Reflective practice across speech and language therapy and education: a protocol for an integrative review.

Effective co-practice is considered a linchpin of inclusive education. Speech and language therapists (SLT), in collaboration with teachers, are amongst the professionals who have a role in ensuring inclusion for students. The challenges of collaboration are well documented, with communication considered a potential antidote. Proposals for how collaborative communication can take place often align with models of reflection. Uncertainty around a shared language for reflection within and across the professions of teaching and SLT may pose a barrier to it occurring. Reflection has long been documented as a strategy used by effective clinicians to improve practice. Hence, teachers and SLTs reflecting together could be considered 'a port of entry' for effective collaborative practice. This study aims to synthesise literature and knowledge on the phenomenon of reflective practice across the professions to facilitate collaboration for inclusive education. The method of qualitative evidence synthesis will be an integrative review. A systematic search will be conducted to extract empirical studies, reviews and theoretical papers on the topic of reflection across both professions.  An adapted version of the PRISMA reporting guidelines will be used in the development, design and reporting of this review. Four databases will be searched: CINAHL, SCOPUS, Education Source and ERIC. A web-based search will also be conducted to retrieve relevant policy documents. Included literature will be appraised using the M-MAT and an adapted checklist from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Deductive content analysis will endeavour to determine if a shared language exists about reflection, across the professions of teaching and speech and language therapy. Establishing a shared language represents a first step towards the development of a framework for collaborative reflection between teachers and SLTs. This is turn serves to inform future research, policy and practice regarding how speech and language therapist can work collaboratively with teachers in schools.

Elevated vascular endothelial growth factor level in Coats' disease and possible therapeutic role of bevacizumab.

PURPOSE: To compare intraocular vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) level in patients with and without Coats' disease, and to report a case of Coats' disease that responded to intravitreal injection of bevacizumab. METHODS: Intraocular fluid was obtained from four eyes with Coats' disease (subretinal fluid in three eyes and aqueous in one eye) and from five eyes with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (subretinal fluid in four eyes and vitreous in one eye). Intraocular VEGF level was compared between these two groups. In one eye with stage 2B Coats' disease, macular edema, visual acuity, and intraocular VEGF level were compared before and after intravitreal injection of bevacizumab. RESULTS: Mean intraocular VEGF level in eyes with Coats' disease was 2,394.5 pg/ml, compared to 15.3 pg/ml in eyes with rhegmagenous retinal detachment. In the eye with stage 2B Coats' disease, macular edema was reduced after bevacizumab injection, and the visual acuity improved from 0.05 to 0.2. Intraocular VEGF level decreased from 1247 pg/ml to 20.4 pg/ml 1 month after the injection. CONCLUSION: Coats' disease is associated with increased intraocular VEGF level. Bevacizumab may be a valuable adjunctive treatment for Coats' disease.

Early adoption of the fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) intravitreal implant in patients with persistent or recurrent diabetic macular edema (DME).

Objective: To assess long-term outcomes for effectiveness, safety, and treatment burden after injection of 0.2 µg/day fluocinolone acetonide [FAc] intravitreal implant (ILUVIEN®) in patients with persistent or recurrent diabetic macular edema (DME) and 6-18 months of follow-up. Methods: Retrospective case series in 18 eyes (13 patients) treated with the FAc implant. Prior to the implant, eyes were treated with an anti-VEGF therapy, dexamethasone implant, or focal or panretinal photocoagulation. Effectiveness outcomes included changes in visual acuity and macular edema. Safety outcomes included intraocular pressure (IOP) changes, IOP drugs, and IOP-related surgeries/interventions. Treatment burden was assessed by comparing the number of DME treatments before and after FAc implantation. Results: The FAc implant reduced macular volume in 16/18 (89%) eyes, with a statistically significant mean change of -1.33 mm3 (p=0.001). The average central retinal thickness reduction for all 18 eyes was statistically significant, decreasing from 444 µm at baseline to 359 µm after the FAc implant (p<0.001). In 90% of eyes, visual acuity was stable throughout the follow-up period, with increases or no worsening in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letter score. Although mean IOP was statistically higher after treatment, it was within the normal range at all timepoints, and most (83.3%) eyes remained in the IOP category 0-22 mmHg, and the number of IOP treatments required did not increase and no patients required IOP-lowering surgery. Treatment burden for DME was reduced after the implant was administered, with 56% of eyes not requiring any additional treatment. The average number of treatments was 1.3 in the 6 months after the FAc implant versus 4.6 in the 12 months preceding the implant. Conclusion: The FAc implant is an appropriate option to incorporate earlier in the DME treatment process, leading to positive long-term outcomes with an acceptable safety profile, and a reduced treatment burden for patients, and reduced clinical staff time.