Participatory Healthcare: A New Trend in Research?
Author: Dr Anayo Unachukwu, MBBS, LLM
“When the great innovation appears, it will almost certainly be in muddled, incomplete and confusing form….For any speculation which does not at first glance look crazy, there is no hope”
Healthcare by its very nature is complex. It comprises of not just one single integrated system, but consists of a large number of interrelated systems.[1] Risk[2] is inherent in the system. As a result of its complexity, it is also prone to errors due to concatenation of multiple small failures.[3] Given the fore-goings, it is unsurprising that a patient care pathway can be complex as regards the nature of care delivered and in the number of organisations that contribute to the care.[4] In parallel to this is the mounting cost of healthcare, emergence of post approval hurdle-pricing reimbursement and health technology assessments-that are more stringent.
Risk in general lacks precision both in definition and the impact it presents. There appears to be an inverse relationship between the tolerance of risk in a given society and its level of affluence. However, most affluent society seeks change in the delivery of service. This is to make for faster, efficient and effective delivery of quality services taking advantage of new technologies. The paradox is that change is front-loaded with uncertainty and it is inherently risky. In the National Health Service-as in many public organisations in developed societies that are involved in healthcare-change is influenced by the public choice theory[5] and market theory principles.[6] The government is increasingly relying on effective partnership to deliver on broad outcome measures[7] which is the nature of Public Service Agreement (PSA). Of note, it recognises that good risk management is integral to delivery of successful partnership.[8] Collaboration, co-invention and partnership have now become the buzz words in the pharmaceutical industries as part of to optimise on their research and development efforts, reduce redundant capacity and adoption of Darwinian approach to portfolio management.
The development of risk assessment and management is largely due to trends in the wider society, technological advances in health care, and the paradigm shift from paternalism to autonomy, consumerism, and clinical negligence litigation.[9] Further, in post-Vioxx world, the regulatory environment in the industry has become more challenging resulting in robust risk management and label restrictions. The political and economic trends and impacts on risk assessment and management are now more ubiquitous; and conflate and complicate the perception of risks.
Given this background, wholesale or partial significant changes in healthcare or a significant change in direction must be done circumspectly whilst factoring in inter alia: the complexity of the sector, risk management and resource reallocation among the various competing influences. According to Le Chatelier’s principle[10] which can be roughly stated as:
“Any change in status quo within a closed system will result in an opposing reaction in the responding system”.
At this stage in this discourse, it may be pertinent to look at the practical applications of change particularly with respect to research in healthcare as recently advocated by some healthcare leaders.
In December 2012, Lucien Engelen, director Raboud REshape and Innovation Centre at Raboud University Njimegen Medical Centre communicated his ‘Big Ideas 2013:The ideas include a launch of an initiative where patients together with their family and informal carers will come up with research-ideas and patients will also try to raise the money for chosen research ideas’. According to Mr Engelen, ‘This will start a new movement”.
Mr Engelen’s qualities as a visionary leader (his innovation centre is the second largest Academic Medical Centre in the Netherlands) and indeed enthusiasm are never in doubt. Neither is his honest intention to make healthcare truly participatory with patient at the very heart of service delivery. In principle participatory healthcare is laudable, given that patients come into such partnership/relationship better informed and able to negotiate better and take active part in management of their health.
However, it may be of some concern when ‘Big Ideas’ are bandied around with a complete disconnect between fundamental research and applied research. His idea of research needless to say is informed by the wisdom of the crowd and successes in other fields-art and culture, new technology etc. Healthcare is unique in more ways than one and attempts to extrapolate from other unrelated sector may have the unintended consequences that have far reaching implications.
Bold initiatives and innovation are laudable in all human efforts and endeavours, be it healthcare, other sectors, etc. The problem with the big ideas in research as advanced by Mr Englene is that it is emotive-and I dare say-has a whiff of personal imprimatur in his attempt to vivify research. Further, big ideas by its very nature, generally have at stake self beliefs, ego and personal ambitions, etc; “outcomes”[11] (as it is said torture data long enough it will confess to anything) become everything. The new game will be the end justifies the means and as a result ‘Lance Armstronging’[12] investigative studies will not be off the radar of the “researchers,” given that the vocal minority backing the effort will be banking on immediate positive outcomes. This cannot by any stretch of definition be called a scientific quest for truth. Call it by any other name-by all means-but not research. Research in healthcare is complex and is beset with vicissitudes of life. Serendipity is integral to any serious research effort and certainly it has changed lives. Part of the reasons why pharmaceutical industries have not had as many successes as previously-apart from the fact that previous research efforts have picked the low hanging fruits-is the ‘sanitised’ funding that leaves little room for serendipity. I am pleased to note that The Dean of the University where Mr Englene is based, Paul Smits, although he likes the idea-‘it brings science into the living room’-however cautioned that care ought to be exercised that the big ideas are not pursued at the expense of fundamental research.
We have to accept that certain endeavours are more difficult than others, no matter how much other disciplines may attempt to borrow from science or even language up what they do to imbricate scientific investigations. The output will be at best a pseudoscientific pretender. Einstein’s wise words are instructive: “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler”.
