Multidisciplinary teams, and parents, negotiating common ground in shared-care of children with long-term conditions: A mixed methods study

Background: Limited negotiation around care decisions is believed to undermine collaborative working between parents of children with long-term conditions and professionals, but there is little evidence of how they actually negotiate their respective roles. Using chronic kidney disease as an exemplar this paper reports on a multi-method study of social interaction between multidisciplinary teams and parents as they shared clinical care. Methods. Phases 1 and 2: a telephone survey mapping multidisciplinary teams' parent-educative activities, and qualitative interviews with 112 professionals (Clinical-psychologists, Dietitians, Doctors, Nurses, Play-specialists, Pharmacists, Therapists and Social-workers) exploring their accounts of parent-teaching in the 12 British children's kidney units. Phase 3: six ethnographic case studies in two units involving observations of professional/parent interactions during shared-care, and individual interviews. We used an analytical framework based on concepts drawn from Communities of Practice and Activity Theory. Results: Professionals spoke of the challenge of explaining to each other how they are aware of parents' understanding of clinical knowledge, and described three patterns of parent-educative activity that were common across MDTs: Engaging parents in shared practice; Knowledge exchange and role negotiation, and Promoting common ground. Over time, professionals had developed a shared repertoire of tools to support their negotiations with parents that helped them accomplish common ground during the practice of shared-care. We observed mutual engagement between professionals and parents where a common understanding of the joint enterprise of clinical caring was negotiated. Conclusions: For professionals, making implicit knowledge explicit is important as it can provide them with a language through which to articulate more clearly to each other what is the basis of their intuition-based hunches about parents' support needs, and may help them to negotiate with parents and accelerate parents' learning about shared caring. Our methodology and results are potentially transferrable to shared management of other conditions. © 2013 Swallow et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Mismatched related hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in primary immunodeficiency

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is the definitive therapy for a variety of primary immunodeficiency syndromes (PIDs). However, no more than 30% of the patients will have a human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-identical sibling. We retrospectively analyzed our results of ten patients with PID; severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) (n = 7), hyper IgM (HIgM) (n = 1) and combined immunodeficiency (CID) (n = 2), who lacked a fully matched donor and underwent mismatched related HSCT during the period from 2008 to 2010. The median age at the time of transplantation ranged between 3 and 84 months (median 6.5 months). Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) were used in all HSCTs. The mean value of the peripheral CD34+ cells infused was 9.19 × 10 6 /kg recipient weight. Patients received different conditioning protocols. All patients received anti graft versus host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis and all were engrafted. Mixed chimerism (5-55%) was noticed. GVHD was observed in 50% of the patients. Post-transplant follow-up ranged from 3 weeks to 36 months (median 15 months). Five patients are still alive while one patient developed engraftment syndrome followed by graft slippage for which a second transplant with CD34+ stem cells 5.8 × 10 6 /kg recipient′s weight was infused. The others died from sepsis and transplant-related complications. Immune reconstitution was noticed in four patients. In conclusion, HLA-haploidentical stem cell transplantation may be feasible, with appropriate GVHD prophylaxis, for patients with PID who lack a fully matched donor