Interesting times: a short introduction from the new editorial team of Gender and Education

Editoria

Exploring accounts of joint working between Speech and Language Therapists and Stroke Association Communication Support Coordinators

Exploring accounts of joint working between Speech and Language Therapists and Stroke Association Communication Support Coordinators Introduction Both Speech and Language Therapists (SLTs) and Stroke Association Communication Support Coordinators (CSCs) are employed across the UK to provide services for people with communication difficulties following Stroke. The two roles are usually employed by different sectors and are subject to very different levels of qualification and professional regulation. Despite recommendations that the two roles work together, there is little existing literature examining current practices of joint working between SLTs and CSCs. Method Data were collected through a series of in depth individual interviews with five CSCs and seven SLTs working within the East of England. Data were analysed inductively using Thematic Analysis (Braun & Clark, 2006). Results Six themes were developed which highlighted the perceived benefits and challenges in this example of cross sector working. Both SLTs and CSCs identified strong incentives for joint working. The themes developed suggested a number of processes are engaged in negotiating the joint working relationship. These include ‘Developing and earning trust and respect’; ‘Pushing to establish place’; and ‘Struggling against external pressures and threats’. In addition, two further themes were developed to explore the process of finding agreement in the division of workload: ‘Sharing Out’ of aphasia; and ‘Local level Negotiation and Matching of expectations’. Conclusions: The findings suggest a number of unique features which characterise joint working relationships between SLTs and CSCs. Clinical applications based on the findings are discussed, along with suggested areas for further research

Relationships between training load, sleep duration, and daily wellbeing and recovery measures in youth athletes

Purpose: To assess the relationships between training load, sleep duration and three daily wellbeing, recovery and fatigue measures in youth athletes. Methods: Fifty-two youth athletes completed three maximal countermovement jumps (CMJ), a daily wellbeing questionnaire (DWB), the Perceived Recovery Status scale (PRS), and provided details on their previous day's training loads (training) and self-reported sleep duration (sleep) on four weekdays over a seven week period. Partial correlations, linear mixed models and magnitude-based inferences were used to assess the relationships between the predictor variables (training; sleep) and the dependent variables (CMJ; DWB; PRS). Results: There was no relationship between CMJ and training (r=-0.09; ±0.06) or sleep (r=0.01; ±0.06). The DWB was correlated with sleep (r=0.28; ±0.05, small), but not training (r=-0.05; ±0.06). The PRS was correlated with training (r=-0.23; ±0.05, small), but not sleep (r=0.12; ±0.06). The DWB was sensitive to low sleep(d=-0.33; ±0.11) relative to moderate, PRS was sensitive to high (d=-0.36; ±0.11) and low (d=0.29; ±0.17) training relative to moderate. Conclusions: The PRS is a simple tool to monitor the training response, but DWB may provide a greater understanding of the athlete's overall wellbeing. The CMJ was not associated with the training or sleep response in this population

The within-participant Correlation between s-RPE and Heart Rate in Youth Sport

The monitoring of training load is important to ensure athletes are adapting optimally to a training stimulus. Before quanti ca- tion of training load can take place, coaches must be con dent that the tools available are accurate. We aimed to quantify the within-participant correlation between the session rating of perceived exertion (s-RPE) and summated heart rate zone (sHRz) methods of monitoring internal training load. Training load (s-RPE and heart rate) data were collected for rugby, soc- cer and eld hockey eld-based training sessions over a 14- week in-season period. A total of 397 sessions were monitored (rugby n = 170, soccer n = 114 and eld hockey n = 113). With- in-subject correlations between s-RPE and sHRz were quanti- ed for each sport using a general linear model. Large correla- tions between s-RPE and the sHRz method were found for rugby (r = 0.68; 95 % CI 0.59–0.75) and eld hockey (r = 0.60; 95 % CI 0.47–0.71) with a very large correlation found for soccer (r = 0.72; 95 % CI 0.62–0.80). No signi cant di erences were found between the correlations for each sport. The very large and large correlations found between s-RPE and the sHRz meth- ods support the use of s-RPE in quantifying internal training load in youth sport

“It’s Important, but it’s Not Everything”: Practitioners’ Use, Analysis and Perceptions of Fitness Testing in Academy Rugby League

A plethora of research exists examining the physical qualities of rugby league players. However, no research has investigated practitioners’ insights into the use, analysis and perceptions of such fitness testing data that is vital for applying research into practice. Therefore, this study aimed to examine practitioners’ (coaches and strength & conditioning [S&C] coaches) perceptions and challenges of using fitness testing and the development of physical qualities. Twenty-four rugby league practitioners were purposefully sampled and completed a semi-structured interview. Interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed identifying five themes (it’s important, but it’s not everything; monitoring; evaluation and decision making; motivation; and other external challenges). The theme of “it’s important, but it’s not everything” emerged as a fundamental issue with regard fitness testing and the use of such data and that physical data alone does not inform coaches decisions. There appears conflicts between coaches and S&C coaches’ perceptions and use of fitness data, identifying complexities of supporting players in multidisciplinary teams. Collectively, the findings highlight the multifaceted nature of academy rugby league and suggest that practitioners should utilise fitness testing to inform player evaluations, positively influence training and assist with decision making. Moreover, practitioners should understand the combination of factors that influence fitness testing and work collaboratively to enhance talent development strategies

Simultaneous administration of adjuvant donor bone marrow in pancreas transplant recipients

Objective: The effect of donor bone marrow was evaluated for its potentially favorable effect in the authors' simultaneous pancreas/kidney transplant program. Methods: From July 1994 to January 1999, 177 pancreas transplants were performed, 151 of which were simultaneous pancreas/kidney transplants. All patients received tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and steroids for immunosuppression (azathioprine was used in the first year of the program). Fifty-three simultaneous pancreas/kidney transplant recipients received perioperative unmodified donor bone marrow, 3 to 6 x 108 cells/kg. Results: Overall actuarial survival rates at 1 and 3 years were 98% and 95% (patient), 95% and 87% (kidney), and 86% and 80% (pancreas), respectively. In the adjuvant bone marrow group, 1- and 3-year survival rates were 96% and 91% (patient), 95% and 87% (kidney), and 83% and 83% (pancreas), respectively. For 98 recipients who did not receive bone marrow, survival rates at 1 and 3 years were 100% and 98% (patient), 96% and 86% (kidney), and 87% and 79% (pancreas), respectively. No pancreas allografts were lost after 3 months in bone marrow recipients, and seven in the non-bone marrow recipients were lost to rejection at 0.7, 6.7, 8.8, 14.6, 24.1, 24.3, and 25.5 months. Twenty-two percent of bone marrow patients were steroid-free at 1 year, 45% at 2 years, and 67% at 3 years. Nineteen percent of the non-bone marrow recipients were steroid-free at 1 year, 38% at 2 years, and 45% (p = 0.02) at 3 years. The mean acute cellular rejection rate was 0.94 ± 1.1 in the bone marrow group and 1.57 ± 1.3 (p = 0.003) in the non-bone marrow group (includes borderline rejection and multiple rejections). The level of donor cell chimerism in the peripheral blood of bone marrow patients was at least two logs higher than in controls. Conclusion: In this series, which represents the largest experience with adjuvant bone marrow infusion in pancreas recipients, there was a higher steroid withdrawal rate (p = 0.02), fewer rejection episodes, and no pancreas graft loss after 3 months in bone marrow recipients compared with contemporaneous controls. All pancreas allografts lost to chronic rejection (n = 6) were in the non-bone marrow group. Donor bone marrow administered around the time of surgery may have a protective effect in pancreas transplantation