and statistical heterogeneity was high. Ten research categories were identified: interpersonal violence, coercive interventions, safety culture, harm to self, safety of the physical environment, medication safety, unauthorised leave, clinical decision making, falls and infection prevention and control. Conclusions: Patient safety in inpatient mental health settings is under-researched in comparison to other non-mental health inpatient settings. Findings demonstrate that inpatient mental health settings pose unique challenges for patient safety, which require investment in research, policy development, and translation into clinical practice

Use of professional practice guidance resources in pharmacy: a cross-sectional nationwide survey of pharmacists, intern pharmacists, and pharmacy students

BACKGROUND: Variations in practice are commonplace in healthcare where health professionals, such as pharmacists act as autonomous practitioners. This is evident in simulated patient studies, where pharmacists practice does not meet widely accepted standards for medicines supply or treatment of an ailment. To promote best pharmacy practice a myriad of guidance resources including practice guidelines, codes and standards are produced by professional organisations. These resources provide a framework for pharmacy practice and endeavour to facilitate consistency in provision of pharmacy-based services to consumers. Despite their role in specifying essential pharmacist behaviours, there is limited research exploring if and how these resources are used in practice. OBJECTIVE: To characterise Australian pharmacists' use of the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia's Code of Ethics, Professional Practice Guidelines and Professional Practice Standards. METHODS: A cross-sectional, self-administered, electronic survey of registered pharmacists, intern pharmacists and pharmacy students living in Australia was conducted in July 2020. Questions considered use of professional practice resources (by resource group) in the preceding 12 months. Data were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Of 601 responses included in the analysis 462 (76.9%) of respondents were registered pharmacists, 88 (14.6%) pharmacy students and 51 (8.5%) intern pharmacists. Interns and students accessed overarching practice resources, such as the Professional Practice Standards, Code of Ethics and Dispensing Practice Guidelines more frequently than practising pharmacists. Pharmacists accessed professional practice guidelines, such as Practice Guidelines for the Provision of Immunisation Services Within Pharmacy, more often than students. More pharmacists than interns and students indicated that they would access guidelines to resolve practice and patient care issues. All resources except the Professional Practice Standards for Pharmacists (67.4%) were accessed by less than 50% of respondents in the preceding 12-month period. Reasons for not accessing resources varied between participant and resource groups, and generally were due to a lack of awareness of the resource or not considering them necessary for the individual's practice. CONCLUSION(S): Access and use patterns for professional practice guidance resources change with experience. Professional organisations responsible for developing resources should consider these patterns when designing and reviewing resources and related policies. To ensure resources are meeting the needs of the profession, students, interns, and pharmacists should be involved in the review of and design of further resources

Do pharmacy practice standards effectively describe behaviour? Reviewing practice standards using a behavioural specificity framework

BACKGROUND: Guidelines and practice standards exist to communicate the conduct and behaviour expected of health care professionals and ensure consistent quality practice. It is important that they describe behaviours explicitly so they can be interpreted, enacted and measured with ease. The AACTT framework specifies behaviour in terms of the: Action to be performed, Actor who performs the action, Context where the action occurs, Target who the action is performed with/for and Time when the action is performed (AACTT). It provides the most up to date framework for specifying behaviours and is particularly relevant to complex behavioural problems that involve sequences of behaviours performed by different people. Behavioural specificity within pharmacy practice standards has not been explored. AIM: To determine if behaviours described in the Professional Practice Standards for Australian Pharmacists specify Action, Actor, Context, Target and Time. METHODS: Two researchers independently reviewed the scope and structure of the practice standards and one extracted action statements (behaviours) verbatim. Through an iterative process, the researchers modified and developed the existing AACTT definitions to operationalise them for application to review of the action statements in the practice standards. The operational definitions, decision criteria and curated examples were combined in a codebook. The definitions were consistently applied through a directed content analysis approach to evaluate all extracted action statements by one researcher. For consistency 20% was independently checked for agreement by a second researcher. RESULTS: A novel codebook to apply AACTT criteria to evaluate practice standards was developed. Application of this codebook identified 768 independent behaviours. Of these, 300 (39%) described at least one discrete observable action, none specified an actor, 25 (3%) specified context, 131 (17%) specified target and 88 (11%) specified time. CONCLUSION(S): The behaviours detailed in practice standards for Australian pharmacists do not consistently specify behaviours in terms of Action, Actor, Context, Target and Time. Developers in the pharmacy profession, and beyond, should consider the behavioural specificity of their documents to improve interpretability, usability and adherence to the behaviours detailed. This also has implications for the development and evaluation of interventions to change such behaviours and improve quality of care