Regenerative Medicine and New Labour Life Science Policy: Rhetorics of Success, Narratives of Sustainability and Survival

Advances in stem cell science and tissue engineering are being turned into applications and products through a novel medical paradigm known as regenerative medicine. This paper begins by examining the vulnerabilities and risks encountered by the regenerative medicine industry during a pivotal moment in its scientific infancy: the 2000s. Under the auspices of New Labour, British medical scientists and life science innovation firms associated with regenerative medicine, received demonstrative rhetorical pledges of support, aligned with the publication of a number of government initiated reports presaged by Bioscience 2015: Improving National Health, Increasing National Wealth. The Department of Health and the Department of Trade and Industry (and its successors) held industry consultations to determine the best means by which innovative bioscience cultures might be promoted and sustained in Britain. Bioscience 2015 encapsulates the first chapter of this sustainability narrative. By 2009, the tone of this storyline had changed to one of survivability. In the second part of the paper, we explore the ministerial interpretation of the ‘bioscience discussion cycle’ that embodies this narrative of expectation, using a computer-aided content analysis programme. Our analysis notes that the ministerial interpretation of these reports has continued to place key emphasis upon the distinctive and exceptional characteristics of the life science industries, such as their ability to perpetuate innovations in regenerative medicine and the optimism this portends – even though many of the economic expectations associated with this industry have remained unfulfilled.

Integrated care: utilisation of complementary and alternative medicine within a conventional cancer treatment centre

Objectives: To estimate the proportion of cancer outpatients who visit a Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) unit that is located within a conventional cancer treatment centre; to compare the characteristics of CAM unit visitors with those of all outpatients; to monitor the demand for 20 CAM therapies delivered by professionals, and the use of the CAM unit for waiting, gathering information and informal support from volunteer staff.

Design: Prospective, observational, over a six month period.

Setting: CAM unit within a NHS cancer treatment centre.

Main outcome measures: Utilisation of the CAM unit for 20 complementary therapies, and for waiting, gathering information, informal support; characteristics of CAM users compared with those of all cancer outpatients attending the cancer centre; predictors of CAM therapy use and frequent use.

Results: 761 (95% of those approached) people were recruited, 498 (65.4%) cancer patients, 202 (26.5%) relatives, 37 (4.8%) friends/carers, 24 (3.2%) staff. Women predominated (n = 560, 73.6%). Of all outpatients attending the cancer centre, 498 (15.8%) visited the CAM unit, 290 (9.2%) accessed therapies. Compared to all outpatients, those visiting the CAM unit were: younger (mean 63.7 vs. 58.4 years), more likely to be female (57.9% vs. 78.7%), have breast (14.8% vs. 51.9%), gynaecological (5.0% vs. 9.1%) cancer, live in local postal district (57.3% vs. 61.6%). Significant predictors of therapy use and frequent visits were being a patient, female, higher education, living closer to the cancer centre.

Conclusions: Despite easy access to CAM therapies, a relatively small number of people regularly used them, whilst a larger number selectively tried a few. The integrated CAM unit meets a demand for information and informal support. The findings inform emerging policy on integrating CAM and conventional cancer treatment to address psychosocial needs of people with cancer. More research is needed on why people do not use integrated CAM services and how charges affect demand. © 2008.

Availability of complementary and alternative medicine for people with cancer in the British National Health Service: Results of a national survey

This study assessed access to Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) therapies for people with cancer within the British National Health Service. CAM units were identified through an internet search in 2009. A total of 142 units, providing 62 different therapies, were identified: 105 (74.0%) England; 23 (16.2%) Scotland; 7 (4.9%) each in Wales and Northern Ireland. Most units provide a small number of therapies (median 4, range 1–20), and focus on complementary, rather than alternative approaches. Counselling is the most widely provided therapy (available at 82.4% of identified units), followed by reflexology (62.0%), aromatherapy (59.1%), reiki (43.0%), massage (42.2%). CAM units per million of the population varied between countries (England: 2.2; Wales: 2.3; Scotland: 4.8; Northern Ireland: 5.0), and within countries. Better publicity for CAM units, greater integration of units in conventional cancer treatment centres may help improve access to CAMs.

