362 research outputs found

    A Symbol of Unity: Freeing the Aboriginal Flag

    Get PDF

    The Operative World: Meaning and Understanding in Merleau-Ponty

    Get PDF
    This thesis seeks an elucidation of Merleau-Ponty’s conception of 'operative' intentionality (l’intentionnalité opérante). This concept is central to Merleau-Ponty’s discussions of meaning and understanding throughout his career. I argue that Merleau-Ponty’s early work, in which he articulates the nature and place of operative intentionality in agency and perception, makes available a general thesis concerning meaning and understanding. Merleau-Ponty’s central claim here is that meaning should not be conceived of as the outcome of acts of interpretation or judgement. I argue that this general thesis is unsatisfactorily represented in some of the most prominent secondary literature on Merleau-Ponty’s work. Nonetheless, there is a tension at the heart of Phenomenology of Perception that compromises the clarity and coherence of Merleau-Ponty’s conception of operative intentionality. The difficulty lies in the way Merleau-Ponty conceives the relationship between perception and language in the early work. It is this problematic that provides the key to appreciating the developments that Merleau-Ponty instigates through his attempts to formulate a phenomenology of language and expression in the 1950s. Tracing the developments of the middle period work on language in this way allows us to see how Merleau-Ponty’s introduction of a new philosophical lexicon of ‘the flesh’ (la chair) in his final writings is motivated by the attempt to accommodate the general thesis concerning meaning and understanding that originally emerged with Phenomenology of Perception’s conception of operative intentionality

    Patients' attitudes towards cost feedback to doctors to prevent unnecessary testing: a qualitative focus group study

    Get PDF
    ObjectivesThere is a need to improve efficiency in healthcare delivery without compromising quality of care. One approach is the development and evaluation of behavioural strategies to reduce unnecessary use of common tests. However, there is an absence of evidence on patient attitudes to the use of such approaches in the delivery of care. Our objective was to explore patient acceptability of a nudge-type intervention that aimed to modify blood test requests by hospital doctors.Study designSingle-centre qualitative study.MethodsThe financial costs of common blood tests were presented to hospital doctors on results reports for 1 year at a hospital. Focus group discussions were conducted with recent inpatients at the hospital using a semi-structured question schedule. Discussions were transcribed and analysed using qualitative content analysis to identify and prioritise common themes explaining attitudes to the intervention approach.ResultsThree focus groups involving 17 participants were conducted. Patients were generally apprehensive about the provision of blood test cost feedback to doctors. Attitudes were organised around themes representing beliefs about blood tests, the impact on doctors and their autonomy, and beliefs about unnecessary testing. Patients thought that blood tests were important, powerful and inexpensive, and cost information could place doctors under additional pressure.ConclusionThe findings identify predominantly positive beliefs about testing and negative attitudes to the use of financial costs in the decision-making of hospital doctors. Public discussion and education about the possible overuse of common tests may allow more resources to be allocated to evidence-based healthcare, by reducing the perception that such strategies to improve healthcare efficiency negatively impact on quality of care

    Patients' attitudes towards cost feedback to doctors to prevent unnecessary testing: a qualitative focus group study

    Get PDF
    © 2020 The Authors Objectives: There is a need to improve efficiency in healthcare delivery without compromising quality of care. One approach is the development and evaluation of behavioural strategies to reduce unnecessary use of common tests. However, there is an absence of evidence on patient attitudes to the use of such approaches in the delivery of care. Our objective was to explore patient acceptability of a nudge-type intervention that aimed to modify blood test requests by hospital doctors. Study design: Single-centre qualitative study. Methods: The financial costs of common blood tests were presented to hospital doctors on results reports for 1 year at a hospital. Focus group discussions were conducted with recent inpatients at the hospital using a semi-structured question schedule. Discussions were transcribed and analysed using qualitative content analysis to identify and prioritise common themes explaining attitudes to the intervention approach. Results: Three focus groups involving 17 participants were conducted. Patients were generally apprehensive about the provision of blood test cost feedback to doctors. Attitudes were organised around themes representing beliefs about blood tests, the impact on doctors and their autonomy, and beliefs about unnecessary testing. Patients thought that blood tests were important, powerful and inexpensive, and cost information could place doctors under additional pressure. Conclusion: The findings identify predominantly positive beliefs about testing and negative attitudes to the use of financial costs in the decision-making of hospital doctors. Public discussion and education about the possible overuse of common tests may allow more resources to be allocated to evidence-based healthcare, by reducing the perception that such strategies to improve healthcare efficiency negatively impact on quality of care

    Hospital doctors’ attitudes to brief educational messages that aim to modify diagnostic test requests: a qualitative study

