Identification of Tools and Techniques to Enhance Interdisciplinary Collaboration During Design and Construction Projects.

The purpose of this study was to collect the perceptions of design professionals and clinicians regarding design process success strategies and elements of interprofessional engagement and communication during healthcare design and construction projects. Additional objectives were to gather best practices to maximize clinician engagement and provide tools and techniques to improve interdisciplinary collaboration for future projects. Strategies are needed to enhance the design and construction process and create interactions that benefit not only the project but the individuals working to see its completion. Meaningful interprofessional collaboration is essential to any healthcare design project and making sure the various players communicate is a critical element. This was a qualitative study conducted via an online survey. Respondents included architects, construction managers, interior designers, and healthcare personnel who had recently been involved in a building renovation or new construction project for a healthcare facility. Responses to open-ended questions were analyzed for themes, and descriptive statistics were used to provide insight into participant demographics. Information on the impressions, perceptions, and opportunities related to clinician involvement in design projects was collected from nurses, architects, interior designers, and construction managers. Qualitative analysis revealed themes of clinician input, organizational dynamics, and a variety of communication strategies to be the most frequently mentioned elements of successful interprofessional collaboration. This study validates the need to include clinician input in the design process, to consider the importance of organizational dynamics on design team functioning, and to incorporate effective communication strategies during design and construction projects.

Ten trends transforming cancer care and their effects on space planning for academic medical centers.

OBJECTIVE: This article aims to define the major trends currently affecting space needs for academic medical center (AMC) cancer centers. It will distinguish between the trends that promote the concentration of services with those that promote decentralization as well as identify opportunities for achieving greater effectiveness in cancer care space planning. BACKGROUND: Changes in cancer care-higher survival rates, increased clinical trials, new technology, and changing practice models-increasingly fill hospitals' and clinicians' schedules and strain clinical space resources. Conflicts among these trends are concentrating some services and dispersing others. As a result, AMCs must expand and renovate intelligently to continue providing state-of-the-art, compassionate care. CONCLUSIONS: Although the typical AMC cancer center can expect to utilize more space than it would have 10 years ago, a deeper understanding of the cancer center enterprise can lead to opportunities for more effectively using available facility resources. Each AMC must determine for itself the appropriate balance of patient volume, clinical activity, and services between its main hospital campus and satellite branches. As well, space allocation should be flexible, as care trends, medical technology, and the provider's own priorities shift over time. The goal isn't necessarily more space-it's better space.

Early intervention of intravenous KB220IV--neuroadaptagen amino-acid therapy (NAAT) improves behavioral outcomes in a residential addiction treatment program: a pilot study.

Substance use disorders (SUD) are inheritable and the culprit is hypodopaminergic function regulated by reward genes. We evaluated a natural dopaminergic agonist; KB220 intravenous (IV) and oral variants, to improve dopaminergic function in SUD. Our pilot experiment found a significant reduction of chronic symptoms, measured by the Chronic Abstinence Symptom Severity (CASS) Scale. The combined group (IV and oral) did significantly better than the oral-only group over the first week and 30-day follow-up period. Next, the combination was given to 129 subjects and three factors; Emotion, Somatic, and Impaired Cognition, with eigenvalues greater than one were extracted for baseline CASS-Revised (CASS-R) variables. Paired sample t-tests for pre and post-treatment scales showed significant declines (p = .00001) from pre- to post-treatment: t = 19.1 for Emotion, t = 16.1 for Somatic, and t = 14.9 for Impaired Cognition. In a two-year follow-up of 23 subjects who underwent KB220IV therapy (at least five IV treatments over seven days) plus orals for 30+ days: 21 (91%) were sober at six months, 19 (82%) having no relapse; 19 (82%) were sober at one year, 18 (78%) having no relapse; and 21 (91%) were sober two-years post-treatment, 16(70%) having no relapse. We await additional research and advise caution in interpreting these encouraging results.

Integrating harm reduction and abstinence-based substance abuse treatment in the public sector.

Harm reduction and abstinence-based substance abuse treatment can not only be integrated, but their integration is more powerful than either separately. This integration has more positive effects than either model separately on the large problem of patient retention in substance abuse treatment. This integration is particularly relevant for its utility and acceptance in the public sector. Examples from a clinic currently utilizing this model in a public hospital are presented.