Understanding the sex disparity in living kidney donation

Living donors are the preferred source of organs for kidney transplantation, which is the treatment modality of choice for end‐stage kidney disease. Health care systems widely promote living kidney donation. However, women are consistently overrepresented among living donors. The reasons behind the sex‐based disparity in living kidney donation remain poorly understood. Compared to women, men possess a greater amount of kidney function, and the higher deceased donation rate among men reflects their higher overall kidney quality. A plausible medical explanation for the sex‐based disparity in living kidney donation includes an uncompromising emphasis on preserving donor health, with less emphasis placed on organ quality, which is the main criterion in deceased donor selection. On the other hand, consent to deceased donation is also greater in women, indicating their greater desire to donate even though fewer women actually become deceased donors. Therefore, nonmedical reasons for the sex disparity in living donation must be sought. Increased empathic distress or emotional memory; a greater sense of responsibility, urgency, and impulsiveness with increased reaction to empathy; a different body image; and a different social status may all contribute to greater living kidney donation in women. Economic inequity may be the singular explanation when personal worth links to economic worth. To better understand the sex disparity in living kidney donation, we need better data on the reasons behind both nondonation and donor rejection after evaluation in clinical practice. Nondirected living kidney donation provides unique opportunities to minimize factors such as emotional distress, empathy, and impulsiveness. More liberal acceptance criteria for donors with isolated medical abnormalities and testing legitimate donor reimbursement strategies based on actual income levels rather than a fixed amount can assist in both ascertaining the reasons behind the sex disparity in living kidney donation and increasing overall living kidney donation rates.     

Philosophy of too much medicine conference report

Medical scientists have expressed scepticism about whether philosophy is relevant to medicine. We challenged this in a conference on the topic of “too much medicine” (TMM) held in Oxford in April 2017. The topic of TMM provided an opportunity to bring the two disciplines together because of its history both in philosophy and in medicine. We found that the collaboration between the two disciplines was fruitful when two conditions were met. First, both disciplines had to avoid discipline‐specific jargon. Second, each discipline had to engage with the other. Specifically, medical scientists had to engage with some philosophical literature, and philosophers had to “get their hands dirty with data.” In this conference report, we provide an overview of our discussions and summarize the other papers in the series.     

Views from the field: Medical student experiences and perceptions of interprofessional learning and collaboration in rural settings

Exploring the perceived environment where students are educated, as well as where they practice, is particularly important for educators and practitioners working in situations of interprofessional rural and remote health. In this study, we explored the perceptions of undergraduate medical students regarding interprofessionalism across their four-year undergraduate program which focuses on rural health. A thematic content analysis of the text-data was conducted on a convenience sample of 47 student responses to essay questions across four cohorts of a four-year undergraduate medical program. The medical program has an explicit social accountability mandate for responsiveness to the needs of a rural population and thus students have multiple opportunities to experience interprofessional education and collaboration in rural contexts. Participants reported (a) blurring and flexibility of roles in a primarily positive manner, (b) participating in unstructured interprofessional learning and collaboration, (c) experiencing the importance of social connections to interprofessional collaboration and learning, and (d) realisations that interprofessional collaboration is a means of overcoming barriers in rural areas. We discuss our findings using the socio-material perspective of complexity theory. These findings may be used to inform undergraduate programs in re-defining, re-creating, developing, and fostering interprofessional learning opportunities for medical students in rural communities as well as to support clinical faculty through ongoing professional development.     

An integrative review exploring the physical and psychological harm inherent in using restraint in mental health inpatient settings

In Western society, policy and legislation seeks to minimize restrictive interventions, including physical restraint; yet research suggests the use of such practices continues to raise concerns. Whilst international agreement has sought to define physical restraint, diversity in the way in which countries use restraint remains disparate. Research to date has reported on statistics regarding restraint, how and why it is used, and staff and service user perspectives about its use. However, there is limited evidence directly exploring the physical and psychological harm restraint may cause to people being cared for within mental health inpatient settings. This study reports on an integrative review of the literature exploring available evidence regarding the physical and psychological impact of restraint. The review included both experimental and nonexperimental research papers, using Cooper's (1998) five‐stage approach to synthesize the findings. Eight themes emerged: Trauma/retraumatization; Distress; Fear; Feeling ignored; Control; Power; Calm; and Dehumanizing conditions. In conclusion, whilst further research is required regarding the physical and psychological implications of physical restraint in mental health settings, mental health nurses are in a prime position to use their skills and knowledge to address the issues identified to eradicate the use of restraint and better meet the needs of those experiencing mental illness.