Guidelines as governance: Critical reflections from a documentary analysis of guidelines to support user involvement in research.

Although guidelines to regulate user involvement in research have been advocated and implemented for several years, literature still describes the process as challenging. In this qualitative study, we take a critical view on guidelines that are developed to regulate and govern the collaboration process of user involvement in research. We adapt a social constructivist view of guidelines and our aim is to explore how guidelines construct the perception of users and researchers and thus the process of involvement. Twenty-two guidelines published between 2006 and 2019 were analyzed iteratively. The analysis focuses on values which are emphasized in the guidelines on the distribution of entities, knowledge, and tasks between users and researchers. The analysis indicates that users and researchers are constructed differently; researchers are mainly constructed as responsible initiators and caretakers, while users are constructed as powerless and vulnerable. The guidelines portray the collaboration process as harmonious and assume a normative perspective. In doing so, challenges described in the literature related to power imbalances are not addressed. Based on these findings, we ask if these guidelines might function to maintain existing power imbalances between users and researchers.

Mapping the peer-reviewed literature on accommodating nurses' return to work after leaves of absence for mental health issues: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The complexity of nursing practice increases the risk of nurses suffering from mental health issues, such as substance use disorders, anxiety, burnout, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). These mental health issues can potentially lead to nurses taking leaves of absence and may require accommodations for their return to work. The purpose of this review was to map key themes in the peer-reviewed literature about accommodations for nurses' return to work following leaves of absence for mental health issues. METHODS: A six-step methodological framework for scoping reviews was used to summarize the amount, types, sources, and distribution of the literature. The academic literature was searched through nine electronic databases. Electronic charts were used to extract code and collate the data. Findings were derived inductively and summarized thematically and numerically. RESULTS: Academic literature is scarce regarding interventions for nurses' return to work following leaves of absence for mental health issues, and most focused on substance use concerns. Search of the peer-reviewed literature yielded only six records. The records were primarily quantitative studies (n = 4, 68%), published between 1997 and 2018, and originated in the United States (n = 6, 100%). The qualitative thematic findings addressed three major themes: alternative to discipline programs (ADPs), peer support, and return to work policies, procedures, and practices. CONCLUSIONS: While the literature supports alternative to discipline programs as a primary accommodation supporting return to work of nurses, more on the effectiveness of such programs is required. Empirical evidence is necessary to develop, maintain, and refine much needed return to work accommodations for nurses after leaves of absence for mental health issues.

Assessing the role of regulatory bodies in managing health professional issues and errors in Europe.

OBJECTIVE: This paper explores how medical regulatory bodies in nine European countries manage professional issues involving quality and patient safety, to build on limited existing information on procedures for regulating medical professionals in Europe. DESIGN: Twelve vignettes describing scenarios of concerns about standards of physicians were developed, covering clinical, criminal and administrative matters. Medical regulatory bodies in nine European countries were asked what action they would normally take in each situation. Their responses were related to their regulatory mandate. RESULTS: Responses varied greatly across participating countries. Regulators are always involved where patients are at risk or where a criminal offence is committed within the clinical setting. Non-criminal medical issues were generally handled by the employer, if any, at their discretion. Countries varied in the use of punitive measures, the extent to which they took an interest in issues arising outside professional activities, and whether they dealt with issues themselves or referred cases to another regulatory authority or took no action at all. CONCLUSIONS: There is little consistency across Europe on the regulation of medical professionals. There is considerable diversity in the range of topics that regulatory bodies oversee, with almost all covering health care quality and safety and others encompassing issues related to reputation, respect and trust. These inconsistencies have significant implications for professional mobility, patient safety and quality of care.

American Osteopathic Association specialty board certification.

Specialty board certification is an important tool in recognizing physicians who take extra measures to establish their skills in any number of specialty areas. The American Osteopathic Association Bureau of Osteopathic Specialists, which oversees the 18 specialty certifying boards, continues to amend existing policies and implement new policies to improve the certification process. Among these policies, the authors describe new collaboration efforts, the development of the osteopathic continuous certification process, and revisions to board eligibility. An update on AOA certification awards, including certificates of added qualifications, is also provided.