Ulysses contracts in medicine

Ulysses contracts are a method by which one person binds himself by agreeing to be bound by others. In medicine such contracts have primarily been discussed as ways of treating people with episodic mental illnesses, where the features of the illness are such that they now judge that they will refuse treatment at the time it is needed. Enforcing Ulysses contracts in these circumstances would require medical professionals to override the express refusal of the patient at the time treatment is required, something that is generally problematic both ethically and legally. In this paper I will argue that despite appearances Ulysses contracts can make it the case that treating a patient in such circumstances is an instance of treating him with his consent, although safeguards are needed to ensure that this is the case. Given the potential benefits to patients I further argue that modified Ulysses contracts should be made legally enforceable.

The influence of evidence-based medicine training on decision-making in relation to over-the-counter medicines: a qualitative study

Objectives
To explore the role of evidence of effectiveness when making decisions about over-the-counter (OTC) medication and to ascertain whether evidence-based medicine training raised awareness in decision-making. Additionally, this work aimed to complement the findings of a previous study because all participants in this current study had received training in evidence-based medicine (unlike the previous participants).

Methods
Following ethical approval and an e-mailed invitation, face-to-face, semi-structured interviews were conducted with newly registered pharmacists (who had received training in evidence-based medicine as part of their MPharm degree) to discuss the role of evidence of effectiveness with OTC medicines. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Following transcription, all data were entered into the NVivo software package (version 8). Data were coded and analysed using a constant comparison approach.

Key findings
Twenty-five pharmacists (7 males and 18 females; registered for less than 4 months) were recruited and all participated in the study. Their primary focus with OTC medicines was safety; sales of products (including those that lack evidence of effectiveness) were justified provided they did no harm. Meeting patient expectation was also an important consideration and often superseded evidence. Despite knowledge of the concept, and an awareness of ethical requirements, an evidence-based approach was not routinely implemented by these pharmacists. Pharmacists did not routinely utilize evidence-based resources when making decisions about OTC medicines and some felt uncomfortable discussing the evidence-base for OTC products with patients.

Conclusions
The evidence-based medicine training that these pharmacists received appeared to have limited influence on OTC decision-making. More work could be conducted to ensure that an evidence-based approach is routinely implemented in practice

Hierarchy as a barrier to advancement for women in academic medicine

Background: Research on barriers to professional advancement for women in academic medicine has not adequately considered the role of environmental factors and how the structure of organizations affects professional advancement and work experiences. This article examines the impact of the hierarchy, including both the organization's hierarchical structure and professionals' perceptions of this structure, in medical school organization on faculty members' experience and advancement in academic medicine. Methods: As part of an inductive qualitative study of faculty in five disparate U.S. medical schools, we interviewed 96 medical faculty at different career stages and in diverse specialties, using in-depth semistructured interviews, about their perceptions about and experiences in academic medicine. Data were coded and analysis was conducted in the grounded theory tradition. Results: Our respondents saw the hierarchy of chairs, based on the indeterminate tenure of department chairs, as a central characteristic of the structure of academic medicine. Many faculty saw this hierarchy as affecting inclusion, reducing transparency in decision making, and impeding advancement. Indeterminate chair terms lessen turnover and may create a bottleneck for advancement. Both men and women faculty perceived this hierarchy, but women saw it as more consequential. Conclusions: The hierarchical structure of academic medicine has a significant impact on faculty work experiences, including advancement, especially for women. We suggest that medical schools consider alternative models of leadership and managerial styles, including fixed terms for chairs with a greater emphasis on inclusion. This is a structural reform that could increase opportunities for advancement especially for women in academic medicine. © 2010 Copyright Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.

