Search

Transition services—programs that support adolescents and young adults (AYAs) as they move from a child‐centered to a more autonomous, adult‐orientated healthcare system—have been associated with improved short‐ and long‐term healthcare outcomes. Unfortunately, there is a paucity of evidence exploring transition services within the neurogastroenterology and motility (NGM) field. The overall aim of this article, endorsed by the American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society and European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, is to promote a discussion about the role of transition services for patients with NGM disorders. The AYAs addressed herein are those who have: (a) a ROME positive disorder of gut–brain interaction (DGBI), (b) a primary or secondary motility disorder (including those with motility disorders that have been surgically managed), or (c) an artificial feeding requirement (parenteral or enteral tube feeding) to manage malnutrition secondary to categories (a) or (b). The issues explored in this position paper include the specific physical and psychological healthcare needs of patients with NGM disorders; key healthcare professionals who should form part of a secondary care NGM transition service; the triadic relationship between healthcare professionals, caregivers, and patients; approaches to selecting patients who may benefit most from transition care; methods to assess transition readiness; and strategies with which to facilitate transfer of care between healthcare professionals. Key areas for future research are also addressed, including the construction of NGM‐specific transition readiness questionnaires, tools to assess post‐transfer healthcare outcomes, and educational programs to train healthcare professionals about transition care in NGM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to information theories of legislative organizations, legislators depend on policy expertise from committees to make decisions. Expertise may also be derived from knowledge held by individual legislators, typically knowledge from their professional backgrounds. Research has shown that legislators sponsor (or patron) bills related to their professional backgrounds and other legislators defer to their expertise. Moreover, bills sponsored by legislators with professional expertise are more likely to advance through the legislative process. This paper considers the role of information derived from professional background on the patronage and passage of healthrelated legislation in the Virginia General Assembly. In so doing, the paper takes a unique approach. Whereas most studies classify legislators in terms of their professional field, this analysis probes more deeply by assessing the effects of a legislators' current or former occupations within their professional field. This paper finds that occupational background is even more influential than the professional field of a legislator on bill patronage and bill passage. The effects of occupational background hold up against alternative explanations such as committee membership, majority party status, or gender in determining bill patronage and passage rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]