[1] Ellie Scrivens, Quality, Risk And Control in Health Care. Open University Press 2005. p. 8
[2] HM Treasure. The Orange Book Management of Risk-Principle and Concepts (October 2004).
[3] Ibid.
[4] Sheila Peskett, “The challenges of commissioning healthcare: a discussion paper,” Int J Health Plann Mgmt 2009; 24: 95-112.
[5] This take the view that publicly provided services are prone to be less efficient, less productive and less focused on their customers than privately provided services.
[6] Competition amongst providers will drive up quality, innovation and productivity whilst containing costs.
[7] This applies not only in the health sector and other public sectors.
[8] HM TREASURY. Managing risks with delivery partners. Office of Government Commerce (OGC).
[9] Department of Health Making Amends: A Consultation Paper Setting out proposals for Reforming the Approach to Clinical Negligence in the NHS (2003); the cost of compensating patients jumped 400 per cent in the course of the 1970s and 750 per cent in the 1990s.
[10] This principle is native to chemistry and in its original form states that in a closed system-a chemical system-if it experiences a change in concentration, temperature, volume or pressure, the new equilibrium is achieved to counteract the imposed change.
[11] Who is measuring; always bear in mind Hawthorn’s effect
[12] One is not talking about being dishonest to achieve a success, but going to an inordinate extraordinary length to see that success is ensured without counting the cost in the long term.
2012pharmaceutical
Amandeep Kaur
Aashir Awan, Phd
Abhisar Anand
Adina Hazan
Alan F. Kaul, PharmD., MS, MBA, FCCP
alexcrystal6
anamikasarkar
apreconasia
aviralvatsa
David Orchard-Webb, PhD
danutdaagmailcom
Demet Sag, Ph.D., CRA, GCP
Dror Nir
dsmolyar
Ethan Coomber
evelinacohn
Gail S Thornton
Irina Robu
jayzmit48
jdpmd
jshertok
kellyperlman
Ed Kislauskis
larryhbern
Madison Davis
marzankhan
megbaker58
ofermar2020
Dr. Pati
pkandala
ritusaxena
Rick Mandahl
sjwilliamspa
Srinivas Sriram
stuartlpbi
Dr. Sudipta Saha
tildabarliya
vaishnavee24
zraviv06
zs22
PUT IT IN CONTEXT OF CANCER CELL MOVEMENT
The contraction of skeletal muscle is triggered by nerve impulses, which stimulate the release of Ca2+ from the sarcoplasmic reticuluma specialized network of internal membranes, similar to the endoplasmic reticulum, that stores high concentrations of Ca2+ ions. The release of Ca2+ from the sarcoplasmic reticulum increases the concentration of Ca2+ in the cytosol from approximately 10-7 to 10-5 M. The increased Ca2+ concentration signals muscle contraction via the action of two accessory proteins bound to the actin filaments: tropomyosin and troponin (Figure 11.25). Tropomyosin is a fibrous protein that binds lengthwise along the groove of actin filaments. In striated muscle, each tropomyosin molecule is bound to troponin, which is a complex of three polypeptides: troponin C (Ca2+-binding), troponin I (inhibitory), and troponin T (tropomyosin-binding). When the concentration of Ca2+ is low, the complex of the troponins with tropomyosin blocks the interaction of actin and myosin, so the muscle does not contract. At high concentrations, Ca2+ binding to troponin C shifts the position of the complex, relieving this inhibition and allowing contraction to proceed.
Figure 11.25
Association of tropomyosin and troponins with actin filaments. (A) Tropomyosin binds lengthwise along actin filaments and, in striated muscle, is associated with a complex of three troponins: troponin I (TnI), troponin C (TnC), and troponin T (TnT). In (more ) Contractile Assemblies of Actin and Myosin in Nonmuscle Cells
Contractile assemblies of actin and myosin, resembling small-scale versions of muscle fibers, are present also in nonmuscle cells. As in muscle, the actin filaments in these contractile assemblies are interdigitated with bipolar filaments of myosin II, consisting of 15 to 20 myosin II molecules, which produce contraction by sliding the actin filaments relative to one another (Figure 11.26). The actin filaments in contractile bundles in nonmuscle cells are also associated with tropomyosin, which facilitates their interaction with myosin II, probably by competing with filamin for binding sites on actin.
Figure 11.26
Contractile assemblies in nonmuscle cells. Bipolar filaments of myosin II produce contraction by sliding actin filaments in opposite directions. Two examples of contractile assemblies in nonmuscle cells, stress fibers and adhesion belts, were discussed earlier with respect to attachment of the actin cytoskeleton to regions of cell-substrate and cell-cell contacts (see Figures 11.13 and 11.14). The contraction of stress fibers produces tension across the cell, allowing the cell to pull on a substrate (e.g., the extracellular matrix) to which it is anchored. The contraction of adhesion belts alters the shape of epithelial cell sheets: a process that is particularly important during embryonic development, when sheets of epithelial cells fold into structures such as tubes.
