Breaking Borders: How Barriers to Global Mobility Hinder International Partnerships in Academic Medicine

This article describes the authors' personal experiences of collaborating across international borders in academic research. International collaboration in academic medicine is one of the most important ways by which research and innovation develop globally. However, the intersections among colonialism, academic medicine, and global health research have created a neocolonial narrative that perpetuates inequalities in global health partnerships. The authors critically examine the visa process as an example of a racist practice to show how the challenges of blocked mobility increase inequality and thwart research endeavors. Visas are used to limit mobility across certain borders, and this limitation hinders international collaborations in academic medicine. The authors discuss the concept of social closure and how limits to global mobility for scholars from low- and middle-income countries perpetuate a cycle of dependence on scholars who have virtually barrier-free global mobility-these scholars being mainly from high-income countries. Given the current sociopolitical milieu of increasing border controls and fears of illegal immigration, the authors' experiences expose what is at stake for academic medicine when the political sphere, focused on tightening border security, and the medical realm, striving to build international research collaborations, intersect. Creating more equitable global partnerships in research requires a shift from the current paradigm that dominates most international partnerships and causes injury to African scholars

The Job Accommodation Scale (JAS): Psychometric Evaluation of a New Measure of Employer Support for Temporary Job Modifications

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10926-014-9508-7An employer offer of temporary job modification is a key strategy for facilitating return-to-work for musculoskeletal conditions, but there are no validated scales to assess the level of support for temporary job modifications across a range of job types and organizations. Objective To pilot test a new 21-item self-report measure [the Job Accommodation Scale (JAS)] to assess its applicability, internal consistency, factor structure, and relation to physical job demands. Methods Supervisors (N = 804, 72.8 % male, mean age = 46) were recruited from 19 employment settings in the USA and Canada and completed a 30-min online survey regarding job modification practices. As part of the survey, supervisors nominated and described a job position they supervised and completed the JAS for a hypothetical worker (in that position) with an episode of low back pain. Job characteristics were derived from the occupational informational network job classification database. Results The full response range (1–4) was utilized on all 21 items, with no ceiling or floor effects. Avoiding awkward postures was the most feasible accommodation and moving the employee to a different site or location was the least feasible. An exploratory factor analysis suggested five underlying factors (Modify physical workload; Modify work environment; Modify work schedule; Find alternate work; and Arrange for assistance), and there was an acceptable goodness-of-fit for the five parceled sub-factor scores as a single latent construct in a measurement model (structural equation model). Job accommodations were less feasible for more physical jobs and for heavier industries. Conclusions The pilot administration of the JAS with respect to a hypothetical worker with low back pain showed initial support for its applicability, reliability, and validity when administered to supervisors. Future studies should assess its validity for use in actual disability cases, for a range of health conditions, and to assess different stakeholder opinions about the feasibility of job accommodation strategies.This research was supported by CIHR Grant MOP-102571, Supervisors’ perspectives on accommodating back injured workers: a mixed-methods study (PI: V Kristman) and by intramural research funding (Project LMRIS 09-01) of the Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety (PI: W Shaw).http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10926-014-9508-

Returning to work after stroke: perspectives of employer stakeholders, a qualitative study.

Purpose: More than 40 % of working age adults with stroke fail to return to work. The work context is a key factor in return to work, but little is known about the experiences of employers in supporting employees with stroke. The aim of this study was to explore return to work after stroke from the employer perspective, to identify key features associated with success and to seek participants’ views regarding the role of healthcare in return to work. Methods: Data was gathered through 18 semi-structured interviews with employer stakeholders and included small business owners, line managers, human resources and occupational health staff. Data was analysed thematically. Results: The main themes identified were: the impact of stroke on the employer, characteristics of the employee, communication, knowledge and information, experience of other stakeholders, integrating healthcare in return to work. Conclusion: Employers face complex emotional and practical issues when helping an employee return to work after stroke, for which many lack knowledge and experience. The range and quality of support networks that they access is variable and advice and support from clinicians is welcomed. Further research is necessary to investigate how such support could be funded and integrated within existing service provision

Following the funding trail: Financing, nurses and teamwork in Australian general practice

Contains fulltext : 97927.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Across the globe the emphasis on roles and responsibilities of primary care teams is under scrutiny. This paper begins with a review of general practice financing in Australia, and how nurses are currently funded. We then examine the influence on funding structures on the role of the nurse. We set out three dilemmas for policy-makers in this area: lack of an evidence base for incentives, possible untoward impacts on interdisciplinary functioning, and the substitution/enhancement debate. METHODS: This three year, multimethod study undertook rapid appraisal of 25 general practices and year-long studies in seven practices where a change was introduced to the role of the nurse. Data collected included interviews with nurses (n = 36), doctors (n = 24), and managers (n = 22), structured observation of the practice nurse (51 hours of observation), and detailed case studies of the change process in the seven year-long studies. RESULTS: Despite specific fee-for-service funding being available, only 6% of nurse activities generated such a fee. Yet the influence of the funding was to focus nurse activity on areas that they perceived were peripheral to their roles within the practice. CONCLUSIONS: Interprofessional relationships and organisational climate in general practices are highly influential in terms of nursing role and the ability of practices to respond to and utilise funding mechanisms. These factors need to be considered, and the development of optimal teamwork supported in the design and implementation of further initiatives that financially support nursing in general practice

Mapping first‐line health care providers' roles, practices, and impacts on care for workers with compensable musculoskeletal disorders in four jurisdictions: A critical interpretive synthesis

Background First-line health care providers are the primary access point for workers' benefits. However, little is known about their impact on quality of care and return-to-work. Our objective was to critically compare literature on the practices of first-line providers for workers with musculoskeletal injuries in Ontario and Quebec (Canada), Washington State (United States), and Victoria (Australia). Methods A critical interpretive synthesis of peer-reviewed scientific literature was conducted. The search across six databases yielded 59 relevant publications that were critically appraised. Results Three themes emerged: 1) how policies about first-line health care providers' modulate worker access to care, 2) how these providers' roles, practices, and training shape disability management, and 3) how the quality of care and disability outcomes are evaluated. Conclusions First-line health care providers have a critical influence on workers' trajectories of care. A focus on their role while taking the complexity of the context into account will help orient future policy changes