To Participate and Elect: Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act at 40

This paper provides an overview of cases decided under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act between September 1, 1982 and December 31, 2021. It updates our 2006 study documenting Section 2 litigation through 2005. Of note is the substantial decline in the number of Section 2 cases decided and diminished success for the plaintiffs who bring them. While recent litigation (including Brnovich and Merrill v. Milligan) suggests that Section 2 is likely to occupy, at best, a diminished role in future electoral disputes, this paper shows that Section 2’s reach had already declined significantly prior to recent disputes. It documents a steep drop in the number of Section 2 decisions involving vote dilution. So too, while plaintiffs bringing dilution claims found notable success in the first decade after Congress amended Section 2 in 1982, they have seen a steady decline in success ever since. Meanwhile, plaintiffs bringing Section 2 non-dilution claims—i.e., alternatively labelled “vote denial” or “time, place and manner” restrictions—have seen less success overall, and, as with dilution claims, a steady decline in success over time. The Report and underlying dataset can be found at www.voting.law.umich.ed

Understanding the uptake of a clinical innovation for osteoarthritis in primary care : a qualitative study of knowledge mobilisation using the i-PARIHS framework

Background: Osteoarthritis is a leading cause of pain and disability worldwide. Despite research supporting best practice, evidence-based guidelines are often not followed. Little is known about the implementation of non-surgical models of care in routine primary care practice. From a knowledge mobilisation perspective, the aim of this study was to understand the uptake of a clinical innovation for osteoarthritis and explore the journey from a clinical trial to implementation. Methods: This study used two methods: secondary analysis of focus groups undertaken with general practice staff from the Managing OSteoArthritis in ConsultationS research trial, which investigated the effectiveness of an enhanced osteoarthritis consultation, and interviews with stakeholders from an implementation project which started post-trial following demand from general practices. Data from three focus groups with 21 multi-disciplinary clinical professionals (5–8 participants per group), and 13 interviews with clinical and non-clinical stakeholders, were thematically analysed utilising the Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework, in a theoretically informative approach. Public contributors were involved in topic guide design and interpretation of results. Results: In operationalising implementation of an innovation for osteoarthritis following a trial, the importance of a whole practice approach, including the opportunity for reflection and planning, were identified. The end of a clinical trial provided opportune timing for facilitating implementation planning. In the context of osteoarthritis in primary care, facilitation by an inter-disciplinary knowledge brokering service, nested within an academic institution, was instrumental in supporting ongoing implementation by providing facilitation, infrastructure and resource to support the workload burden. ‘Instinctive facilitation’ may involve individuals who do not adopt formal brokering roles or fully recognise their role in mobilising knowledge for implementation. Public contributors and lay communities were not only recipients of healthcare innovations but also potential powerful facilitators of implementation. Conclusion: This theoretically informed knowledge mobilisation study into the uptake of a clinical innovation for osteoarthritis in primary care has enabled further characterisation of the facilitation and recipient constructs of i-PARIHS by describing optimum timing for facilitation and roles and characteristics of facilitators

Supervised treatment in outpatients for schizophrenia plus (STOPS+): protocol for a cluster randomised trial of a community-based intervention to improve treatment adherence and reduce the treatment gap for schizophrenia in Pakistan

Introduction There is a significant treatment gap, with only a few community-based services for people with schizophrenia in low-income and middle-income countries. Poor treatment adherence in schizophrenia is associated with poorer health outcomes, suicide attempts and death. We previously reported the effectiveness of supervised treatment in outpatients for schizophrenia (STOPS) for improving treatment adherence in patients with schizophrenia. However, STOPS was evaluated in a tertiary care setting with no primary care involvement, limiting its generalisability to the wider at-risk population. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of STOPS+ in scaling up the primary care treatment of schizophrenia to a real-world setting. Methods and analysis The effectiveness of the STOPS+ intervention in improving the level of functioning and medication adherence in patients with schizophrenia in Pakistan will be evaluated using a cluster randomised controlled trial design. We aim to recruit 526 participants from 24 primary healthcare centres randomly allocated in 1:1 ratio to STOPS+ intervention and enhanced treatment as usual arms. Participants will be followed-up for 12 months postrecruitment. The sample size is estimated for two outcomes (1) the primary clinical outcome is level of functioning, measured using the Global Assessment of Functioning scale and (2) the primary process outcome is adherence to treatment regimen measured using a validated measure. An intention-to-treat approach will be used for the primary analysis. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been obtained from Keele University Ethical Review Panel (ref: MH-190017) and Khyber Medical University Ethical Review Board (ref: DIR-KMU-EB/ST/000648). The results of the STOPS+ trial will be reported in peer-reviewed journals and academic conferences and disseminated to local stakeholders and policymakers

