Taking simulation out of its "safe container"-exploring the bidirectional impacts of psychological safety and simulation in an emergency department

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Simulation facilitators strive to ensure the psychological safety of participants during simulation events; however, we have limited understanding of how antecedent levels of psychological safety impact the simulation experience or how the simulation experience impacts real-world psychological safety. METHODS: We explored the experience of participants in an embedded, interprofessional simulation program at a large tertiary emergency department (ED) in Australia. We engaged in theoretical thematic analysis of sequential narrative surveys and semi-structured interviews using a previously derived framework of enablers of psychological safety in healthcare. We sought to understand (1) how real-world psychological safety impacts the simulation experience and (2) how the simulation experience influences real-world psychological safety. RESULTS: We received 74 narrative responses and conducted 19 interviews. Simulation experience was both influenced by and impacted psychological safety experienced at the individual, team, and organizational levels of ED practice. Most strikingly, simulation seemed to be an incubator of team familiarity with direct impact on real-world practice. We present a model of the bidirectional impact of psychological safety and simulation within healthcare environments. CONCLUSION: Our model represents both opportunity and risk for facilitators and organizations engaging in simulation. It should inform objectives, design, delivery, debriefing, and faculty development and firmly support the situation of simulation programs within the broader cultural ethos and goals of the departments and organizations. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41077-022-00201-8

A randomised phase II trial of temozolomide with or without cannabinoids in patients with recurrent glioblastoma (ARISTOCRAT):Protocol for a multi-centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BackgroundGlioblastoma (GBM) is the most common adult malignant brain tumour, with an incidence of 5 per 100,000 per year in England. Patients with tumours showing O -methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation represent around 40% of newly diagnosed GBM. Relapse/tumour recurrence is inevitable. There is no agreed standard treatment for patients with GBM, therefore, it is aimed at delaying further tumour progression and maintaining health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Limited clinical trial data exist using cannabinoids in combination with temozolomide (TMZ) in this setting, but early phase data demonstrate prolonged overall survival compared to TMZ alone, with few additional side effects. Jazz Pharmaceuticals (previously GW Pharma Ltd.) have developed nabiximols (trade name Sativex®), an oromucosal spray containing a blend of cannabis plant extracts, that we aim to assess for preliminary efficacy in patients with recurrent GBM.MethodsARISTOCRAT is a phase II, multi-centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial to assess cannabinoids in patients with recurrent MGMT methylated GBM who are suitable for treatment with TMZ. Patients who have relapsed ≥ 3 months after completion of initial first-line treatment will be randomised 2:1 to receive either nabiximols or placebo in combination with TMZ. The primary outcome is overall survival time defined as the time in whole days from the date of randomisation to the date of death from any cause. Secondary outcomes include overall survival at 12 months, progression-free survival time, HRQoL (using patient reported outcomes from QLQ-C30, QLQ-BN20 and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires), and adverse events.DiscussionPatients with recurrent MGMT promoter methylated GBM represent a relatively good prognosis sub-group of patients with GBM. However, their median survival remains poor and, therefore, more effective treatments are needed. The phase II design of this trial was chosen, rather than phase III, due to the lack of data currently available on cannabinoid efficacy in this setting. A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial will ensure an unbiased robust evaluation of the treatment and will allow potential expansion of recruitment into a phase III trial should the emerging phase II results warrant this development.Trial registration ISRCTN: 11460478. ClinicalTrials.Gov: NCT0562970

Management evaluation of metastasis in the brain (MEMBRAIN)—a United Kingdom and Ireland prospective, multicenter observational study

Background:In recent years an increasing number of patients with cerebral metastasis (CM) have been referred to the neuro-oncology multidisciplinary team (NMDT). Our aim was to obtain a national picture of CM referrals to assess referral volume and quality and factors affecting NMDT decision making. Methods:A prospective multicenter cohort study including all adult patients referred to NMDT with 1 or more CM was conducted. Data were collected in neurosurgical units from November 2017 to February 2018. Demographics, primary disease, KPS, imaging, and treatment recommendation were entered into an online database. Results:A total of 1048 patients were analyzed from 24 neurosurgical units. Median age was 65 years (range, 21-93 years) with a median number of 3 referrals (range, 1-17 referrals) per NMDT. The most common primary malignancies were lung (36.5%, n = 383), breast (18.4%, n = 193), and melanoma (12.0%, n = 126). A total of 51.6% (n = 541) of the referrals were for a solitary metastasis and resulted in specialist intervention being offered in 67.5% (n = 365) of cases. A total of 38.2% (n = 186) of patients being referred with multiple CMs were offered specialist treatment. NMDT decision making was associated with number of CMs, age, KPS, primary disease status, and extent of extracranial disease (univariate logistic regression, P < .001) as well as sentinel location and tumor histology (P < .05). A delay in reaching an NMDT decision was identified in 18.6% (n = 195) of cases. Conclusions:This study demonstrates a changing landscape of metastasis management in the United Kingdom and Ireland, including a trend away from adjuvant whole-brain radiotherapy and specialist intervention being offered to a significant proportion of patients with multiple CMs. Poor quality or incomplete referrals cause delay in NMDT decision making

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

Communicating Identities: An Examination of Senatorial Bill Sponsorship in a Pre- and Post-9/11 Context

The role of female politicians is a topic that has garnered significant study. More specifically, the concept of gendered issues (Mirya R. Holman 2015; Witt, Paget, and Matthews 1994) is one that deserves greater attention, especially when we see issues outside of the female gender norm becoming important in the national dialogue. Specifically, I am referring to Defense and National Security, both of which are issues that are incredibly salient in the minds of constituents, though are not generally thought of as within the capabilities of a female politician (Lawless 2004). 9/11 is perhaps the most salient National Security-related event to have happened within our country, and in the years surrounding 9/11, citizen’s concern regarding Defense and Foreign Policy became more heightened (Lawless 2004). What I hope to get after in this study is the impact 9/11 had on women in the Senate, given that citizens were prioritizing National Security and women were perceived as less equipped to handle such policy areas