Facilitating and motivating factors for reporting reprehensible conduct in care: A study among nurse practitioners and physician assistants in the Netherlands

Rationale, aims and objectives The aims of this study are as follows: (a) to establish whether a relationship exists between the importance that healthcare professionals attach to ethics in care and their likelihood to report reprehensible conduct committed by colleagues, and (b) to assess whether this relationship is moderated by behavioural control targeted at preventing harm. Method In this cross-sectional study, which was based on a convenience sample (n = 155) of nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) in the Netherlands, we measured ethics advocacy (EA) as a motivating factor (reflecting the importance that healthcare professionals attach to ethics and care) and "behavioral control targeted at preventing harm" (BCPH) as a facilitating factor. "Reporting reprehensible conduct" (RRC) was measured as a context-specific indicator of whistleblowing intentions, consisting of two vignettes describing morally questionable behaviour committed by colleagues. Results The propensity to report reprehensible conduct was a function of the interaction between EA and BCPH. The only group for which EA predicted RRC consisted of individuals with above-average levels of perceived BCPH. Conclusion The results suggest that the importance that healthcare professionals attach to ethical aspects in care is not sufficient to ensure that they will report reprehensible conduct. Such importance does not induce reporting behaviour unless the professionals also perceive themselves as having a high level of BCPH. We suggest that these insights could be helpful in training healthcare providers to cope with ethical dilemmas that they are likely to encounter in their work

Re-assessing the validity of the Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire (MSQ):Two new scales for moral deliberation and paternalism

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES: The current study and previous research have called the six-component model of Lützen's 30-item Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire (MSQ) into question. For this reason, we re-examined the construct validity of this instrument. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, which was based on a convenience sample of Dutch nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs), we tested the validity of MSQ items using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA, respectively). RESULTS: The EFA revealed a two-component model, which was then tested as a target model with CFA and was found to have good model fit. Some items were correlated with two uncorrelated latent constructs, which we labelled as "paternalistic" and "deliberate" attitudes towards patients. CONCLUSIONS: As in previous studies, the analyses in the current study, which was conducted among PAs and NPs, did not reveal six dimensions for the 30 items. Two new latent dimensions of moral sensitivity were psychometrically tested and confirmed. These two components relate to studies investigating ethical behaviour, and they can be used to describe the moral climate in healthcare organizations. The scales are indicators of the extent to which health professionals behave in a deliberate (sensitive) or paternalistic (insensitive) manner towards the opinions of patients within the context of medical decision-making

Improving outcomes in patients with coexisting multimorbid conditions-the development and evaluation of the combined diabetes and renal control trial (C-DIRECT): study protocol.

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is the most common cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Patients with diabetes on dialysis have worse clinical outcomes and increased psychological burden. The need to manage the combined treatment demands for both conditions is particularly challenging yet there is paucity of data of the barriers preventing optimal management to combined therapy for diabetes and kidney failure. The study aims to explore needs of patients and develop an intervention to enable people with diabetes and ESRD to better manage both their conditions

S-100B as an extra selection tool for FDG PET/CT scanning in follow-up of AJCC stage III melanoma patients

Background and Objectives This current study assessed the value of S-100B measurement to guide fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scanning for detecting recurrent disease in stage III melanoma patients. Methods This study included 100 stage III melanoma patients in follow-up after curative lymph node dissection. Follow-up visits included physical examination and S-100B monitoring. FDG PET/CT scanning was indicated by clinical symptoms and/or elevated S-100B. Results Of 100 patients, 13 (13%) had elevated S-100B without clinical symptoms, of whom 7 (54%) showed disease evidence upon FDG PET/CT scanning. Twenty-six patients (26%) had clinical symptoms with normal S-100B and FDG PET/CT revealed metastasis in 20 (77%). Three patients had clinical symptoms and elevated S-100B, and FDG PET/CT revealed metastasis in all three (100%). Overall, FDG PET/CT scanning revealed metastasis in 30 of the 42 patients (71.4%). For seven recurrences, elevated S-100B prompted early detection of asymptomatic disease; 10% of all asymptomatic patients in follow-up, 23% of all patients with recurrent disease. Conclusion S-100B cannot exclude recurrent disease during follow-up of stage III melanoma. However, adding S-100B measurement to standard clinical assessment can guide FDG PET/CT scanning for detecting recurrent melanoma

