Search

In scholarship on cancer survivorship, “normality” is discussed as a strategy to restore and maintain continuity of identity for the person with cancer. I interrogate the strategic deployment of “normality” in what I define as ritual-like practices by drawing on 20 narrative interviews and 455 photographs produced by study participants. The findings explore normality as outcome (being normal), practice (doing normality), and ethical standard (aspiring to normality). They indicate how sociocultural scripts such as the cancer survivor identity and authentic selfhood inflect what it means to be a “normal” person with cancer with repercussions for recognition in lived experience.

Objective: As more people live with cancer and for longer time periods, it is important to understand the growing diversity in lived experiences of survivorship. This study explored interpretative repertoires around cancer and their implications for survivorship from the perspectives of people with cancer to inform communication in cancer care. Methods: The sample included 11 participants (7 male, 4 female) with diverse cancer diagnoses and prognoses recruited through two public cancer care centres in Queensland, Australia. A narrative analysis of sequential interviews (n = 20) and photographs produced by the participants (n = 455) was conducted. Results: Four interrelated metaphors and narratives emerged in the interpretative repertoires of participants: cancer as a presence, survivorship as a struggle for meaning, survivorship as movement and survivorship as confluence. Continuities with “battle” and “journey” terminology were evident. However, these were subtly adapted and reimagined within participants' own lived experience. This was particularly pronounced among participants with incurable cancers, as they strived to make sense of contradictions within cancer survivorship. Conclusion: The findings offer in‐depth insights into the complexity and nuances of cancer survivorship. Such insights can contribute to facilitating successful and open‐ended communication between cancer care providers, people with cancer and their families.

Summary Background The role of infectious diseases (ID) and clinical microbiology (CM) in hospital settings has expanded in response to increasing antimicrobial resistance, leading to widespread development of hospital antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes, the majority of which include antibiotic approval systems. However, inappropriate antibiotic use in hospitals continues, suggesting potential disjunctions between technical advice and the logics of antibiotic use within hospitals. Aim To examine the experiences of doctors in a UK hospital with respect to AMS guidance of antibiotic prescribing, and experiences of a verbal postprescription antibiotic approval process. Methods Twenty doctors in a teaching hospital in the UK participated in semi-structured interviews about their experiences of antibiotic use and governance. NVivo10 software was used to conduct a thematic content analysis systematically. Findings This study identified three key themes regarding doctors' relationships with ID/CM clinicians that shaped their antibiotic practices: (1) competing hierarchical influences limiting active consultation with ID/CM; (2) non-ID/CM consultants' sense of ownership over clinical decision-making and concerns about challenges to clinical autonomy; and (3) tensions between evidence-based practice and experiential-style learning. Conclusions This study illustrates the importance of examining relations between ID/CM and non-ID/CM clinicians in the hospital context, indicating that AMS models that focus exclusively on delivering advice rather than managing interprofessional relationships may be limited in their capacity to optimize antibiotic use. AMS and, specifically, antibiotic approval systems would likely be more effective if they incorporated time and resources for fostering and maintaining professional relationships.

Objectives: Escalating antimicrobial resistance worldwide necessitates urgent optimization of antimicrobial prescribing to preserve antibiotics for future generations. Early intravenous (iv) to oral switch campaigns are one strategy that hospital-based antimicrobial stewardship programmes can incorporate to minimize inappropriate antibiotic use. Yet, iv antibiotics continue to be offered for longer than is clinically indicated, increasing hospital length of stay, increasing costs and placing patients at risk (e.g. cannula-related infections). This study aims to identify why this inappropriate prescribing trend continues. Methods: Twenty doctors (9 females and 11 males) working at a teaching hospital in north-east England participated in semi-structured interviews about their experiences of antibiotic use. NVivo10 software was used to conduct a thematic content analysis of the full interview transcripts driven by the framework approach. Results are reported according to COREQ guidelines. Results: Decisions around the choice of iv over oral antibiotics were influenced by three key issues: (i) consumerism, i.e. participants were concerned about the risk of litigation or complaints if patient expectations were not met; (ii) hierarchy of the medical team structure limited opportunities for de-escalation of antibiotics; and (iii) iv antibiotics were perceived as more potent and having significant mythical qualities, which participants acknowledged were not necessarily evidence based. Conclusions: The iv to oral switch interventions should tailor strategies to demystify iv versus oral antibiotic efficacy, engage consumers around the negative effects of iv antibiotic overuse and examine strategies to streamline team decision-making. Addressing these issues has the potential to reduce inappropriate antibiotic use and resistance.

Background Antibiotic treatment options for common infections are diminishing due to the proliferation of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The impact of Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) programs seeking to preserve viable antibiotic drugs by governing their use in hospitals has hitherto been limited. Pharmacists have been delegated a critical role in antibiotic governance in AMS teams within hospitals but the experience of pharmacists in influencing antibiotic use has received limited attention. In this study we explore the experiences of pharmacists in antibiotic decision-making in two Australian hospitals. Methods We conducted 19 semi-structured interviews to explore hospital-based pharmacists’ perceptions and experiences of antibiotic use and governance. The analysis was conducted with NVivo10 software, utilising the framework approach. Results Three major themes emerged in the pharmacist interviews including (1) the responsibilities of pharmacy in optimising antibiotic use and the interprofessional challenges therein; (2) the importance of antibiotic streamlining and the constraints placed on pharmacists in achieving this; and (3) the potential, but often under-utilised expertise, pharmacists bring to antibiotic optimisation. Conclusions Pharmacists have a critical role in AMS teams but their capacity to enact change is limited by entrenched interprofessional dynamics. Identifying how hospital pharmacy’s antibiotic gatekeeping is embedded in the interprofessional nature of clinical decision-making and limited by organisational environment has important implications for the implementation of hospital policies seeking to streamline antibiotic use. Resource constraints (i.e. time limitation and task prioritisation) in particular limit the capacity of pharmacists to overcome the interprofessional barriers through development of stronger collaborative relationships. The results of this study suggest that to enact change in antibiotic use in hospitals, pharmacists must be supported in their negotiations with doctors, have increased presence on hospital wards, and must be given opportunities to pass on specialist knowledge within multidisciplinary clinical teams. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1290-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objective To understand Australian hospital pharmacists’ accounts of antibiotic use, and the potential role of pharmacy in antibiotic optimisation within a tertiary hospital setting. Design, setting and participants Qualitative study, utilising semistructured interviews with 19 pharmacists in two hospitals in Queensland, Australia in 2014. Data was analysed using the framework approach and supported by NVivo10 qualitative data analysis software. Results The results demonstrate that (1) pharmacists’ attitudes are ambivalent towards the significance of antibiotic resistance with optimising antibiotic use perceived as low priority; (2) pharmacists’ current capacity to influence antibiotic decision-making is limited by the prescribing power of doctors and the perception of antibiotic use as a medical responsibility; and, (3) interprofessional and organisational barriers exist that prevent change in the hospital setting including medical hierarchies, limited contact with senior doctors and resource constraints resulting in insufficient pharmacy staffing to foster collaborative relationships and facilitate the uptake of their advice. Discussion While pharmacy is playing an increasingly important role in enhanced antibiotic governance and is a vital component of antimicrobial stewardship in Australia, role-based limitations, interprofessional dynamics and organisational/resource constraints in hospitals, if not urgently addressed, will continue to significantly limit the ability of pharmacy to influence antibiotic prescribing.