    Get PDF
    Background: Avoidable use of diagnostic tests can both harm patients and increase the cost of healthcare. Nudge-type educational interventions have potential to modify clinician behaviour while respecting clinical autonomy and responsibility, but there is little evidence how this approach may be best used in a healthcare setting. This study aims to explore attitudes of hospital doctors to two nudge-type messages: one concerning potential future cancer risk after receiving a CT scan, another about the financial costs of blood tests. Methods: We added two brief educational messages to diagnostic test results in a UK hospital for one year. One message on the associated long-term potential cancer risk from ionising radiation imaging to CT scan reports, and a second on the financial costs incurred to common blood test results. We conducted a qualitative study involving telephone interviews with doctors working at the hospital to identify themes explaining their response to the intervention. Results: Twenty eight doctors were interviewed. Themes showed doctors found the intervention to be highly acceptable, as the group had a high awareness of the need to prevent harm and optimise use of finite resources, and most found the nudge-type approach to be inoffensive and harmless. However, the messages were not seen as personally relevant because doctors felt they were already relatively conservative in their use of tests. Cancer risk was important in decision-making but was not considered to represent new knowledge to doctors. Conversely, financial costs were considered to be novel information that was unimportant in decision-making. Defensive medicine was commonly cited as a barrier to individual behaviour change. The educational cancer risk message on CT scan reports increased doctors’ confidence to challenge decisions and explain risks to patients and there were some modifications in clinical practice prompted by the financial cost message. Conclusion: The nudge-type approach to target avoidable use of tests was acceptable to hospital doctors but there were barriers to behaviour change. There was evidence doctors perceived this cheap and light-touch method can contribute to culture change and form a foundation for more comprehensive educational efforts to modify behaviour in a healthcare environment

    Implementation and evaluation of the SPRINT protocol for tight glycaemic control in critically ill patients: a clinical practice change

    Get PDF
    SPRINT was implemented as a clinical practice change in a general intensive care unit (ICU). The objective of this study was to measure the effect of the SPRINT protocol on glycaemic control and mortality compared to previous ICU control methods. Glycaemic control and mortality outcomes for 371 SPRINT patients with median acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) score 18 [IQR: 15-24] are compared to a 413 patient retrospective cohort with median APACHE II score of 18 [IQR: 15-23]

    Preventing kidney transplant failure by screening for antibodies against human leucocyte antigens followed by optimised immunosuppression: OuTSMART RCT

    Get PDF
    Design: Investigator-led, prospective, open-labelled marker-based strategy (hybrid) randomised trial. Background: Allografts in 3% of kidney transplant patients fail annually. Development of antibodies against human leucocyte antigens is a validated predictive biomarker of allograft failure. Under immunosuppression is recognised to contribute, but whether increasing immunosuppression can prevent allograft failure in human leucocyte antigen Ab+ patients is unclear. Participants: Renal transplant recipients > 1 year post-transplantation attending 13 United Kingdom transplant clinics, without specific exclusion criteria. Interventions: Regular screening for human leucocyte antigen antibodies followed, in positive patients by interview and tailored optimisation of immunosuppression to tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil and prednisolone. Objective: To determine if optimisation of immunosuppression in human leucocyte antigen Ab+ patients can cost-effectively prevent kidney allograft failure. Outcome: Time to graft failure after 43 months follow-up in patients receiving the intervention, compared to controls, managed by standard of care. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years were used in the cost-effectiveness analysis. Randomisation and blinding: Random allocation (1 : 1) to unblinded biomarker-led care or double-blinded standard of care stratified by human leucocyte antigen antibodies status (positive/negative) and in positives, presence of donor-specific antibodies (human leucocyte antigen antibodies against donor human leucocyte antigen) or not (human leucocyte antigen antibodies against non-donor human leucocyte antigen), baseline immunosuppression and transplant centre. Biomaker-led care human leucocyte antigen Ab+ patients received intervention. Human leucocyte antigen Ab-negative patients were screened every 8 months. Recruitment Began September 2013 and for 37 months. The primary endpoint, scheduled for June 2020, was moved to March 2020 because of COVID-19. Numbers randomised: From 5519 screened, 2037 were randomised (1028 biomaker-led care, 1009 to standard of care) including 198 with human leucocyte antigen antibodies against donor human leucocyte antigen (106 biomaker-led care, 92 standard of care) and 818 with human leucocyte antigens antibodies against non-donor human leucocyte antigen (427 biomaker-led care, 391 standard of care). Numbers analysed: Two patients were randomised in error so 2035 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Outcome: The trial had 80% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.49 in biomarker-led care DSA+ group, > 90% power to detect hazard ratio of 0.35 in biomarker-led care non-DSA+ group (with 5% type 1 error). Actual hazard ratios for graft failure in these biomarker-led care groups were 1.54 (95% CI: 0.72 to 3.30) and 0.97 (0.54 to 1.74), respectively. There was 90% power to demonstrate non-inferiority of overall biomarker-led care group with assumed hazard ratio of 1.4: This was not demonstrated as the upper confidence limit for graft failure exceeded 1.4: (1.02, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.44). The hazard ratio for biopsy-proven rejection in the overall biomarker-led care group was 0.5 [95% CI: 0.27 to 0.94: p = 0.03]. The screening approach was not cost-effective in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year. Harms: No significant differences in other secondary endpoints or adverse events. Limitations: Tailored interventions meant optimisation was not possible in some patients. We did not study pathology on protocol transplant biopsies in DSA+ patients. Conclusions: No evidence that optimised immunosuppression in human leucocyte antigen Ab+ patients delays renal transplant failure. Informing patients of their human leucocyte antigen antibodies status appears to reduce graft rejection. Future work: We need a better understanding of the pathophysiology of transplant failure to allow rational development of effective therapies. Trial registration: This trial is registered as EudraCT (2012-004308-36) and ISRCTN (46157828). Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme (11/100/34) and will be published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 10, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information
    corecore