Collaborative Depression Trial (CADET): multi-centre randomised controlled trial of collaborative care for depression - study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Comprising of both organisational and patient level components, collaborative care is a potentially powerful intervention for improving depression treatment in UK primary Care. However, as previous models have been developed and evaluated in the United States, it is necessary to establish the effect of collaborative care in the UK in order to determine whether this innovative treatment model can replicate benefits for patients outside the US. This Phase III trial was preceded by a Phase II patient level RCT, following the MRC Complex Intervention Framework.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>A multi-centre controlled trial with cluster-randomised allocation of GP practices. GP practices will be randomised to usual care control or to "collaborative care" - a combination of case manager coordinated support and brief psychological treatment, enhanced specialist and GP communication. The primary outcome will be symptoms of depression as assessed by the PHQ-9.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>If collaborative care is demonstrated to be effective we will have evidence to enable the NHS to substantially improve the organisation of depressed patients in primary care, and to assist primary care providers to deliver a model of enhanced depression care which is both effective and acceptable to patients.</p> <p>Trial Registration Number</p> <p>ISRCTN32829227</p

Comparison of active treatments for impaired glucose regulation : a Salford Royal Foundation Trust and Hitachi collaboration (CATFISH): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is highly prevalent and contributes to significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Behaviour change interventions that target health and lifestyle factors associated with the onset of diabetes can delay progression to diabetes, but many approaches rely on intensive one-to-one contact by specialists. Health coaching is an approach based on motivational interviewing that can potentially deliver behaviour change interventions by non-specialists at a larger scale. This trial protocol describes a randomized controlled trial (CATFISH) that tests whether a web-enhanced telephone health coaching intervention (IGR3) is more acceptable and efficient than a telephone-only health coaching intervention (IGR2) for people with prediabetes (impaired glucose regulation). METHODS: CATFISH is a two-parallel group, single-centre individually randomized controlled trial. Eligible participants are patients aged ≥18 years with impaired glucose regulation (HbA1c concentration between 42 and 47 mmol/mol), have access to a telephone and home internet and have been referred to an existing telephone health coaching service at Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK. Participants who give written informed consent will be randomized remotely (via a clinical trials unit) to either the existing pathway (IGR2) or the new web-enhanced pathway (IGR3) for 9 months. The primary outcome measure is patient acceptability at 9 months, determined using the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures at 9 months are: cost of delivery of IGR2 and IGR3, mental health, quality of life, patient activation, self-management, weight (kg), HbA1c concentration, and body mass index. All outcome measures will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. A qualitative process evaluation will explore the experiences of participants and providers with a focus on understanding usability of interventions, mechanisms of behaviour change, and impact of context on delivery and user acceptability. Qualitative data will be analyzed using Framework. DISCUSSION: The CATFISH trial will provide a pragmatic assessment of whether a web-based information technology platform can enhance acceptability of a telephone health coaching intervention for people with prediabetes. The data will prove critical in understanding the role of web applications to improve engagement with evidence-based approaches to preventing diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN16534814 . Registered on 7 February 2016

How Much Rugby is Too Much? A Seven-Season Prospective Cohort Study of Match Exposure and Injury Risk in Professional Rugby Union Players.

INTRODUCTION: Numerous studies have documented the incidence and nature of injuries in professional rugby union, but few have identified specific risk factors for injury in this population using appropriate statistical methods. In particular, little is known about the role of previous short-term or longer-term match exposures in current injury risk in this setting. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to investigate the influence that match exposure has upon injury risk in rugby union. METHOD: We conducted a seven-season (2006/7-2012/13) prospective cohort study of time-loss injuries in 1253 English premiership professional players. Players' 12-month match exposure (number of matches a player was involved in for ≥20 min in the preceding 12 months) and 1-month match exposure (number of full-game equivalent [FGE] matches in preceding 30 days) were assessed as risk factors for injury using a nested frailty model and magnitude-based inferences. RESULTS: The 12-month match exposure was associated with injury risk in a non-linear fashion; players who had been involved in fewer than ≈15 or more than ≈35 matches over the preceding 12-month period were more susceptible to injury. Monthly match exposure was linearly associated with injury risk (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.14 per 2 standard deviation [3.2 FGE] increase, 90% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.20; likely harmful), although this effect was substantially attenuated for players in the upper quartile for 12-month match exposures (>28 matches). CONCLUSION: A player's accumulated (12-month) and recent (1-month) match exposure substantially influences their current injury risk. Careful attention should be paid to planning the workloads and monitoring the responses of players involved in: (1) a high (>≈35) number of matches in the previous year, (2) a low (<≈15) number of matches in the previous year, and (3) a low-moderate number of matches in previous year but who have played intensively in the recent past. These findings make a major contribution to evidence-based policy decisions regarding match workload limits in professional rugby union