A sociological exploration of the tensions related to interprofessional collaboration in acute-care discharge planning

Patient discharge is a key concern in hospitals, particularly in acute care, given the multifaceted and challenging nature of patients' healthcare needs. Policies on discharge have identified the importance of interprofessional collaboration, yet research has described its limitations in this clinical context. This study aimed to extend our understanding of interprofessional interactions related to discharge in a general internal medicine setting by using sociological theories to illuminate the existence of, and interplay between, structural factors and microlevel practices. An ethnographic approach was employed to obtain an in-depth insight into healthcare providers' perspectives, behaviours, and interactions regarding discharge. Data collection involved observations, interviews, and document analysis. Approximately 65 hours of observations were undertaken, 23 interviews were conducted with healthcare providers, and government and hospital discharge documents were collected. Data were analysed using a directed content approach. The findings indicate the existence of a medically dominated division of healthcare labour in patient discharge with opportunities for some interprofessional negotiations; the role of organizational routines in facilitating and challenging interprofessional negotiations in patient discharge; and tensions in organizational priorities that impact an interprofessional approach to discharge. The findings provide insight into the various levels at which interventions can be targeted to improve interprofessional collaboration in discharge while recognizing the organizational tensions that challenge an interprofessional approach

Nurse practitioner interactions in acute and long-term care : an exploration of the role of knotworking in supporting interprofessional collaboration

BACKGROUND: Interprofessional care ensures high quality healthcare. Effective interprofessional collaboration is required to enable interprofessional care, although within the acute care hospital setting interprofessional collaboration is considered suboptimal. The integration of nurse practitioner roles into the acute and long-term care settings is influencing enhanced care. What remains unknown is how the nurse practitioner role enacts interprofessional collaboration or enables interprofessional care to promote high quality care. The study aim was to understand how nurse practitioners employed in acute and long-term care settings enable interprofessional collaboration and care. METHOD: Nurse practitioner interactions with other healthcare professionals were observed throughout the work day. These interactions were explored within the context of "knotworking" to create an understanding of their social practices and processes supporting interprofessional collaboration. Healthcare professionals who worked with nurse practitioners were invited to share their perceptions of valued role attributes and impacts. RESULTS: Twenty-four nurse practitioners employed at six hospitals participated. 384 hours of observation provided 1,284 observed interactions for analysis. Two types of observed interactions are comparable to knotworking. Rapid interactions resemble the traditional knotworking described in earlier studies, while brief interactions are a new form of knotworking with enhanced qualities that more consistently result in interprofessional care. Nurse practitioners were the most common initiators of brief interactions. CONCLUSIONS: Brief interactions reveal new qualities of knotworking with more consistent interprofessional care results. A general process used by nurse practitioners, where they practice a combination of both traditional (rapid) knotworking and brief knotworking to enable interprofessional care within acute and long-term care settings, is revealed

Buffalo, Bush Meat, and the Zoonotic Threat of Brucellosis in Botswana

Brucellosis is a zoonotic disease of global importance infecting humans, domestic animals, and wildlife. Little is known about the epidemiology and persistence of brucellosis in wildlife in Southern Africa, particularly in Botswana.Archived wildlife samples from Botswana (1995-2000) were screened with the Rose Bengal Test (RBT) and fluorescence polarization assay (FPA) and included the African buffalo (247), bushbuck (1), eland (5), elephant (25), gemsbok (1), giraffe (9), hartebeest (12), impala (171), kudu (27), red lechwe (10), reedbuck (1), rhino (2), springbok (5), steenbok (2), warthog (24), waterbuck (1), wildebeest (33), honey badger (1), lion (43), and zebra (21). Human case data were extracted from government annual health reports (1974-2006).Only buffalo (6%, 95% CI 3.04%-8.96%) and giraffe (11%, 95% CI 0-38.43%) were confirmed seropositive on both tests. Seropositive buffalo were widely distributed across the buffalo range where cattle density was low. Human infections were reported in low numbers with most infections (46%) occurring in children (<14 years old) and no cases were reported among people working in the agricultural sector.Low seroprevalence of brucellosis in Botswana buffalo in a previous study in 1974 and again in this survey suggests an endemic status of the disease in this species. Buffalo, a preferred source of bush meat, is utilized both legally and illegally in Botswana. Household meat processing practices can provide widespread pathogen exposure risk to family members and the community, identifying an important source of zoonotic pathogen transmission potential. Although brucellosis may be controlled in livestock populations, public health officials need to be alert to the possibility of human infections arising from the use of bush meat. This study illustrates the need for a unified approach in infectious disease research that includes consideration of both domestic and wildlife sources of infection in determining public health risks from zoonotic disease invasions

Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice (IPECP) in Post-COVID Healthcare Education and Practice Transformation Era – Discussion Paper. Joint Publication by InterprofessionalResearch.Global, American Interprofessional Health Collaborative & Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative

In the past two years the world has experienced unprecedented devastation, disruption, and death due to the COVID-19 global Pandemic. At the same time, the Pandemic acts as a transformation catalyst that accelerated the implementation and adoption of long overdue changes in healthcare education and practice, including telehealth and virtual learning.Interprofessional collaboration during the pandemic was able to foster healthcare transformation in several ways at the policy and legislative level, such as the fast-tracking of internationally trained professions. The role and use of digital technologies in healthcare education and practice have been extended and solidified by the pandemic. Macro-level policies acknowledging the importance ofpopulation health are key for future interprofessional collaboration of stakeholders to address inequalities. Similarly, interprofessional collaboration is key to addressing the proliferation of misinformation. Interprofessional education and collaborative practice (IPECP) can be effectively utilized to combat misinformation by increasing health literacy amongst health professions and the communities they serve.Despite IPECP being an integral component of promoting patient safety, and holistic, quality care, silos continue to exist. Furthermore, implementation of the Quintuple Aim (better health, better care, better value, better work experience, and better health equity), particularly through the lens of equity, remains elusive. Going forward, the integration and sustainability of IPECP are crucial and the experience of IPECP within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic should be reflected on, researched, and evaluated to inform future global healthcare systems and the workforce to provide and achieve the Quintuple Aim; the goal ofall in healthcare.As we are emerging out of the Pandemic, we have a unique opportunity to leverage on the lessons learned from the pandemic in fostering the healthcare transformation through innovation and IPECP. To capitalize on this opportunity and in a collaborative effort, the InterprofessionalResearch.Global (IPR.Global), the American Interprofessional Health Collaborative (AIHC), and the CanadianInterprofessional Health Collaborative (CIHC) have developed this e-book as a Discussion Paper to explore and discuss (from a global perspective) the impact and application of healthcare education and practice transformation on IPECP as we emerge from the COVID Pandemic with the goal to identify best practicesto integrate and sustain IPECP. We call the interprofessional educators, practitioners, leaders, scholars, and policy makers to utilize ‘Forward Thinking and Adaptability’ and ‘Sustainability and Growth’ in their IPECP approaches and strategies, to achieve Quintuple Aim. As learned during the Pandemic, working together – across professions, institutions, nationally, and globally – is essential in emerging stronger and in transforming our healthcare education and practice

Duration of androgen deprivation therapy with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of long-course versus short-course androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised trial

Background Previous evidence supports androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with primary radiotherapy as initial treatment for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the use and optimal duration of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy remains uncertain. Methods RADICALS-HD was a randomised controlled trial of ADT duration within the RADICALS protocol. Here, we report on the comparison of short-course versus long-course ADT. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after previous radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to add 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT) or 24 months of ADT (long-course ADT) to radiotherapy, using subcutaneous gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (monthly in the short-course ADT group and 3-monthly in the long-course ADT group), daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. The comparison had more than 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 75% to 81% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72). Standard time-to-event analyses were used. Analyses followed intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00541047 . Findings Between Jan 30, 2008, and July 7, 2015, 1523 patients (median age 65 years, IQR 60–69) were randomly assigned to receive short-course ADT (n=761) or long-course ADT (n=762) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 138 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 8·9 years (7·0–10·0), 313 metastasis-free survival events were reported overall (174 in the short-course ADT group and 139 in the long-course ADT group; HR 0·773 [95% CI 0·612–0·975]; p=0·029). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 71·9% (95% CI 67·6–75·7) in the short-course ADT group and 78·1% (74·2–81·5) in the long-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 105 (14%) of 753 participants in the short-course ADT group and 142 (19%) of 757 participants in the long-course ADT group (p=0·025), with no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation Compared with adding 6 months of ADT, adding 24 months of ADT improved metastasis-free survival in people receiving postoperative radiotherapy. For individuals who can accept the additional duration of adverse effects, long-course ADT should be offered with postoperative radiotherapy. Funding Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society

Adding 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy to postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of short-course versus no androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised controlled trial

Background Previous evidence indicates that adjuvant, short-course androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves metastasis-free survival when given with primary radiotherapy for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the value of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy is unclear. Methods RADICALS-HD was an international randomised controlled trial to test the efficacy of ADT used in combination with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to radiotherapy alone (no ADT) or radiotherapy with 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT), using monthly subcutaneous gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue injections, daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as distant metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. Standard survival analysis methods were used, accounting for randomisation stratification factors. The trial had 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 80% to 86% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67). Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. Findings Between Nov 22, 2007, and June 29, 2015, 1480 patients (median age 66 years [IQR 61–69]) were randomly assigned to receive no ADT (n=737) or short-course ADT (n=743) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 121 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 7·1–10·1), metastasis-free survival events were reported for 268 participants (142 in the no ADT group and 126 in the short-course ADT group; HR 0·886 [95% CI 0·688–1·140], p=0·35). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 79·2% (95% CI 75·4–82·5) in the no ADT group and 80·4% (76·6–83·6) in the short-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 121 (17%) of 737 participants in the no ADT group and 100 (14%) of 743 in the short-course ADT group (p=0·15), with no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation Metastatic disease is uncommon following postoperative bed radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adding 6 months of ADT to this radiotherapy did not improve metastasis-free survival compared with no ADT. These findings do not support the use of short-course ADT with postoperative radiotherapy in this patient population