Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 713
Filter
1.
BMJ Open ; 12(5): e061373, 2022 May 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1874567

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of a behaviour change physiotherapy intervention to increase physical activity compared with usual rehabilitation after total hip replacement (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR). DESIGN: Multicentre, pragmatic, two-arm, open, randomised controlled, superiority trial. SETTING: National Health Service providers in nine English hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: 224 individuals aged ≥18 years, undergoing a primary THR or TKR deemed 'moderately inactive' or 'inactive'. INTERVENTION: Participants received either six, 30 min, weekly, group-based exercise sessions (usual care) or the same six weekly, group-based, exercise sessions each preceded by a 30 min cognitive behaviour discussion group aimed at challenging barriers to physical inactivity following surgery (experimental). RANDOMISATION AND BLINDING: Initial 75 participants were randomised 1:1 before changing the allocation ratio to 2:1 (experimental:usual care). Allocation was based on minimisation, stratifying on comorbidities, operation type and hospital. There was no blinding. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary: University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Activity Score at 12 months. Secondary: 6 and 12-month assessed function, pain, self-efficacy, kinesiophobia, psychological distress and quality of life. RESULTS: Of the 1254 participants assessed for eligibility, 224 were included (139 experimental: 85 usual care). Mean age was 68.4 years (SD: 8.7), 63% were women, 52% underwent TKR. There was no between-group difference in UCLA score (mean difference: -0.03 (95% CI -0.52 to 0.45, p=0.89)). There were no differences observed in any of the secondary outcomes at 6 or 12 months. There were no important adverse events in either group. The COVID-19 pandemic contributed to the reduced intended sample size (target 260) and reduced intervention compliance. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence to suggest attending usual care physiotherapy sessions plus a group-based behaviour change intervention differs to attending usual care physiotherapy alone. As the trial could not reach its intended sample size, nor a proportion of participants receive their intended rehabilitation, this should be interpreted with caution. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN29770908.


Subject(s)
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee , COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Exercise , Exercise Therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Physical Therapy Modalities , Quality of Life , State Medicine
2.
BMJ Open ; 12(6): e060674, 2022 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1874564

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To explore the experiences of healthcare workers providing non-invasive advanced respiratory support (NARS) to critically unwell patients with COVID-19. DESIGN: A qualitative study drawing on a social constructionist perspective using thematic analysis of semistructured interviews. SETTING: A single acute UK National Health Service Trust across two hospital sites. PARTICIPANTS: Multidisciplinary team members in acute, respiratory and palliative medicine. RESULTS: 21 nurses, doctors (juniors and consultants) and physiotherapists described the provision of NARS to critically unwell COVID-19 patients as extremely challenging. The main themes were of feeling ill prepared and unsupported, a need to balance complex moral actions and a sense of duty to patients and their families. The impact on staff was profound and findings are discussed via a lens of moral injury. Injurious events included staff feeling they had acted in a way that caused harm, failed to prevent harm or had been let down by seniors or the Trust. Participants identified factors that mitigated adverse impact. CONCLUSIONS: Although many of the issues described by participants are likely immutable components of healthcare in a pandemic, there were several important protective factors that emerged from the data. Experience, debriefing and breaks from COVID-19 wards were valuable to participants and successfully achieving a peaceful death for the patient was often viewed as compensation for a difficult journey. These protective factors may provide modelling for future education and support services to help prevent moral injury or aide in its recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Registered on the Open Science Framework, DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/TB5QJ.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospitals , Humans , Pandemics , Qualitative Research , State Medicine
3.
Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 30(3): 177-181, 2022 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1874056

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The incidence of head and neck cancer (HNC) is increasing globally and changes in treatment mean that patients are living longer with the condition. It is recognised that while there have been improvements at the diagnostic phase of the pathway, follow-up and on-going care can be fragmented and inequitable. Integrated care models (ICMs) are acknowledged as beneficial. The National Health Service in England is moving to a model whereby services are being re-organised to integrated care systems. This paper reviews the literature and discusses potential models of care to enhance speech and language therapy (SLT) provision for patients with HNC in line with the emerging ICS. RECENT FINDINGS: The COVID-19 pandemic has provided an opportunity to review service provision and SLT teams quickly adapted to offering remote support. Discussions are currently on-going to explore the potential for patient initiated follow-up via the PETNECK 2 trial and the Buurtzorg 'neighbourhood model' holds promise. SUMMARY: ICMs put the patient at the centre of care and have reported benefits for experience of care and clinical outcomes. Navigating organisational structures is complex. The Buurtzorg model provides a practical and theoretical framework to support organisational change.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated , Head and Neck Neoplasms , COVID-19/epidemiology , England , Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy , Humans , Language Therapy , Pandemics , Speech , State Medicine
4.
BMJ ; 377: o1310, 2022 05 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1865149

