ABSTRACT
On 11th March 2020, the UK government announced plans for the scaling of COVID-19 testing, and on 27th March 2020 it was announced that a new alliance of private sector and academic collaborative laboratories were being created to generate the testing capacity required. The Cambridge COVID-19 Testing Centre (CCTC) was established during April 2020 through collaboration between AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, and the University of Cambridge, with Charles River Laboratories joining the collaboration at the end of July 2020. The CCTC lab operation focussed on the optimised use of automation, introduction of novel technologies and process modelling to enable a testing capacity of 22,000 tests per day. Here we describe the optimisation of the laboratory process through the continued exploitation of internal performance metrics, while introducing new technologies including the Heat Inactivation of clinical samples upon receipt into the laboratory and a Direct to PCR protocol that removed the requirement for the RNA extraction step. We anticipate that these methods will have value in driving continued efficiency and effectiveness within all large scale viral diagnostic testing laboratories.
Subject(s)
SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Populations practising customary consanguineous marriage have a higher incidence of autosomal recessive genetic disorders than those in which reproductive partners are usually unrelated. In the absence of any national-level response, English service developments to address the additional needs of families living with or at risk of such disorders have been locally led. These interventions remain in their infancy here, as elsewhere in Europe, and important questions remain regarding how appropriate, effective and sustainable responses can be operationalised in practice. This formative service review employed four local case studies together with wider consultation exercises over a 4-year period (2011-2015) to document recent responses to this area of need, issues arising and lessons to inform future work. Service components included the following: enhancements to genetic services to provide family-centred, culturally competent approaches to counselling and testing; community genetic literacy approaches; and capacity development among health professionals. Local approaches were, however, very varied in their detail, scope, level of investment and longevity. The provisions of culturally competent genetic counselling services and community-level genetic literacy interventions were generally well received by those who accessed them. Coordinated action across all service components appeared important for an effective service, but healthcare professionals, particularly general practitioners, were often difficult to engage in this agenda. An evaluative culture and engagement in a wider community of practice had supported service development across sites. However, sustaining investment was challenging, particularly where new services were not well integrated into core provision and where commissioning was driven by expectations of short-term reductions in infant mortality and disability.
ABSTRACT
AIM: To improve the detection and quality of care of patients who attend the emergency department (ED) with confirmed or suspected domestic abuse (DA). DESIGN: A quality improvement report on the design, implementation and evaluation of a specialised service and structured training programme to detect and manage DA presentations within an emergency medicine department. SETTING: The study was set in the ED at the Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK. KEY MEASURES FOR IMPROVEMENT: Key measures for improvement included introducing a service within the ED to help staff manage DA and coordinate responses; improve staff confidence in detecting DA; develop a structured and consistent process by which to manage DA presentations. STRATEGIES FOR CHANGE: An Independent Domestic Violence Advocate service was introduced into the department in July 2011 through a multiagency agreement. A structured training and education programme was delivered to ED staff. A 'communications form' was developed for DA risk assessment and case management. The process was reviewed quarterly. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-two referrals were made to the service (121 distinct clients) over a 12-month period. Staff reported greater confidence in detecting DA, and community partners highlighted the role the service had in improving DA detection and care quality within the city. CONCLUSIONS: Strong leadership and prioritising the issue within the department has facilitated the development of the process and contributed substantially to its success. Support from community partners has been invaluable in tailoring the service and education programme to the needs of staff and patients within the department.
