Search

Aim: To explore the views of neonatal intensive care nursing staff on the deliverability of a novel genetic point‐of‐care test detecting a genetic variant associated with antibiotic‐induced ototoxicity. Design: An interpretive, descriptive, qualitative interview study. Methods: Data were collected using semi‐structured interviews undertaken between January and November 2020. Participants were neonatal intensive care nursing staff taking part in the Pharmacogenetics to Avoid Loss of Hearing trial. Results: Thematic analysis resulted in four themes: perceived clinical utility; the golden hour; point‐of‐care device; training and support. Recommendations were made to streamline the protocol and ongoing training and support were considered key to incorporating the test into routine care. Conclusion: Exploring the views of nurses involved in the delivery of the point‐of‐care test was essential in its implementation. By the study endpoint, all participants could see the value of routine clinical introduction of the point‐of care test. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: Nurses are in a key position to support the delivery of point‐of‐care genetic testing into mainstream settings. This study has implications for the successful integration of other genetic point‐of‐care tests in acute healthcare settings. Impact: The study will help to tailor the training and support required for routine deployment of the genetic point‐of‐care test. The study has relevance for nurses involved in the development and delivery of genetic point‐of‐care tests in other acute hospital settings. Reporting Method: This qualitative study adheres to the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research EQUATOR guidelines and utilizes COREQ and SRQR checklists. Patient or Public Contribution: All staff working on the participating neonatal intensive care units were trained to use the genetic point‐of‐care test. All inpatients on the participating units were eligible to have testing via the point‐of‐care test. The Pharmacogenetics to Avoid Loss of Hearing Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement group provided valuable feedback. Trial and Protocol Registration: Registered within the University of Manchester. Ethics approval reference numbers: IRAS: 253102 REC reference: 19/NW/0400. Also registered with the ISRCTN ref: ISRCTN13704894. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research improves relevance to end users and improves processes including recruitment participants. PPI in our research has gone from being non-existent to ubiquitous over a few years. We provide critical reflections on the benefits and challenges of PPI. Case studies are reported according to a modified GRIP2 framework; the aims, methodology, impact of PPI and critical reflections on each case and our experiences with PPI in general. We report five UK projects that included PPI from teenagers, families, people living with dementia, autistic people, and people from South Asian and d/Deaf communities. Our experience has progressed from understanding the rationale to grappling methodologies and integrating PPI in our research. PPI took place at all stages of research, although commonly involved input to design including recruitment and development of study materials. Methodologies varied between projects, including PPI co-investigators, advisory panels and online surveys. On-going challenges include addressing social exclusion from research for people that lack digital access following increasing on-line PPI and involvement from underserved communities. PPI was initially motivated by funders; however the benefits have driven widespread PPI, ensuring our research is relevant to people living with hearing loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper constructs a new set of institutional indicators for Malawi. We develop indicators of political rights, of freehold, traditional (communitarian) and intellectual property rights, based on the Malawian legislative framework. In exploring the association between our rights measures and a range of indicators of socio-economic development, we obtain limited support for a modernization process for Malawi. On the one hand, the association between the rights variables can be interpreted as a modernization nexus, with a trade-off between legally anchored private property freehold rights and political rights on the one hand, and traditional forms of communal property rights on the other. By contrast, the association between rights and a range of socioeconomic development indicators gives a more nuanced picture. For social development measures property rights measures exercise a positive impact, regardless of whether they take the form of freehold or communitarian property rights. Economic development measures respond positively only to the freehold measure, and negatively to communitarian property rights. The socioeconomic development measures are negatively associated with political rights in Malawi over the last 40 years of the twentieth century.