Recommendations for improving the working conditions and cultures of distressed junior doctors, based on a qualitative study and stakeholder perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Doctors, including junior doctors, are vulnerable to greater levels of distress and mental health difficulties than the public. This is exacerbated by their working conditions and cultures. While this vulnerability has been known for many years, little action has been taken to protect and support junior doctors working in the NHS. As such, we present a series of recommendations from the perspective of junior doctors and other relevant stakeholders, designed to improve junior doctors' working conditions and, thus, their mental health. METHODS: We interviewed 36 junior doctors, asking them for recommendations for improving their working conditions and culture. Additionally, we held an online stakeholder meeting with a variety of healthcare professionals (including junior doctors), undergraduate medical school leads, postgraduate speciality school leads and NHS policymakers where we asked what could be done to improve junior doctors' working conditions. We combined interview data with notes from the stakeholder discussions to produce this set of recommendations. RESULTS: Junior doctor participants and stakeholders made organisational and interpersonal recommendations. Organisational recommendations include the need for more environmental, staff and educational resources as well as changes to rotas. Interpersonal recommendations include changes to communication and recommendations for better support and teamwork. CONCLUSION: We suggest that NHS policymakers, employers and managers consider and hopefully implement the recommendations set out by the study participants and stakeholders as reported in this paper and that the gold standards of practice which are reported here (such as examples of positive learning environments and supportive supervision) are showcased so that others can learn from them.

Relationship between working conditions and psychological distress experienced by junior doctors in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey study.

OBJECTIVES: This paper explored the self-reported prevalence of depression, anxiety and stress among junior doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic. It also reports the association between working conditions and psychological distress experienced by junior doctors. DESIGN: A cross-sectional online survey study was conducted, using the 21-item Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale and Health and Safety Executive scale to measure psychological well-being and working cultures of junior doctors. SETTING: The National Health Service in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: A sample of 456 UK junior doctors was recruited online during the COVID-19 pandemic from March 2020 to January 2021. RESULTS: Junior doctors reported poor mental health, with over 40% scoring extremely severely depressed (45.2%), anxious (63.2%) and stressed (40.2%). Both gender and ethnicity were found to have a significant influence on levels of anxiety. Hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis outlined the specific working conditions which significantly predicted depression (increased demands (ß=0.101), relationships (ß=0.27), unsupportive manager (ß=-0.111)), anxiety (relationships (ß=0.31), change (ß=0.18), demands (ß=0.179)) and stress (relationships (ß=0.18), demands (ß=0.28), role (ß=0.11)). CONCLUSIONS: The findings illustrate the importance of working conditions for junior doctors' mental health, as they were significant predictors for depression, anxiety and stress. Therefore, if the mental health of junior doctors is to be improved, it is important that changes or interventions specifically target the working environment rather than factors within the individual clinician.

Suicide numbers during the first 9-15 months of the COVID-19 pandemic compared with pre-existing trends: An interrupted time series analysis in 33 countries.

Background: Predicted increases in suicide were not generally observed in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the picture may be changing and patterns might vary across demographic groups. We aimed to provide a timely, granular picture of the pandemic's impact on suicides globally. Methods: We identified suicide data from official public-sector sources for countries/areas-within-countries, searching websites and academic literature and contacting data custodians and authors as necessary. We sent our first data request on 22nd June 2021 and stopped collecting data on 31st October 2021. We used interrupted time series (ITS) analyses to model the association between the pandemic's emergence and total suicides and suicides by sex-, age- and sex-by-age in each country/area-within-country. We compared the observed and expected numbers of suicides in the pandemic's first nine and first 10-15 months and used meta-regression to explore sources of variation. Findings: We sourced data from 33 countries (24 high-income, six upper-middle-income, three lower-middle-income; 25 with whole-country data, 12 with data for area(s)-within-the-country, four with both). There was no evidence of greater-than-expected numbers of suicides in the majority of countries/areas-within-countries in any analysis; more commonly, there was evidence of lower-than-expected numbers. Certain sex, age and sex-by-age groups stood out as potentially concerning, but these were not consistent across countries/areas-within-countries. In the meta-regression, different patterns were not explained by countries' COVID-19 mortality rate, stringency of public health response, economic support level, or presence of a national suicide prevention strategy. Nor were they explained by countries' income level, although the meta-regression only included data from high-income and upper-middle-income countries, and there were suggestions from the ITS analyses that lower-middle-income countries fared less well. Interpretation: Although there are some countries/areas-within-countries where overall suicide numbers and numbers for certain sex- and age-based groups are greater-than-expected, these countries/areas-within-countries are in the minority. Any upward movement in suicide numbers in any place or group is concerning, and we need to remain alert to and respond to changes as the pandemic and its mental health and economic consequences continue. Funding: None.