Subject(s)
State Medicine , England , Humans
5.
BMJ ; 377: o1224, 2022 05 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1861612
6.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(10)2022 05 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1855604

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study is to identify geographic areas for priority actions in order to control COVID-19 among the elderly living in Residential Care Homes (RCH). We also describe the evolution of COVID-19 in RHC throughout the 278 municipalities of continental Portugal between March and December 2020. METHODS: A spatial population analysis of positive COVID-19 cases reported by the Portuguese National Health Service (NHS) among the elderly living in RCH. The data are for COVID-19 testing, symptomatic status, comorbidities, and income level by municipalities. COVID-19 measures at the municipality level are the proportion of positive cases of elderly living in RCH, positive cases per elderly living in RCH, symptomatic to asymptomatic ratio, and the share of comorbidities cases. Spatial analysis used the Kernel density estimation (KDE), space-time statistic Scan, and geographic weighted regression (GWR) to detect and analyze clusters of infected elderly. RESULTS: Between 3 March and 31 December 2020, the high-risk primary cluster was located in the regions of Braganca, Guarda, Vila Real, and Viseu, in the Northwest of Portugal (relative risk = 3.67), between 30 September and 13 December 2020. The priority geographic areas for attention and intervention for elderly living in care homes are the regions in the Northeast of Portugal, and around the large cities, Lisbon and Porto, which had high risk clusters. The relative risk of infection was spatially not stationary and generally positively affected by both comorbidities and low-income. CONCLUSION: The regions with a population with high comorbidities and low income are a priority for action in order to control COVID-19 in the elderly living in RCH. The results suggest improving both income and health levels in the southwest of Portugal, in the environs of large cities, such as Lisbon and Porto, and in the northwest of Portugal to mitigate the spread of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Health Facilities , Humans , Portugal/epidemiology , State Medicine
7.
BMJ Open ; 11(11): e049859, 2021 11 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1854330

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: A mobile app, BlueIce, was codesigned with young people with a history of self-harm to provide them with more accessible and available evidence-based support at times of distress. A preliminary evaluation found that BlueIce was acceptable, safe and used by young people and helped to reduce self-harm. The present study is designed to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding BlueIce to usual Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a single-blind, randomised controlled trial comparing usual CAMHS care with usual care plus BlueIce. A total of 138 adolescents aged 12-17 with current or a history of self-harm will be recruited through the Oxford Health National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust via their CAMHS clinician. The primary outcome is self-harm at 12 weeks assessed using the Risk Taking and Self-Harm Inventory for Adolescents. Secondary outcomes include mood, anxiety, hopelessness, general behaviour, sleep and impact on everyday life at 12 weeks and 6 months. Health-related quality of life and healthcare resource utilisation data will be collected at baseline, 12 weeks and 6 months. Postuse interviews at 12 weeks will determine the acceptability, safety and usability of BlueIce. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the NHS South Central-Oxford B NHS Research Ethics Committee (19/SC/0212) and by the Health Research Authority (HRA) and Health and Care Research Wales. Findings will be disseminated in peer review open-access journals and at academic conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN10541045.


Subject(s)
Mobile Applications , Self-Injurious Behavior , Adolescent , Child , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Self-Injurious Behavior/prevention & control , Single-Blind Method , Smartphone , State Medicine
8.
BMJ Open ; 12(4): e056369, 2022 04 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1854346

