The challenges of communicating research evidence in practice: perspectives from UK health visitors and practice nurses

<p>Background: Health practitioners play a pivotal role in providing patients with up-to-date evidence and health information. Evidence-based practice and patient-centred care are transforming the delivery of healthcare in the UK. Health practitioners are increasingly balancing the need to provide evidence-based information against that of facilitating patient choice, which may not always concur with the evidence base. There is limited research exploring how health practitioners working in the UK, and particularly those more autonomous practitioners such as health visitors and practice nurses working in community practice settings, negotiate this challenge. This research provides a descriptive account of how health visitors and practice nurses negotiate the challenges of communicating health information and research evidence in practice.</p> <p>Methods: A total of eighteen in-depth telephone interviews were conducted in the UK between September 2008 and May 2009. The participants comprised nine health visitors and nine practice nurses, recruited via adverts on a nursing website, posters at a practitioner conference and through recommendation. Thematic analysis, with a focus on constant comparative method, was used to analyse the data.</p> <p>Results: The data were grouped into three main themes: communicating evidence to the critically-minded patient; confidence in communicating evidence; and maintaining the integrity of the patient-practitioner relationship. These findings highlight some of the daily challenges that health visitors and practice nurses face with regard to the complex and dynamic nature of evidence and the changing attitudes and expectations of patients. The findings also highlight the tensions that exist between differing philosophies of evidence-based practice and patient-centred care, which can make communicating about evidence a daunting task.</p> <p>Conclusions: If health practitioners are to be effective at communicating research evidence, we suggest that more research and resources need to be focused on contextual factors, such as how research evidence is negotiated, appraised and communicated within the dynamic patient-practitioner relationship.</p&gt

ReseArch with Patient and Public invOlvement: a RealisT evaluation - the RAPPORT study

Background Patient and public involvement (PPI) is a prerequisite for many funding bodies and NHS research ethics approval. PPI in research is defined as research carried out with or by the public rather than to, about or for them. While the benefits of PPI have been widely discussed, there is a lack of evidence on the impact and outcomes of PPI in research. Objectives To determine the types of PPI in funded research, describe key processes, analyse the contextual and temporal dynamics of PPI and explore the experience of PPI in research for all those involved. Mechanisms contributing to the routine incorporation of PPI in the research process were assessed, the impact of PPI on research processes and outcomes evaluated, and barriers and enablers to effective PPI identified. Design A three-staged realist evaluation drawing on Normalisation Process Theory to understand how far PPI was embedded within health-care research in six areas: diabetes mellitus, arthritis, cystic fibrosis, dementia, public health and learning disabilities. The first two stages comprised a scoping exercise and online survey to chief investigators to assess current PPI activity. The third stage consisted of case studies tracked over 18 months through interviews and document analysis. The research was conducted in four regions of England. Participants Non-commercial studies currently running or completed within the previous 2 years eligible for adoption on the UK Clinical Research Network portfolio. A total of 129 case study participants included researchers and PPI representatives from 22 research studies, and representatives from funding bodies and PPI networks

Debating the Desirability of New Biomedical Technologies: Lessons from the Introduction of Breast Cancer Screening in the Netherlands

Health technology assessment (HTA) was developed in the 1970s and 1980s to facilitate decision making on the desirability of new biomedical technologies. Since then, many of the standard tools and methods of HTA have been criticized for their implicit normativity. At the same time research into the character of technology in practice has motivated philosophers, sociologists and anthropologists to criticize the traditional view of technology as a neutral instrument designed to perform a specific function. Such research suggests that the tools and methods of more traditional forms of HTA are often inspired by an ‘instrumentalist’ conception of technology that does not fit the way technology actually works. This paper explores this hypothesis for a specific case: the assessments and deliberations leading to the introduction of breast cancer screening in the Netherlands. After reconstructing this history of HTA ‘in the making’ the stepwise model of HTA that emerged during the process is discussed. This model was rooted indeed in an instrumentalist conception of technology. However, a more detailed reconstruction of several episodes from this history reveals how the actors already experienced the inadequacy of some of the instrumentalist presuppositions. The historical case thus shows how an instrumentalist conception of technology may result in implicit normative effects. The paper concludes that an instrumentalist view of technology is not a good starting point for HTA and briefly suggests how the fit between HTA methods and the actual character of technology in practice might be improved