Suicide trends in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic: an interrupted time-series analysis of preliminary data from 21 countries.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is having profound mental health consequences for many people. Concerns have been expressed that, at their most extreme, these consequences could manifest as increased suicide rates. We aimed to assess the early effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide rates around the world. METHODS: We sourced real-time suicide data from countries or areas within countries through a systematic internet search and recourse to our networks and the published literature. Between Sept 1 and Nov 1, 2020, we searched the official websites of these countries' ministries of health, police agencies, and government-run statistics agencies or equivalents, using the translated search terms "suicide" and "cause of death", before broadening the search in an attempt to identify data through other public sources. Data were included from a given country or area if they came from an official government source and were available at a monthly level from at least Jan 1, 2019, to July 31, 2020. Our internet searches were restricted to countries with more than 3 million residents for pragmatic reasons, but we relaxed this rule for countries identified through the literature and our networks. Areas within countries could also be included with populations of less than 3 million. We used an interrupted time-series analysis to model the trend in monthly suicides before COVID-19 (from at least Jan 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020) in each country or area within a country, comparing the expected number of suicides derived from the model with the observed number of suicides in the early months of the pandemic (from April 1 to July 31, 2020, in the primary analysis). FINDINGS: We sourced data from 21 countries (16 high-income and five upper-middle-income countries), including whole-country data in ten countries and data for various areas in 11 countries). Rate ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs based on the observed versus expected numbers of suicides showed no evidence of a significant increase in risk of suicide since the pandemic began in any country or area. There was statistical evidence of a decrease in suicide compared with the expected number in 12 countries or areas: New South Wales, Australia (RR 0·81 [95% CI 0·72-0·91]); Alberta, Canada (0·80 [0·68-0·93]); British Columbia, Canada (0·76 [0·66-0·87]); Chile (0·85 [0·78-0·94]); Leipzig, Germany (0·49 [0·32-0·74]); Japan (0·94 [0·91-0·96]); New Zealand (0·79 [0·68-0·91]); South Korea (0·94 [0·92-0·97]); California, USA (0·90 [0·85-0·95]); Illinois (Cook County), USA (0·79 [0·67-0·93]); Texas (four counties), USA (0·82 [0·68-0·98]); and Ecuador (0·74 [0·67-0·82]). INTERPRETATION: This is the first study to examine suicides occurring in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in multiple countries. In high-income and upper-middle-income countries, suicide numbers have remained largely unchanged or declined in the early months of the pandemic compared with the expected levels based on the pre-pandemic period. We need to remain vigilant and be poised to respond if the situation changes as the longer-term mental health and economic effects of the pandemic unfold. FUNDING: None.

What challenges did junior doctors face while working during the COVID-19 pandemic? A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: This paper reports findings exploring junior doctors' experiences of working during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. DESIGN: Qualitative study using in-depth interviews with 15 junior doctors. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, anonymised and imported into NVivo V.12 to facilitate data management. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. SETTING: National Health Service (NHS) England. PARTICIPANTS: A purposive sample of 12 female and 3 male junior doctors who indicated severe depression and/or anxiety on the DASS-21 questionnaire or high suicidality on Paykel's measure were recruited. These doctors self-identified as having lived experience of distress due to their working conditions. RESULTS: We report three major themes. First, the challenges of working during the COVID-19 pandemic, which were both personal and organisational. Personal challenges were characterised by helplessness and included the trauma of seeing many patients dying, fears about safety and being powerless to switch off. Work-related challenges revolved around change and uncertainty and included increasing workloads, decreasing staff numbers and negative impacts on relationships with colleagues and patients. The second theme was strategies for coping with the impact of COVID-19 on work, which were also both personal and organisational. Personal coping strategies, which appeared limited in their usefulness, were problem and emotion focused. Several participants appeared to have moved from coping towards learnt helplessness. Some organisations reacted to COVID-19 collaboratively and flexibly. Third, participants reported a positive impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on working practices, which included simplified new ways of working-such as consistent teams and longer rotations-as well as increased camaraderie and support. CONCLUSIONS: The trauma that junior doctors experienced while working during COVID-19 led to powerlessness and a reduction in the benefit of individual coping strategies. This may have resulted in feelings of resignation. We recommend that, postpandemic, junior doctors are assigned to consistent teams and offered ongoing support.

