Living ‘good lives’: using mentoring to support desistance and recovery

Abstract

In recent years, a proliferation of mentoring projects have been established in England and Wales, targeted at both offenders and drug users. This is, in part, a consequence of high-level encouragement to establish such schemes. Mentoring features throughout the Ministry of Justice’s Transforming Rehabilitation strategy as a tool to support offenders to ‘get their lives back on track’, and the 2017 drug strategy highlights the importance of peer mentoring for those engaged in treatment services. Using Kingdon’s multiple streams approach, the article accounts for the popularity of mentoring within criminal justice and drug policy despite a less than convincing evidence-base. His model is based upon an appreciation of three streams (problem, policies and politics) which coincide when a compelling problem is linked to a plausible solution that meets the test of political feasibility. It is argued that mentoring has come to be viewed as a cost-effective solution to reduce reoffending and improve drug treatment outcomes despite a lack of conclusive evidence. It has garnered support because of its fit with dominant political discourses around citizenship and civil society. Mentoring has received support from within and without government but its inherent appeal overshadows a lack of clarity of what mentoring is and insufficient theoretical understanding of why it might be effective. Consequently, it is proposed that the Good Lives Model, a strengths-based rehabilitation theory, might provide an appropriate theoretical base and inform discussions about the role of mentoring within desistance and recovery journeys.     

Factors associated with clinically significant hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes using sensor-augmented pump therapy with predictive low-glucose management: A multicentric study on iberoamerica

Background and aimsDespite using sensor-augmented pump therapy (SAPT) with predictive low-glucose management (PLGM), hypoglycemia is still an issue in patients with type 1 Diabetes (T1D). Our aim was to determine factors associated with clinically significant hypoglycemia (<54 mg/dl) in persons with T1D treated with PLGM-SAPT.Methodology: This is a multicentric prospective real-life study performed in Colombia, Chile and Spain. Patients with T1D treated with PLGM-SAPT, using sensor ≥70% of time, were included. Data regarding pump and sensor use patterns and carbohydrate intake from 28 consecutive days were collected. A bivariate and multivariate Poisson regression analysis was carried out, to evaluate the association between the number of events of <54 mg/dl with the clinical variables and patterns of sensor and pump use.Results188 subjects were included (41 ± 13.8 years-old, 23 ± 12 years disease duration, A1c 7.2% ± 0.9). The median of events <54 mg/dl was four events/patient/month (IQR 1–10), 77% of these events occurred during day time. Multivariate analysis showed that the number of events of hypoglycemia were higher in patients with previous severe hypoglycemia (IRR1.38; 95% CI 1.19–1.61; p < 0.001), high glycemic variability defined as Coefficient of Variation (CV%) > 36% (IRR 2.09; 95%CI 1.79–2.45; p < 0.001) and hypoglycemia unawareness. A protector effect was identified for adequate sensor calibration (IRR 0.77; 95%CI 0.66–0.90; p:0.001), and the use of bolus wizard >60% (IRR 0.74; 95%CI 0.58–0.95; p:0.017).ConclusionIn spite of using advanced SAPT, clinically significant hypoglycemia is still a non-negligible risk. Only the identification and intervention of modifiable factors could help to prevent and reduce hypoglycemia in clinical practice.     

原发性肝癌患者手术切除术后早期复发影响因素分析

目的:探究原发性肝癌患者手术切除术后早期复发影响因素分析。方法:对广州市番禺区中医院2017年2月-2019年2月收治的原发性肝癌患者98例进行回顾性分析,依据各项临床指标分析手术切除术后早期复发的影响因素。结果:原发性肝癌患者经由手术切除后出现复发的可能性较高,同时手术切缘有残留、包膜不完整、肿瘤结节、心理因素、甲胎蛋白、血管侵犯、肝硬化及肿瘤直径等均是影响原发性肝癌手术期后再复发的高危因素。结论:原发性肝癌通常具有术后复发的生物学特性,依据对手术切除术之后早期复发因素的分析,对手术风险与治疗方案进行充分评估,同时要求患者进行定期复查及随访等工作,可对患者手术成功以及并发症的防治等均具有积极意义。     

Use of a Checklist During Observation of a Simulated Cardiac Arrest Scenario Does Not Improve Time to CPR and Defibrillation Over Observation Alone for Subsequent Scenarios

Theory: Immersive simulation is a common mode of education for medical students. Observation of clinical simulations prior to participation is believed to be beneficial, though this is often a passive process. Active observation may be more beneficial. Hypotheses: The hypothesis tested in this study was that the active use of a simple checklist during observation of an immersive simulation would result in better participant performance in a subsequent scenario compared with passive observation alone. Methods: Medical students were randomized to either passive or active (with checklist) observation of an immersive simulation involving cardiac arrest prior to participating in their own simulation. Performance measures included time to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and time to defibrillation and were compared between first and second scenarios as well as between passive and active observers. Results: Seventy-nine simulations involving 232 students were conducted. Mean time to CPR was 18 seconds (SD = 11.6) for those using the checklist and 24 seconds (SD = 15.8) for those who observed passively (M difference = 6 seconds), t(35) = 1.46, p =.153. Time to defibrillation was 94 seconds (SD = 26.4) for those using the checklist and 92 seconds (SD = 23.8) for those who observed passively (M difference = –2 seconds), t(38) =.21, p =.837. Time to CPR was 24 seconds (SD = 15.8) for passive observers and 31 seconds (SD = 21.0; M difference = 7 seconds), t(35) = 1.13, p =.265, for their first scenario counterparts. Time to CPR was 18 seconds (SD = 11.6) for active observers and 36 seconds (SD = 26.2; M difference = 18 seconds), t(24) = 2.81, p =.010, for their first scenario counterparts. Time to defibrillation was 92 seconds (SD = 23.8) for passive observers and 125 seconds (SD = 32.2; M difference = 33 seconds), t(33) = 3.63, p =.001, for their first scenario counterparts. Time to defibrillation was 94 seconds (SD = 26.4) for the active observers and 132 seconds (SD = 52.9; M difference = 38 seconds), t(28) =.46, p =.008, for their first scenario counterparts. Conclusions: Observation alone leads to improved performance in the management of a simulated cardiac arrest. The active use of a simple skills-based checklist during observation did not appear to improve performance over passive observation alone.