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the impact of the United Kingdom's National Health Service Digital Academy (NHSDA) Digital Health Leadership course on high-level recommendations in digital preparedness and the development of a proficient leadership to oversee digital transformation, which has been a longstanding priority within the NHS. DESIGN: A mixed methods study incorporating an online questionnaire, in-depth interviews and focus groups that were then analysed through a thematic analysis, underpinned by a constructivist approach. SETTINGS: An online mixed methods study of a defined cohort of participants who had completed the NHSDA course. PARTICIPANTS: 26 participants were recruited to the study, of whom 50% were clinicians, 26.9% in management and 19.2% in data science. All had completed the 2-year NHSDA programme in Digital Health Leadership more than 6 months prior. RESULTS: Interviews and focus groups elicited two key areas of impact of the course: loco-regional digitisation and the development of a network of change agents. The dissertation project had direct effects on local digital transformation efforts. Most of these projects focused on clinician (11.7%) or service user (10.3%) engagement, as oppose to de novo digital processes (9.4%). The development of a network of digital leaders has facilitated communication between organisations and improved the efficiency of the national digital infrastructure. CONCLUSIONS: A bespoke course incorporating a dissertation of practice model for digital health leaders can have broader impact for the attainment of digital priorities. This includes helping trusts to successfully adopt digital solutions, as well as fostering shared organisational learning. These influences, however, are mediated by resource and cultural barriers, which continue to hinder transformation efforts.


Subject(s)
Leadership , State Medicine , Focus Groups , Humans
9.
BMJ ; 377: o1145, 2022 05 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1854298
10.
Health Policy ; 126(7): 688-692, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1851145

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 shocked global healthcare systems, particularly the surgical services, resulting in a significant backlog of patients with waiting times not expected to return to pre-pandemic levels until 2025. The Royal College of Surgeons has recommended a wider use of virtual clinics to meet the increased demand. The efficacy of virtual follow up is well documented in the literature; however, there is very little evidence of the role of virtual clinics in the assessment of new elective patients. METHODS: Observational study comparing clinical outcomes of new patients electively referred to orthopaedic virtual clinics between January and February 2021 with face-to-face clinics in January and February 2020. RESULTS: Over the equivalent time frame, more patients were reviewed in virtual clinics compared to traditional face-to-face (821 vs 499). However, virtual clinics lead to significantly more patients being brought back for follow up (78.3% vs 37.3%) and fewer patients received outcomes that progressed their journey towards a definitive intervention or discharge. CONCLUSION: The overall benefit of virtual clinic appointments in the context of reviewing new patients remains to be proven. Despite increasing use of virtual clinics in the National Health Service, we have shown a potential delay to patients' clinical progression, ultimately delaying healthcare delivery. Potential methods to improve the benefit of virtual clinics are proposed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Orthopedics , Ambulatory Care Facilities , Humans , Pandemics , State Medicine
11.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 22(1): 640, 2022 May 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1846838

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic, England's Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) released a White Paper outlining proposed legislative reform of the National Health Service (NHS). Key to the proposals is the shift from relationships between providers based on competition, to cooperation, as the central driver of improved performance and quality. Against this background we explore potential regulatory barriers and enablers to collaboration identified by key NHS stakeholders and assess whether the proposed policy changes are likely to deliver the desired improvement in collaborative relationships, in the context of challenges experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted 32 semi-structured interviews with 30 key stakeholders, taking place during the COVID-19 pandemic from Jan 2020 to May 2021. Participants were selected for their expertise regarding collaboration and were recruited purposively. Interviews were conducted online with the use of video conferencing software. The interviews were thematically analysed to identify themes. Proposals contained in the DHSC White Paper helped to structure the thematic analysis, interpretation, and reporting of the results. RESULTS: Requirements to compete to provide services, regulatory ability to block collaborative arrangements, lack of collaboration between providers and Clinical Commissioning Groups, and current lack of data sharing were found to hamper collaborative efforts. These issues often negatively affected collaborative relations by increasing bureaucracy and prompted leaders to attempt to avoid future collaborations. Other barriers included opaque accountability arrangements, and erosion of trust in regulators. The COVID-19 pandemic was found to foster collaboration between organisations, but some changes mandated by the new legislation may stifle further collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: Many of the proposed legislative changes in the White Paper would help to remove existing barriers to service integration and collaboration identified by stakeholders. However, the proposed shift in the concentration of power from NHS England to the DHSC may exacerbate historically low levels of trust between providers and regulators. Many of the proposed changes fail to address endemic NHS policy issues such as chronic understaffing. Further dialogue is needed at all levels of the health and social care system to ensure future legislative changes meet the needs of all stakeholders.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , State Medicine , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Organizations , Pandemics , Qualitative Research
12.
BMJ Open ; 12(5): e063505, 2022 05 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1846526