Jumping into the deep-end: results from a pilot impact evaluation of a community-based aquatic exercise program

This multi-center quasi-experimental pilot study aimed to evaluate changes in pain, joint stiffness, physical function, and quality of life over 12 weeks in adults with musculoskeletal conditions attending ‘Waves’ aquatic exercise classes. A total of 109 adults (mean age, 65.2 years; range, 24–93 years) with musculoskeletal conditions were recruited across 18 Australian community aquatic centers. The intervention is a peer-led, 45 min, weekly aquatic exercise class including aerobic, strength, flexibility, and balance exercises (n = 67). The study also included a control group of people not participating in Waves or other formal exercise (n = 42). Outcomes were measured using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and EuroQoL five dimensions survey (EQ-5D) at baseline and 12 weeks. Satisfaction with Waves classes was also measured at 12 weeks. Eighty two participants (43 Waves and 39 control) completed the study protocol and were included in the analysis. High levels of satisfaction with classes were reported by Waves participants. Over 90 % of participants reported Waves classes were enjoyable and would recommend classes to others. Waves participants demonstrated improvements in WOMAC and EQ-5D scores however between-group differences did not reach statistical significance. Peer-led aquatic exercise classes appear to improve pain, joint stiffness, physical function and quality of life for people with musculoskeletal conditions. The diverse study sample is likely to have limited the power to detect significant changes in outcomes. Larger studies with an adequate follow-up period are needed to confirm effects

Integrating case-finding and initial management for osteoarthritis, anxiety, and depression into primary care long-term condition reviews: results from the ENHANCE pilot trial.

Background: Multimorbidity is increasingly the norm; however, primary care remains focused on single diseases. Osteoarthritis, anxiety, and depression are frequently comorbid with other long-term conditions (LTCs), but rarely prioritized by clinicians.Objectives: To test the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of an intervention integrating case-finding and management for osteoarthritis, anxiety, and depression within LTC reviews.Methods: A pilot stepped-wedge RCT across 4 general practices recruited patients aged >= A5 years attending routine LTC reviews. General practice nurses provided usual LTC reviews (control period), then, following training, delivered the ENHANCE LTC review (intervention period). Questionnaires, an ENHANCE EMIS-embedded template and consultation audio-recordings, were used in the evaluation.Results: General practice recruitment and training attendance reached prespecified success criteria. Three hundred and eighteen of 466 (68%) of patients invited responded; however, more patients were recruited during the control period (206 control, 112 intervention). Eighty-two percent and 78% returned their 6-week and 6-month questionnaires, respectively. Integration of the ENHANCE LTC review into routine LTC reviews varied. Case-finding questions were generally used as intended for joint pain, but to a lesser extent for anxiety and depression. Initial management through referrals and signposting were lacking, and advice was more frequently provided for joint pain. The stepped-wedge design meant timing of the training was challenging and yielded differential recruitment.Conclusion: This pilot trial suggests that it is feasible to deliver a fully powered trial in primary care. Areas to optimize include improving the training and reconsidering the stepped-wedge design and the approach to recruitment by targeting those with greatest need

Improving the care of people with long-term conditions in primary care: protocol for the ENHANCE pilot trial

Background:Long-term conditions (LTCs) are important determinants of quality of life and healthcare expenditure worldwide. Whilst multimorbidity is increasingly the norm in primary care, clinical guidelines and the delivery of care remain focused on single diseases, resulting in poorer clinical outcomes. Osteoarthritis, and anxiety and/or depression frequently co-occur with other LTCs, yet are seldom prioritized by the patient or clinician, resulting in higher levels of disability, poorer prognosis, and increased healthcare costs.Objective: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of an integrated approach to LTC management, tackling the underdiagnosis and under-management of osteoarthritis-related pain and anxiety and/or depression in older adults with other LTCs in primary care.Design: The ENHANCE study is a pilot stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial to test the feasibility and acceptability of a nurse-led ENHANCE LTC review consultation for identifying, assessing, and managing joint pain, and anxiety and/or depression in patients attending LTCreviews. Specific objectives (process evaluation and research outcomes) will be achieved through a theoretically informed mixed-methods approach using participant self-reported questionnaires, a medical record review, an ENHANCE EMIS template, qualitative interviews, and audio recordings of the ENHANCE LTC review.Discussion: Success of the pilot trial will be measured against the level of the primary care team engagement, assessment of training delivery, and degree of patient recruitment and retention. Patient satisfaction and treatment fidelity will also be explored

Clinically relevant atovaquone-resistant human malaria parasites fail to transmit by mosquito.