Child suicide rates during the COVID-19 pandemic in England.

BACKGROUND: There is concern about the impact of COVID-19, and the control measures to prevent the spread, on children's mental health. The aim of this work was to identify if there had been a rise of childhood suicide during the COVID pandemic. METHOD: Using data from England's National Child Mortality Database (NCMD) the characteristics and rates of children dying of suicide between April and December 2020 were compared with those in 2019. In a subset (1st January to 17th May 2020) further characteristics and possible contributing factors were obtained. RESULTS: A total of 193 likely childhood deaths by suicide were reported. There was no evidence overall suicide deaths were higher in 2020 than 2019 (RR 1.09 (0.80-1.48), p = 0.584) but weak evidence that the rate in the first lockdown period (April to May 2020) was higher than the corresponding period in 2019 (RR 1.56 (0.86-2.81), p = 0.144). Characteristics of individuals were similar between periods. Social restrictions (e.g. to education), disruption to care and support services, tensions at home and isolation appeared to be contributing factors. LIMITATIONS: As child suicides are fortunately rare, the analysis is based on small numbers of deaths with limited statistical power to detect anything but major increases in incidence. CONCLUSION: We found no consistent evidence that child suicide deaths increased during the COVID-19 pandemic although there was a possibility that they may have increased during the first UK lockdown. A similar peak was not seen during the following months, or the second lockdown.

Suicide in England in the COVID-19 pandemic: Early observational data from real time surveillance.

BACKGROUND: There have been concerns that the COVID-19 pandemic may lead to an increase in suicide. The coronial system in England is not suitable for timely monitoring of suicide because of the delay of several months before inquests are held. METHODS: We used data from established systems of "real time surveillance" (RTS) of suspected suicides, in areas covering a total population of around 13 million, to test the hypothesis that the suicide rate rose after the first national lockdown began in England. FINDINGS: The number of suicides in April-October 2020, after the first lockdown began, was 121•3 per month, compared to 125•7 per month in January-March 2020 (-4%; 95% CI-19% to 13%, p = 0•59). Incidence rate ratios did not show a significant rise in individual months after lockdown began and were not raised during the 2-month lockdown period April-May 2020 (IRR: 1•01 [0•81-1•25]) or the 5-month period after the easing of lockdown, June-October 2020 (0•94 [0•81-1•09]). Comparison of the suicide rates after lockdown began in 2020 for the same months in selected areas in 2019 showed no difference. INTERPRETATION: We did not find a rise in suicide rates in England in the months after the first national lockdown began in 2020, despite evidence of greater distress. However, a number of caveats apply. These are early figures and may change. Any effect of the pandemic may vary by population group or geographical area. The use of RTS in this way is new and further development is needed before it can provide full national data. FUNDING: This study was funded by the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP).The HQIP is led by a consortium of the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, the Royal College of Nursing, and National Voices. Its aim is to promote quality improvement in patient outcomes, and in particular, to increase the impact that clinical audit, outcome review programs and registries have on healthcare quality in England and Wales. HQIP holds the contract to commission, manage, and develop the National Clinical Audit and Patient Outcomes Program (NCAPOP), comprising around 40 projects covering care provided to people with a wide range of medical, surgical and mental health conditions. The program is funded by NHS England, the Welsh Government and, with some individual projects, other devolved administrations, and crown dependencies.