This is the first in a series of articles describing the application of Lean management systems to Laboratory Medicine. Lean is the term used to describe a principle-based continuous quality improvement (CQI) management system based on the Toyota production system (TPS) that has been evolving for over 70 years. Its origins go back much further and are heavily influenced by the work of W Edwards Deming and the scientific method that forms the basis of most quality management systems. Lean has two fundamental elements--a systematic approach to process improvement by removing waste in order to maximise value for the end-user of the service and a commitment to respect, challenge and develop the people who work within the service to create a culture of continuous improvement. Lean principles have been applied to a growing number of Healthcare systems throughout the world to improve the quality and cost-effectiveness of services for patients and a number of laboratories from all the pathology disciplines have used Lean to shorten turnaround times, improve quality (reduce errors) and improve productivity. Increasingly, models used to plan and implement large scale change in healthcare systems, including the National Health Service (NHS) change model, have evidence-based improvement methodologies (such as Lean CQI) as a core component. Consequently, a working knowledge of improvement methodology will be a core skill for Pathologists involved in leadership and management.

A survey of public attitudes showed that there is significant stigma perceived to be associated with Parkinson's disease (PD), as well as significant misconceptions about the course and outcomes of the disease. Negative attitudes to PD were associated with perceived stigma, (younger) age, knowledge of a sufferer and knowledge of the disease. Perceived stigma, negative attitudes and incorrect beliefs are likely to impinge on the psychosocial well-being of those living with the disease, particularly those with early onset. The data from this study was collected from 200 householders and suggest that more public information about positive lifestyle possibilities for those living with Parkinson's would be of value to disease sufferers and their carers.

Background: Quality of care in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has received much attention internationally; however, the available surveys focus on health professionals rather than patients. Aims: To assess the experiences of healthcare for people living with IBD against established Australian IBD Standards. Methods: An online cross-sectional survey was conducted with Australians ≥16 years old recruited via Crohn's & Colitis Australia membership, public and private clinics and the Royal Flying Doctor Service. Participants completed a questionnaire incorporating items addressing the Australian IBD Standards 2016, the Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire, IBD Control Survey and the Manitoba Index. Results: Complete data were provided by 731 respondents (71.5% female, median age 46 years, ranging from 16 to 84 years). While the majority (74.8%) were satisfied with their IBD healthcare, the care reported did not meet the Australian IBD Standards. Overall, 32.4% had access to IBD nurses, 30.9% to a dietician and 12% to a psychologist in their treating team. Participants managed by public IBD clinics were most likely to have access to an IBD nurse (83.7%), helpline (80.7%) and research trials (37%). One third of respondents reported waiting >14 days to see a specialist when their IBD flared. Participants received enough information, mostly from medical specialists (88.8%) and IBD nurses (79.4%). However, 51% wanted to be more involved in their healthcare. Conclusions: These data show discordance between expectations of patients and national standards with current levels of service provision, which fail to deliver equitable and comprehensive IBD care.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) affects up to 20% of the global population and is associated with impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate differences in HRQoL of those with IBS compared with healthy controls and to examine whether HRQoL improves following psychological intervention. Online databases were searched for articles from 2002 to 2017. Studies were screened and data extracted according to predetermined criteria. A total of 4,154 citations were identified from which 36 were eligible for inclusion. Eight studies compared HRQoL of those with IBS (n = 822) with that of healthy individuals (n = 3,809). Those with IBS suffered significant impairment across all HRQoL domains compared with healthy individuals, with the majority of effects (Cohen's d) being moderate to large. Twenty-eight studies investigated HRQoL in IBS following psychological intervention (n = 1,308) relative to controls (n = 1,006). All HRQoL domains improved with large effects following treatment; however, maintenance of these effects was inconsistent. Those with IBS experience poorer HRQoL than the wider community; nevertheless, psychological interventions are associated with improved HRQoL across all domains. High-quality studies are needed to better inform gastroenterological nurses of which interventions are most efficacious in alleviating the burden of IBS, and which IBS subpopulations would benefit.

Background and Aim Data on patient needs and access to psychological services in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are scarce. This study aimed to describe the levels of distress and the needs, attitudes, and access to psychological services for people within Australia against established Australian IBD Standards. Methods An online cross‐sectional survey was conducted with Australians ≥16 years old recruited via Crohn's & Colitis Australia membership, public and private clinics, and the Royal Flying Doctor Service. K10 was used to measure psychological distress. The Chi‐square test was used to compare those with and without distress on key variables. Results Overall, 731 respondents provided complete data (71.5% female, mean age 46.5 years). Overall, 50% of respondents reported distress; only 15.2% were currently seeing a mental health practitioner; only 16.1% were asked about their mental health by their IBD specialist or IBD nurse; and only 12.2% reported access to a mental health practitioner as part of their IBD service. Those with psychological distress were significantly less satisfied with their IBD care; more commonly hospitalized; had an active disease, fistula or perianal disease, pain, or fatigue; and were receiving steroids, opioids, or antidepressants (all P < 0.05). As many as 68.2% of those with severe distress were not seeing a mental health practitioner. Conclusions The integrated biopsychosocial model of health care, with regular mental health screening and good access to mental health professionals, is requested by people living with IBD to improve their outcomes.

No abstract

Background Symptoms of anxiety and depression are common in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Antidepressants are taken by approximately 30% of people with IBD. However, there are no current guidelines on treating co-morbid anxiety and depression in people with IBD with antidepressants, nor are there clear data on the role of antidepressants in managing physical symptoms of IBD. Objectives The objectives were to assess the efficacy and safety of antidepressants for treating anxiety and depression in IBD, and to assess the effects of antidepressants on quality of life (QoL) and managing disease activity in IBD. Search methods We searched MEDLINE; Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Register from inception to 23 August 2018. Reference lists, trials registers, conference proceedings and grey literature were also searched. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing any type of antidepressant to placebo, no treatment or an active therapy for IBD were included. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently screened search results, extracted data and assessed bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess quality of observational studies. GRADE was used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence supporting the outcomes. Primary outcomes included anxiety and depression. Anxiety was assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) or the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS). Depression was assessed using HADS or the Beck Depression Inventory. Secondary outcomes included adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, withdrawal due to AEs, quality of life (QoL), clinical remission, relapse, Adjuvant therapy with antidepressants for the management of inflammatory bowel disease (Review)

No abstract