The aims and effectiveness of communities of practice in healthcare: A systematic review.

Communities of practice (CoPs) are defined as "groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise by interacting on an ongoing basis". They are an effective form of knowledge management that have been successfully used in the business sector and increasingly so in healthcare. In May 2023 the electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched for primary research studies on CoPs published between 1st January 1950 and 31st December 2022. PRISMA guidelines were followed. The following search terms were used: community/communities of practice AND (healthcare OR medicine OR patient/s). The database search picked up 2009 studies for screening. Of these, 50 papers met the inclusion criteria. The most common aim of CoPs was to directly improve a clinical outcome, with 19 studies aiming to achieve this. In terms of outcomes, qualitative outcomes were the most common measure used in 21 studies. Only 11 of the studies with a quantitative element had the appropriate statistical methodology to report significance. Of the 9 studies that showed a statistically significant effect, 5 showed improvements in hospital-based provision of services such as discharge planning or rehabilitation services. 2 of the studies showed improvements in primary-care, such as management of hepatitis C, and 2 studies showed improvements in direct clinical outcomes, such as central line infections. CoPs in healthcare are aimed at improving clinical outcomes and have been shown to be effective. There is still progress to be made and a need for further studies with more rigorous methodologies, such as RCTs, to provide further support of the causality of CoPs on outcomes.

Intereye Symmetry in Bietti Crystalline Dystrophy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate anatomic and functional intereye symmetry among individuals with Bietti crystalline dystrophy (BCD) using clinical and multimodal imaging methods, with a focus on the number, area, and distribution of the characteristic retinal crystalline deposits. DESIGN: Observational case series with prospective and retrospective data. METHODS: Setting: Multicenter. STUDY POPULATION: Thirteen Australian and New Zealand participants (26 eyes) with confirmed biallelic CYP4V2 mutations and a characteristic BCD fundus appearance. Procedures and main outcome measures: Crystals visible on color fundus photography were manually counted. Crystals were superimposed on aligned multimodal fundus images. Spearman's correlation coefficients (ρ), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and Bland-Altman plots were used to quantify symmetry between eyes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Fundus crystal area and count, and absent-autofluorescence (absent-AF) area. RESULTS: Median participant age was 48 years (interquartile range: 40-60 years). Intereye symmetry was high for fundus crystal area (ρ = 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00-1.00; ICC = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.88-0.99), fundus crystal count (ρ = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.92-1.00; ICC = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.89-0.99), and absent-AF area (ρ = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.53-0.98; ICC = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.90-0.99). Average foveal volume, foveal crystal count and area, average and central foveal thickness, best corrected visual acuity, and average macular and central foveal sensitivity were not highly correlated between eyes. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated strong intereye symmetry measured by fundus crystal area, fundus crystal number, and absent-AF area. This may influence the choice of outcome measures for future therapeutic trials for BCD and provides valuable clinical information for ophthalmologists involved in the care and counseling of patients with BCD.