Towards a Contingency Theory perspective of Quality Management in Enabling Strategic Alignment

The aim of this paper is to explore the role of Quality Management (QM) theory and practice using a contingency theory perspective. The study is grounded in the role of QM in improving strategic alignment within Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs) using Contingency Theory rather than adopting best practice approaches. An inductive theory building research methodology was used involving multiple case analyses of five SMEs, involving repeat interviews (n=45), focus groups (n=5) and document analysis. From the findings, it was found that Contingency Variables (strategy, culture, lifecycle and customer focus) and their respective typologies were found to interact with QM practices in helping to shape strategic alignment between the SMEs and their environments. This shaping process based on contingency approaches occurred in a manner unique to each SME and their respective environments rather than in an overarching best practice manner.

The Hidden benefits of “poster presentation assessment”: Skill acquirement and learning; evaluated from the nursing students perspective

Introduction
This paper reports to an exercise in evaluating poster group work and poster presentation and the extra learning and skill acquisition that this can provide to nursing students, through a creative and stimulating assessment method. Much had been written about the benefits of using posters as an assessment method, yet there appears to be a lack of research that captures the student experience.
Aim
This evaluative study sought to evaluate the student experience by using a triangulation approach to evaluation:
Methodology
All students from the February 2015 nursing intake, were eligible to take part (80 students) of which 71 participated (n=71). The poster group presentations took place at the end of their first phase of year one teaching and the evaluation took place at the end of their first year as undergraduate. Evaluation involved;
1. Quantitative data by questionnaires
2. Qualitative data from focus group discussions
Results
A number of key themes emerged from analysis of the data which captured the “added value” of learning from the process of poster assessment including:
 Professionalism: developing time keeping skills, presenting skills.
 Academic skills: developing literature search, critic and reporting
 Team building and collaboration
Overall 88% agreed that the process furnished them with additional skills and benefits above the actual production of the poster, with 97% agreeing that these additional skills are important skills for a nurse.
Conclusion
These results would suggest that the process of poster development and presentation furnish student nurses with many additional skills that they may not acquire through other types of assessment and are therefore beneficial. The structure of the assessment encourages a self-directed approach so students take control of the goals and purposes of learning. The sequential organization of the assessment guides students in the transition from dependent to self-directed learners.

Cabazitaxel for Hormone-Relapsed Metastatic Prostate Cancer Previously Treated With a Docetaxel-Containing Regimen: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

As part of its single technology appraisal (STA) process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the company that manufactures cabazitaxel (Jevtana(®), Sanofi, UK) to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of cabazitaxel for treatment of patients with metastatic hormone-relapsed prostate cancer (mHRPC) previously treated with a docetaxel-containing regimen. The School of Health and Related Research Technology Appraisal Group at the University of Sheffield was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). The ERG produced a critical review of the evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of the technology based upon the company's submission to NICE. Clinical evidence for cabazitaxel was derived from a multinational randomised open-label phase III trial (TROPIC) of cabazitaxel plus prednisone or prednisolone compared with mitoxantrone plus prednisone or prednisolone, which was assumed to represent best supportive care. The NICE final scope identified a further three comparators: abiraterone in combination with prednisone or prednisolone; enzalutamide; and radium-223 dichloride for the subgroup of people with bone metastasis only (no visceral metastasis). The company did not consider radium-223 dichloride to be a relevant comparator. Neither abiraterone nor enzalutamide has been directly compared in a trial with cabazitaxel. Instead, clinical evidence was synthesised within a network meta-analysis (NMA). Results from TROPIC showed that cabazitaxel was associated with a statistically significant improvement in both overall survival and progression-free survival compared with mitoxantrone. Results from a random-effects NMA, as conducted by the company and updated by the ERG, indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between the three active treatments for both overall survival and progression-free survival. Utility data were not collected as part of the TROPIC trial, and were instead taken from the company's UK early access programme. Evidence on resource use came from the TROPIC trial, supplemented by both expert clinical opinion and a UK clinical audit. List prices were used for mitoxantrone, abiraterone and enzalutamide as directed by NICE, although commercial in-confidence patient-access schemes (PASs) are in place for abiraterone and enzalutamide. The confidential PAS was used for cabazitaxel. Sequential use of the advanced hormonal therapies (abiraterone and enzalutamide) does not usually occur in clinical practice in the UK. Hence, cabazitaxel could be used within two pathways of care: either when an advanced hormonal therapy was used pre-docetaxel, or when one was used post-docetaxel. The company believed that the former pathway was more likely to represent standard National Health Service (NHS) practice, and so their main comparison was between cabazitaxel and mitoxantrone, with effectiveness data from the TROPIC trial. Results of the company's updated cost-effectiveness analysis estimated a probabilistic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £45,982 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, which the committee considered to be the most plausible value for this comparison. Cabazitaxel was estimated to be both cheaper and more effective than abiraterone. Cabazitaxel was estimated to be cheaper but less effective than enzalutamide, resulting in an ICER of £212,038 per QALY gained for enzalutamide compared with cabazitaxel. The ERG noted that radium-223 is a valid comparator (for the indicated sub-group), and that it may be used in either of the two care pathways. Hence, its exclusion leads to uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness results. In addition, the company assumed that there would be no drug wastage when cabazitaxel was used, with cost-effectiveness results being sensitive to this assumption: modelling drug wastage increased the ICER comparing cabazitaxel with mitoxantrone to over £55,000 per QALY gained. The ERG updated the company's NMA and used a random effects model to perform a fully incremental analysis between cabazitaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide and best supportive care using PASs for abiraterone and enzalutamide. Results showed that both cabazitaxel and abiraterone were extendedly dominated by the combination of best supportive care and enzalutamide. Preliminary guidance from the committee, which included wastage of cabazitaxel, did not recommend its use. In response, the company provided both a further discount to the confidential PAS for cabazitaxel and confirmation from NHS England that it is appropriate to supply and purchase cabazitaxel in pre-prepared intravenous-infusion bags, which would remove the cost of drug wastage. As a result, the committee recommended use of cabazitaxel as a treatment option in people with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 whose disease had progressed during or after treatment with at least 225 mg/m(2) of docetaxel, as long as it was provided at the discount agreed in the PAS and purchased in either pre-prepared intravenous-infusion bags or in vials at a reduced price to reflect the average per-patient drug wastage.