Long-acting injectable medications, such as atovaquone, offer the prospect of a "chemical vaccine" for malaria, combining drug efficacy with vaccine durability. However, selection and transmission of drug-resistant parasites is of concern. Laboratory studies have indicated that atovaquone resistance disadvantages parasites in mosquitoes, but lack of data on clinically relevant Plasmodium falciparum has hampered integration of these variable findings into drug development decisions. Here we generate atovaquone-resistant parasites that differ from wild type parent by only a Y268S mutation in cytochrome b, a modification associated with atovaquone treatment failure in humans. Relative to wild type, Y268S parasites evidence multiple defects, most marked in their development in mosquitoes, whether from Southeast Asia (Anopheles stephensi) or Africa (An. gambiae). Growth of asexual Y268S P. falciparum in human red cells is impaired, but parasite loss in the mosquito is progressive, from reduced gametocyte exflagellation, to smaller number and size of oocysts, and finally to absence of sporozoites. The Y268S mutant fails to transmit from mosquitoes to mice engrafted with human liver cells and erythrocytes. The severe-to-lethal fitness cost of clinically relevant atovaquone resistance to P. falciparum in the mosquito substantially lessens the likelihood of its transmission in the field

BHPR research: qualitative1. Complex reasoning determines patients' perception of outcome following foot surgery in rheumatoid arhtritis

Background: Foot surgery is common in patients with RA but research into surgical outcomes is limited and conceptually flawed as current outcome measures lack face validity: to date no one has asked patients what is important to them. This study aimed to determine which factors are important to patients when evaluating the success of foot surgery in RA Methods: Semi structured interviews of RA patients who had undergone foot surgery were conducted and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis of interviews was conducted to explore issues that were important to patients. Results: 11 RA patients (9 ♂, mean age 59, dis dur = 22yrs, mean of 3 yrs post op) with mixed experiences of foot surgery were interviewed. Patients interpreted outcome in respect to a multitude of factors, frequently positive change in one aspect contrasted with negative opinions about another. Overall, four major themes emerged. Function: Functional ability & participation in valued activities were very important to patients. Walking ability was a key concern but patients interpreted levels of activity in light of other aspects of their disease, reflecting on change in functional ability more than overall level. Positive feelings of improved mobility were often moderated by negative self perception ("I mean, I still walk like a waddling duck”). Appearance: Appearance was important to almost all patients but perhaps the most complex theme of all. Physical appearance, foot shape, and footwear were closely interlinked, yet patients saw these as distinct separate concepts. Patients need to legitimize these feelings was clear and they frequently entered into a defensive repertoire ("it's not cosmetic surgery; it's something that's more important than that, you know?”). Clinician opinion: Surgeons' post operative evaluation of the procedure was very influential. The impact of this appraisal continued to affect patients' lasting impression irrespective of how the outcome compared to their initial goals ("when he'd done it ... he said that hasn't worked as good as he'd wanted to ... but the pain has gone”). Pain: Whilst pain was important to almost all patients, it appeared to be less important than the other themes. Pain was predominately raised when it influenced other themes, such as function; many still felt the need to legitimize their foot pain in order for health professionals to take it seriously ("in the end I went to my GP because it had happened a few times and I went to an orthopaedic surgeon who was quite dismissive of it, it was like what are you complaining about”). Conclusions: Patients interpret the outcome of foot surgery using a multitude of interrelated factors, particularly functional ability, appearance and surgeons' appraisal of the procedure. While pain was often noted, this appeared less important than other factors in the overall outcome of the surgery. Future research into foot surgery should incorporate the complexity of how patients determine their outcome Disclosure statement: All authors have declared no conflicts of interes

Abstracts from the NIHR INVOLVE Conference 2017

n/