Primary care nurses' experiences of how the mass media influence frontline healthcare in the UK

Background: Mass media plays an important role in communicating about health research and services to patients, and in shaping public perceptions and decisions about health. Healthcare professionals also play an important role in providing patients with credible, evidence-based and up-to-date information on a wide range of health issues. This study aims to explore primary care nurses' experiences of how mass media influences frontline healthcare.<p></p> Methods: In-depth telephone interviews were carried out with 18 primary care nurses (nine health visitors and nine practice nurses) working in the United Kingdom (UK). Interviews were recorded and transcribed. The data was analysed using thematic analysis, with a focus on constant comparative analysis.<p></p> Results: Three themes emerged from the data. First, participants reported that their patients were frequently influenced by controversial health stories reported in the media, which affected their perceptions of, and decisions about, care. This, in turn, impinged upon participants' workloads as they had to spend additional time discussing information and reassuring patients. Second, participants also recalled times in their own careers when media reports had contributed to a decline in their confidence in current healthcare practices and treatments. Third, the participants in this study suggested a real need for additional resources to support and expand their own media literacy skills, which could be shared with patients.<p></p> Conclusion: In an ever expanding media landscape with greater reporting on health, nurses working in the primary care setting face increasing pressure to effectively manage media stories that dispute current health policies and practices. These primary care nurses were keen to expand their media literacy skills to develop critical autonomy in relation to all media, and to facilitate more meaningful conversations with their patients about their health concerns and choices.<p></p&gt

Radiation and breast cancer: a review of current evidence

This paper summarizes current knowledge on ionizing radiation-associated breast cancer in the context of established breast cancer risk factors, the radiation dose–response relationship, and modifiers of dose response, taking into account epidemiological studies and animal experiments. Available epidemiological data support a linear dose–response relationship down to doses as low as about 100 mSv. However, the magnitude of risk per unit dose depends strongly on when radiation exposure occurs: exposure before the age of 20 years carries the greatest risk. Other characteristics that may influence the magnitude of dose-specific risk include attained age (that is, age at observation for risk), age at first full-term birth, parity, and possibly a history of benign breast disease, exposure to radiation while pregnant, and genetic factors

Haematopoietic SCT in severe autoimmune diseases: updated guidelines of the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation

In 1997, the first consensus guidelines for haematopoietic SCT (HSCT) in autoimmune diseases (ADs) were published, while an international coordinated clinical programme was launched. These guidelines provided broad principles for the field over the following decade and were accompanied by comprehensive data collection in the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) AD Registry. Subsequently, retrospective analyses and prospective phase I/II studies generated evidence to support the feasibility, safety and efficacy of HSCT in several types of severe, treatment-resistant ADs, which became the basis for larger-scale phase II and III studies. In parallel, there has also been an era of immense progress in biological therapy in ADs. The aim of this document is to provide revised and updated guidelines for both the current application and future development of HSCT in ADs in relation to the benefits, risks and health economic considerations of other modern treatments. Patient safety considerations are central to guidance on patient selection and HSCT procedural aspects within appropriately experienced and Joint Accreditation Committee of International Society for Cellular Therapy and EBMT accredited centres. A need for prospective interventional and non-interventional studies, where feasible, along with systematic data reporting, in accordance with EBMT policies and procedures, is emphasized

The impact of cooperatives' risk aversion and equity capital constraints on their inter-firm consolidation and collaboration strategies-with an empirical study of the European dairy industry

This article concludes that cooperative firms' choice of interfirm consolidation and collaboration strategies can be explained by two attributes, inherent in the cooperative business form, namely, risk aversion and equity capital constraints. Empirical data originate from the 15 largest EU dairy firms during a 5-year period (1998-2002). In total 198 activities are identified. They are classified into six categories: (a) mergers, (b) acquisitions, (c) strategic share holdings, (d) joint ventures, (e) licensing, and (f) general collaboration agreements. It is shown that cooperative firms prefer mergers, collaboration agreements, joint ventures, and licensing. All of these are relatively low in terms of both performance risks and relational risks, and they demand limited amounts of equity capital. Investor-owned firms focus on take-over strategies-acquisitions and share holdings. Other indicators of risk aversion are that cooperatives tend to collaborate with other cooperatives and that they prefer partners in their own home market. [EconLit: Q130; P130; L200.] © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Agribusiness 23: 453-472, 2007.