A study of the relational aspects of the culture of academic medicine

PURPOSE: The impact of medical school culture on medical students has been well studied, but little documentation exists regarding how medical faculty experience the culture in which they work. In an ongoing project, the National Initiative on Gender, Culture and Leadership in Medicine, the authors are investigating how the existing culture of academic medical institutions supports all faculty members' ability to function at their highest potential. METHOD: The authors conducted a qualitative study of faculty in five disparate U.S. medical schools. Faculty in different career stages and diverse specialties were interviewed regarding their perceptions and experiences in academic medicine. Analysis was inductive and data driven. RESULTS: Relational aspects of the culture emerged as a central theme for both genders across all career categories. Positive relationships were most evident with patients and learners. Negative relational attributes among faculty and leadership included disconnection, competitive individualism, undervaluing of humanistic qualities, deprecation, disrespect, and the erosion of trust. CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that serious problems exist in the relational culture and that such problems may affect medical faculty vitality, professionalism, and general productivity and are linked to retention. Efforts to create and support trusting relationships in medical schools might enhance all faculty members' efforts to optimally contribute to the clinical, education, and research missions of academic medicine. Future work will document the outcomes of a five-school collaboration to facilitate change in the culture to support the productivity of all medical faculty. © 2009 Association of American Medical Colleges.

Collaboration in academic medicine:Reflections on gender and advancement

Purpose: Collaboration in academic medicine is encouraged, yet no one has studied the environment in which faculty collaborate. The authors investigated how faculty experienced collaboration and the institutional atmosphere for collaboration. Method: In 2007, as part of a qualitative study of faculty in five disparate U.S. medical schools, the authors interviewed 96 medical faculty at different career stages and in diverse specialties, with an oversampling of women, minorities, and generalists, regarding their perceptions and experiences of collaboration in academic medicine. Data analysis was inductive and driven by the grounded theory tradition. Results: Female faculty expressed enthusiasm about the potential and process of collaboration; male faculty were more likely to focus on outcomes. Senior faculty experienced a more collaborative environment than early career faculty, who faced numerous barriers to collaboration: the hierarchy of medical academe, advancement criteria, and the lack of infrastructure supportive of collaboration. Research faculty appreciated shared ideas, knowledge, resources, and the increased productivity that could result from collaboration, but they were acutely aware that advancement requires an independent body of work, which was a major deterrent to collaboration among early career faculty. Conclusions: Academic medicine faculty have differing views on the impact and benefits of collaboration. Early career faculty face concerning obstacles to collaboration. Female faculty seemed more appreciative of the process of collaboration, which may be of importance for transitioning to a more collaborative academic environment. A reevaluation of effective benchmarks for promotion of faculty is warranted to address the often exclusive reliance on individualistic achievement. © 2009 The Association of American Medical Colleges.

Infection systems biology:from reactive to proactive (P4) medicine

This short review establishes the conceptual bases and discusses the principal aspects of P4-shorthand for predictive, preventive, personalized and participatory medicine-medicine, in the framework of infectious diseases. P4 medicine is a new way to approach medical care; instead of acting when the patient is sick, physicians will be able to detect early warnings of disease to take early action. Furthermore, people might even be able to adjust their lifestyles to prevent disease. P4 medicine is fuelled by systems approaches to disease, including methods for personalized genome sequencing and new computational techniques for building dynamic disease predictive networks from massive amounts of data from a variety of OMICs. An excellent example of the effectiveness of the P4 medicine approach is the change in cancer treatments. Emphasis is placed on early detection, followed by genotyping of the patient to use the most adequate treatment according to the genetic background. Cardiovascular diseases and perhaps even neurodegenerative disorders will be the next targets for P4 medicine. The application of P4 medicine to infectious diseases is still in its infancy, but is a promising field that will provide much benefit to both the patients and the health-care system.