Shared decision making in patients at risk of cancer: The role of domain and numeracy

Background
Shared decision making has become an integral part of medical consultation. Research has, however, reported wide differences in individuals' desires to be involved in the decision-making process, and these differences in preferences are likely to be the result of a number of factors including age, education and numeracy.

Objective
To investigate whether patients at genetic risk for cancer had preferences for shared decision making that differed depending on medical domain (general health vs. cancer) and whether decision preferences are linked to numeracy abilities.

Methods
Four hundred and seventy-six women who consented to participate in response to an email sent by a local branch of the U.S.-based Cancer Genetics Network (CGN) to its members. Participants completed the Control Preference Scale, as well as an objective and subjective numeracy scales.

Results
Decision domain (cancer vs. general health) was not associated with women's preferences for involvement in decision making. Objective and subjective numeracy predicted a preference for decision involvement in general, and only objective numeracy was predictive with regard to cancer.

Conclusion
Participants were equally likely to state they wanted to play an active, collaborative or passive role in both medical domains (general and cancer). High-numeracy participants were more likely to express a desire for an active role in general and in case they were diagnosed with cancer.

Practice implications
Health authorities' recommendations to clinicians to include patients in their medical decisions are supported by patients' desires, and clinicians should be cognizant of their patients' preferences as well as their numeracy skills.

Shared Services in Ireland

The global financial crisis has forced governments across the globe to seek new ways of achieving efficiencies and savings in running their state administrations. Prominent amongst the variety of approaches adopted is the concept of shared services, which purports to offer a means of consolidating common tasks, reducing duplication, and achieving greater value for money. Based on successful experiences in the private sector, the phenomenon of shared service centres (SSCs) as a new co-ordination practice is of particular interest. In this chapter, the use of shared services and SSCs in Ireland is considered.

Introduction: Beyond the Divided City: Policies and Practices of Shared Space

Introduction to special feature on 'post-conflict' Belfast

High-throughput single-nucleotide polymorphism-based typing of shared Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains in cystic fibrosis patients using the Sequenom iPLEX platform

Shared strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa are now well recognized in people with cystic fibrosis (CF), and suitable P. aeruginosa laboratory typing tools are pivotal to understanding their clinical significance and guiding infection control policies in CF clinics. We therefore compared a single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-based typing method using Sequenom iPLEX matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization with time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) with typing methods used routinely by our laboratory. We analysed 617 P. aeruginosa isolates that included 561 isolates from CF patients collected between 2001 and 2009 in two Brisbane CF clinics and typed previously by enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus (ERIC)-PCR, as well as 56 isolates from non-CF patients analysed previously by multilocus sequence typing (MLST). The isolates were tested using a P. aeruginosa Sequenom iPLEX MALDI-TOF (PA iPLEX) method comprising two multiplex reactions, a 13-plex and an 8-plex, to characterize 20 SNPs from the P. aeruginosa housekeeping genes acsA, aroE, guaA, mutL, nuoD, ppsA and trpE. These 20 SNPs were employed previously in a real-time format involving 20 separate assays in our laboratory. The SNP analysis revealed 121 different SNP profiles for the 561 CF isolates. Overall, there was at least 96% agreement between the ERIC-PCR and SNP analyses for all predominant shared strains among patients attending our CF clinics: AUST-01, AUST-02 and AUST-06. For the less frequently encountered shared strain AUST-07, 6/25 (24%) ERIC-PCR profiles were misidentified initially as AUST-02 or as unique, illustrating the difficulty of gel-based analyses. SNP results for the 56 non-CF isolates were consistent with previous MLST data. Thus, the PA iPLEX format provides an attractive high-throughput alternative to ERIC-PCR for large-scale investigations of shared P. aeruginosa strains.

Shared Pseudomonas aeruginosa genotypes are common in Australian cystic fibrosis centres

Recent molecular-typing studies suggest cross-infection as one of the potential acquisition pathways for Pseudomonas aeruginosa in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). In Australia, there is only limited evidence of unrelated patients sharing indistinguishable P. aeruginosa strains. We therefore examined the point-prevalence, distribution, diversity and clinical impact of P. aeruginosa strains in Australian CF patients nationally. 983 patients attending 18 Australian CF centres provided 2887 sputum P. aeruginosa isolates for genotyping by enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus-PCR assays with confirmation by multilocus sequence typing. Demographic and clinical details were recorded for each participant. Overall, 610 (62%) patients harboured at least one of 38 shared genotypes. Most shared strains were in small patient clusters from a limited number of centres. However, the two predominant genotypes, AUST-01 and AUST-02, were widely dispersed, being detected in 220 (22%) and 173 (18%) patients attending 17 and 16 centres, respectively. AUST-01 was associated with significantly greater treatment requirements than unique P. aeruginosa strains. Multiple clusters of shared P. aeruginosa strains are common in Australian CF centres. At least one of the predominant and widespread genotypes is associated with increased healthcare utilisation. Longitudinal studies are now needed to determine the infection control implications of these findings.

Health professionals' and service users' perspectives of shared care for monitoring wet age-related macular degeneration: a qualitative study alongside the ECHoES trial

Objectives: To explore the views of eye health professionals and service users on shared community and hospital care for wet or neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).

Method: Using maximum variation sampling, 5 focus groups and 10 interviews were conducted with 23 service users and 24 eye health professionals from across the UK (consisting of 8 optometrists, 6 ophthalmologists, 6 commissioners, 2 public health representatives and 2 clinical eye care advisors to local Clinical Commissioning Groups). Data were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically using constant comparative techniques derived from grounded theory methodology.

Results: The needs and preferences of those with nAMD appear to be at odds with the current service being provided. There was enthusiasm among health professionals and service users about the possibility of shared care for nAMD as it was felt to have the potential to relieve hospital eye service burden and represent a more patient-centred option, but there were a number of perceived barriers to implementation. Some service users and ophthalmologists voiced concerns about optometrist competency and the potential for delays with referrals to secondary care if stable nAMD became active again. The health professionals were divided as to whether shared care was financially more efficient than the current model of care. Specialist training for optometrists, under the supervision of ophthalmologists, was deemed to be the most effective method of training and was perceived to have the potential to improve the communication and trust that shared care would require.

Conclusions: While shared care is perceived to represent a promising model of nAMD care, voiced concerns suggest that there would need to be greater collaboration between ophthalmology and optometry, in terms of interprofessional trust and communication.