The most dramatic example of actin-myosin contraction in nonmuscle cells, however, is provided by cytokinesisthe division of a cell into two following mitosis (Figure 11.27). Toward the end of mitosis in animal cells, a contractile ring consisting of actin filaments and myosin II assembles just underneath the plasma membrane. Its contraction pulls the plasma membrane progressively inward, constricting the center of the cell and pinching it in two. Interestingly, the thickness of the contractile ring remains constant as it contracts, implying that actin filaments disassemble as contraction proceeds. The ring then disperses completely following cell division.
Figure 11.27
Cytokinesis. Following completion of mitosis (nuclear division), a contractile ring consisting of actin filaments and myosin II divides the cell in two.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9961/
This is good. I don’t recall seeing it in the original comment. I am very aware of the actin myosin troponin connection in heart and in skeletal muscle, and I did know about the nonmuscle work. I won’t deal with it now, and I have been working with Aviral now online for 2 hours.
I have had a considerable background from way back in atomic orbital theory, physical chemistry, organic chemistry, and the equilibrium necessary for cations and anions. Despite the calcium role in contraction, I would not discount hypomagnesemia in having a disease role because of the intracellular-extracellular connection. The description you pasted reminds me also of a lecture given a few years ago by the Nobel Laureate that year on the mechanism of cell division.
PUT IT IN CONTEXT OF CANCER CELL MOVEMENT
The contraction of skeletal muscle is triggered by nerve impulses, which stimulate the release of Ca2+ from the sarcoplasmic reticuluma specialized network of internal membranes, similar to the endoplasmic reticulum, that stores high concentrations of Ca2+ ions. The release of Ca2+ from the sarcoplasmic reticulum increases the concentration of Ca2+ in the cytosol from approximately 10-7 to 10-5 M. The increased Ca2+ concentration signals muscle contraction via the action of two accessory proteins bound to the actin filaments: tropomyosin and troponin (Figure 11.25). Tropomyosin is a fibrous protein that binds lengthwise along the groove of actin filaments. In striated muscle, each tropomyosin molecule is bound to troponin, which is a complex of three polypeptides: troponin C (Ca2+-binding), troponin I (inhibitory), and troponin T (tropomyosin-binding). When the concentration of Ca2+ is low, the complex of the troponins with tropomyosin blocks the interaction of actin and myosin, so the muscle does not contract. At high concentrations, Ca2+ binding to troponin C shifts the position of the complex, relieving this inhibition and allowing contraction to proceed.
Figure 11.25
Association of tropomyosin and troponins with actin filaments. (A) Tropomyosin binds lengthwise along actin filaments and, in striated muscle, is associated with a complex of three troponins: troponin I (TnI), troponin C (TnC), and troponin T (TnT). In (more ) Contractile Assemblies of Actin and Myosin in Nonmuscle Cells
Contractile assemblies of actin and myosin, resembling small-scale versions of muscle fibers, are present also in nonmuscle cells. As in muscle, the actin filaments in these contractile assemblies are interdigitated with bipolar filaments of myosin II, consisting of 15 to 20 myosin II molecules, which produce contraction by sliding the actin filaments relative to one another (Figure 11.26). The actin filaments in contractile bundles in nonmuscle cells are also associated with tropomyosin, which facilitates their interaction with myosin II, probably by competing with filamin for binding sites on actin.
Figure 11.26
Contractile assemblies in nonmuscle cells. Bipolar filaments of myosin II produce contraction by sliding actin filaments in opposite directions. Two examples of contractile assemblies in nonmuscle cells, stress fibers and adhesion belts, were discussed earlier with respect to attachment of the actin cytoskeleton to regions of cell-substrate and cell-cell contacts (see Figures 11.13 and 11.14). The contraction of stress fibers produces tension across the cell, allowing the cell to pull on a substrate (e.g., the extracellular matrix) to which it is anchored. The contraction of adhesion belts alters the shape of epithelial cell sheets: a process that is particularly important during embryonic development, when sheets of epithelial cells fold into structures such as tubes.
The most dramatic example of actin-myosin contraction in nonmuscle cells, however, is provided by cytokinesisthe division of a cell into two following mitosis (Figure 11.27). Toward the end of mitosis in animal cells, a contractile ring consisting of actin filaments and myosin II assembles just underneath the plasma membrane. Its contraction pulls the plasma membrane progressively inward, constricting the center of the cell and pinching it in two. Interestingly, the thickness of the contractile ring remains constant as it contracts, implying that actin filaments disassemble as contraction proceeds. The ring then disperses completely following cell division.
Figure 11.27
Cytokinesis. Following completion of mitosis (nuclear division), a contractile ring consisting of actin filaments and myosin II divides the cell in two.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9961/
This is good. I don’t recall seeing it in the original comment. I am very aware of the actin myosin troponin connection in heart and in skeletal muscle, and I did know about the nonmuscle work. I won’t deal with it now, and I have been working with Aviral now online for 2 hours.
I have had a considerable background from way back in atomic orbital theory, physical chemistry, organic chemistry, and the equilibrium necessary for cations and anions. Despite the calcium role in contraction, I would not discount hypomagnesemia in having a disease role because of the intracellular-extracellular connection. The description you pasted reminds me also of a lecture given a few years ago by the Nobel Laureate that year on the mechanism of cell division.