Obstructive sleep apnoea predicts the development of preproliferative and proliferative retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes:a longitudinal analysis

Background and aims: Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of blindness. OSA is associated with increased oxidative and nitrosative stress and endothelial dysfunction in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Hence, it is plausible that OSA can promote the development and progression of DR. Materials and methods: An observational longitudinal study in adults with T2DM. Patients with pre-existing OSA, end-stage renal disease and non-diabetic retinopathy were excluded. OSA (apnoea hypopnea index ≥ 5 events/hour) was assessed by a single overnight home-based cardio-respiratory monitoring (Alice PDX, etc.). DR was assesses using retinal images between 2007 and 2012. Sight threatening retinopathy (STR) was defined as pre-proliferative or proliferative DR, maculopathy or photocoagulation. Advanced DR was defined as pre-proliferative or proliferative DR. Results: 199 patients were included (57.3% men, 47.7% White Europeans). STR and OSA prevalence were 38.7 % and 62.8% respectively. STR preva-lence was higher in patients with OSA (OSA+) compared to those with-out (OSA-) [48.8% vs. 21.6%, p <0.001]. After adjustment for confounders, OSA remained independently associated with STR (OR 3.7, 95%CI 1.6-8.9, p=0.006, maculopathy (OR 4.5, 1.8-11.4, p=0.002) and advanced DR (OR 3.9, 1.02-15.3, p=0.047). Over 4.4±1 years, more OSA+ patients progressed from no or background DR to advanced DR (15.3% vs. 3%, p=0.01). OSA was an independent predictor of advanced DR development after adjustment (OR 6.6, 95%CI 1.2-35.1, p=0.03). OSA did not predict the development of maculopathy. Patients received continuous positive airway pressure treatment were less likely to develop advanced DR. Conclusion: OSA is independently associated with STR and predicts the development of preproliferative and proliferative DR. Interventional studies are needed to assess the impact of OSA treatment on DR.Supported by: NIHR (UK) and The UK Novo Nordisk Research Foundation.

Developing a robust self evaluation framework for active learning:the first stage of an ERASMUS+ project (QAEMarketPlace4HEI)

In ensuring the quality of learning and teaching in Higher Education, self-evaluation is an important component of the process. An example would be the approach taken within the CDIO community whereby self-evaluation against the CDIO standards is part of the quality assurance process. Eight European universities (Reykjavik University, Iceland; Turku University of Applied Sciences, Finland; Aarhus University, Denmark; Helsinki Metropolia University of Applied Sciences, Finland; Ume? University, Sweden; Telecom Bretagne, France; Aston University, United Kingdom; Queens University Belfast, United Kingdom) are engaged in an EU funded Erasmus + project that is exploring the quality assurance process associated with active learning. The development of a new self-evaluation framework that feeds into a ?Marketplace? where participating institutions can be paired up and then engage in peer evaluations and sharing around each institutions approach to and implementation of active learning. All of the partner institutions are engaged in the application of CDIO within their engineering programmes and this has provided a common starting point for the partnership to form and the project to be developed. Although the initial focus will be CDIO, the longer term aim is that the approach could be of value beyond CDIO and within other disciplines. The focus of this paper is the process by which the self-evaluation framework is being developed and the form of the draft framework. In today?s Higher Education environment, the need to comply with Quality Assurance standards is an ever present feature of programme development and review. When engaging in a project that spans several countries, the wealth of applicable standards and guidelines is significant. In working towards the development of a robust Self Evaluation Framework for this project, the project team decided to take a wide view of the available resources to ensure a full consideration of different requirements and practices. The approach to developing the framework considered: a) institutional standards and processes b) national standards and processes e.g. QAA in the UK c) documents relating to regional / global accreditation schemes e.g. ABET d) requirements / guidelines relating to particular learning and teaching frameworks e.g. CDIO. The resulting draft self-evaluation framework is to be implemented within the project team to start with to support the initial ?Marketplace? pairing process. Following this initial work, changes will be considered before a final version is made available as part of the project outputs. Particular consideration has been paid to the extent of the framework, as a key objective of the project is to ensure that the approach to quality assurance has impact but is not overly demanding in terms of time or paperwork. In other words that it is focused on action and value added to staff, students and the programmes being considered.

The effectiveness of workplace coaching:A meta-analysis of learning and performance outcomes; scale development; theoretical model of individual differences and longitudinal study

The extant literature on workplace coaching is characterised by a lack of theoretical and empirical understanding regarding the effectiveness of coaching as a learning and development tool; the types of outcomes one can expect from coaching; the tools that can be used to measure coaching outcomes; the underlying processes that explain why and how coaching works and the factors that may impact on coaching effectiveness. This thesis sought to address these substantial gaps in the literature with three linked studies. Firstly, a meta-analysis of workplace coaching effectiveness (k = 17), synthesizing the existing research was presented. A framework of coaching outcomes was developed and utilised to code the studies. Analysis indicated that coaching had positive effects on all outcomes. Next, the framework of outcomes was utilised as the deductive start-point to the development of the scale measuring perceived coaching effectiveness. Utilising a multi-stage approach (n = 201), the analysis indicated that perceived coaching effectiveness may be organised into a six factor structure: career clarity; team performance; work well-being; performance; planning and organizing and personal effectiveness and adaptability. The final study was a longitudinal field experiment to test a theoretical model of individual differences and coaching effectiveness developed in this thesis. An organizational sample of 84 employees each participated in a coaching intervention, completed self-report surveys, and had their job performance rated by peers, direct reports and supervisors (a total of 352 employees provided data on participant performance). The results demonstrate that compared to a control group, the coaching intervention generated a number of positive outcomes. The analysis indicated that coachees’ enthusiasm, intellect and orderliness influenced the impact of coaching on outcomes. Mediation analysis suggested that mastery goal orientation, performance goal orientation and approach motivation in the form of behavioural activation system (BAS) drive, were significant mediators between personality and outcomes. Overall, the findings of this thesis make an original contribution to the understanding of the types of outcomes that can be expected from coaching, and the magnitude of impact coaching has on outcomes. The thesis also provides a tool for reliably measuring coaching effectiveness and a theoretical model to understand the influence of coachee individual differences on coaching outcomes.