No abstract

The recovery process and social work education share theoretical and practice roots that facilitate a goodness-of-fit between the profession and the empowerment orientation of recovery. This article examines the linkages between the recovery process and social work education, including areas where curricular renewal will assure that master's in social work (MSW) students and graduates embrace the recovery-oriented values that facilitate consumer-driven services. Curricular innovation is also proposed that addresses the need for MSW programs to develop supported education programs that will enable more consumers to pursue and complete graduate social work education.

BackgroundPatients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with acute respiratory failure (ARF) face chronic complications that can impede return to normal daily function. A mobile, collaborative critical care model may enhance the recovery of ARF survivors.MethodsThe Mobile Critical Care Recovery Program (m-CCRP) study is a two arm, randomized clinical trial. We will randomize 620 patients admitted to the ICU with acute respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation in a 1:1 ratio to one of two arms (310 patients per arm) – m-CCRP intervention versus attention control. Those in the intervention group will meet with a care coordinator after hospital discharge in predetermined intervals to aid in the recovery process. Baseline assessments and personalized goal setting will be used to develop an individualized care plan for each patient after discussion with an interdisciplinary team. The attention control arm will receive printed material and telephone reminders emphasizing mobility and management of chronic conditions. Duration of the intervention and follow-up is 12 months post-randomization.Our primary aim is to assess the efficacy of m-CCRP in improving the quality of life of ARF survivors at 12 months. Secondary aims of the study are to evaluate the efficacy of m-CCRP in improving function (cognitive, physical, and psychological) of ARF survivors and to determine the efficacy of m-CCRP in reducing acute healthcare utilization.DiscussionThe proposed randomized controlled trial will evaluate the efficacy of a collaborative critical care recovery program in accomplishing the Institute of Healthcare Improvement’s triple aims of better health, better care, at lower cost. We have developed a collaborative critical care model to promote ARF survivors’ recovery from the physical, psychological, and cognitive impacts of critical illness. In contrast to a single disease focus and clinic-based access, m-CCRP represents a comprehensive, accessible, mobile, ahead of the curve intervention, focused on the multiple aspects of the unique recovery needs of ARF survivors.Trial registrationNCT03053245, clinicaltrials.gov, registered February 1, 2017.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2449-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Purpose: Evidence suggests that a physiotherapist-led chronic pain self-management programme in primary health care (PHC) improves function for people living with chronic pain; however, implementing a new approach to care can be difficult. In this study, we sought to understand the experiences of physiotherapists who had implemented the ChrOnic pain self-ManageMent support with pain science EducatioN and exerCisE (COMMENCE) programme; its perceived barriers, facilitators, benefits, and drawbacks; and how the physiotherapists tailored the programme to their own clinical contexts. Method: This interpretive description qualitative study used semi-structured interviews with physiotherapists who had implemented the COMMENCE programme in PHC. Results: Themes from 11 interviews included experiences of personal and professional growth, increasing confidence with experience, and changing the culture of pain management. Barriers and drawbacks to implementation included resource intensiveness, balancing programme demands with other clinical work, and challenges with patient attendance and participation. Facilitators included training, programme design and materials, supportive teams, and previous knowledge. Benefits included offering group and individualized support, evidence-based content, and sparking interest in learning more about pain management. The participants made small changes to tailor the programme content and delivery to their context. Conclusions: This study provides a rich understanding of the experiences, barriers, facilitators, benefits, drawbacks, and tailoring related to the COMMENCE programme in PHC. The results will facilitate future implementation of this intervention in PHC settings.

Our study examines the impacts on workers when organisational humour is repeated, sustained, dominating, and potentially harmful, and thus can be considered to be bullying. In an ethnographic study of an idiosyncratic New Zealand IT company, we observed humour that was sexualised, dominating, and perpetrated by the most powerful organizational members. We argue that the compelling need for belonging in this extreme organizational culture influenced workers to accept bullying humour as just a joke and therefore acceptable and harmless even when it contravened societal workplace norms. Our contribution is in identifying and extending the significant theoretical relationship between workplace humour and bullying that, to date, is not well-explored in organizational research.