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Long COVID, a new condition whose origins and natural history are not yet fully established, currently affects 1.5 million people in the UK. Most do not have access to specialist long COVID services. We seek to optimise long COVID care both within and outside specialist clinics, including improving access, reducing inequalities, helping self-management and providing guidance and decision support for primary care. We aim to establish a 'gold standard' of care by systematically analysing current practices, iteratively improving pathways and systems of care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This mixed-methods, multisite study is informed by the principles of applied health services research, quality improvement, co-design, outcome measurement and learning health systems. It was developed in close partnership with patients (whose stated priorities are prompt clinical assessment; evidence-based advice and treatment and help with returning to work and other roles) and with front-line clinicians. Workstreams and tasks to optimise assessment, treatment and monitoring are based in three contrasting settings: workstream 1 (qualitative research, up to 100 participants), specialist management in 10 long COVID clinics across the UK, via a quality improvement collaborative, experience-based co-design and targeted efforts to reduce inequalities of access, return to work and peer support; workstream 2 (quantitative research, up to 5000 participants), patient self-management at home, technology-supported monitoring and validation of condition-specific outcome measures and workstream 3 (quantitative research, up to 5000 participants), generalist management in primary care, harnessing electronic record data to study population phenotypes and develop evidence-based decision support, referral pathways and analysis of costs. Study governance includes an active patient advisory group. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: LOng COvid Multidisciplinary consortium Optimising Treatments and servIces acrOss the NHS study is sponsored by the University of Leeds and approved by Yorkshire & The Humber-Bradford Leeds Research Ethics Committee (ref: 21/YH/0276). Participants will provide informed consent. Dissemination plans include academic and lay publications, and partnerships with national and regional policymakers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05057260, ISRCTN15022307.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Locomotion , State Medicine , United Kingdom
13.
BMJ Open ; 12(5): e058628, 2022 05 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1846524

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess accuracy of emergency medical service (EMS) telephone triage in identifying patients who need an EMS response and identify factors which affect triage accuracy. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Emergency telephone triage provided by Yorkshire Ambulance Service (YAS) National Health Service (NHS) Trust. PARTICIPANTS: 12 653 adults who contacted EMS telephone triage services provided by YAS between 2 April 2020 and 29 June 2020 assessed by COVID-19 telephone triage pathways were included. OUTCOME: Accuracy of call handler decision to dispatch an ambulance was assessed in terms of death or need for organ support at 30 days from first contact with the telephone triage service. RESULTS: Callers contacting EMS dispatch services had an 11.1% (1405/12 653) risk of death or needing organ support. In total, 2000/12 653 (16%) of callers did not receive an emergency response and they had a 70/2000 (3.5%) risk of death or organ support. Ambulances were dispatched to 4230 callers (33.4%) who were not conveyed to hospital and did not deteriorate. Multivariable modelling found variables of older age (1 year increase, OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.05) and presence of pre-existing respiratory disease (OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.60) to be predictors of false positive triage. CONCLUSION: Telephone triage can reduce ambulance responses but, with low specificity. A small but significant proportion of patients who do not receive an initial emergency response deteriorated. Research to improve accuracy of EMS telephone triage is needed and, due to limitations of routinely collected data, this is likely to require prospective data collection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Medical Services , Adult , Ambulances , Cohort Studies , Data Collection , Humans , State Medicine , Telephone , Triage
14.
Health Syst Transit ; 24(1): 1-194, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1842621

ABSTRACT

This analysis provides a review of developments in financing, governance, organisation and delivery, health reforms and performance of the health systems in the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom has enjoyed a national health service with access based on clinical need, and not ability to pay for over 70 years. This has provided several important benefits including protection against the financial consequences of ill-health, redistribution of wealth from rich to poor, and relatively low administrative costs. Despite this, the United Kingdom continues to lag behind many other comparable high-income countries in key measures including life expectancy, infant mortality and cancer survival. Total health spending in the United Kingdom is slightly above the average for Europe, but it is below many other comparable high-income countries such as Germany, France and Canada. The United Kingdom also has relatively lower levels of doctors, nurses, hospital beds and equipment than many other comparable high-income countries. Wider social determinants of health also contribute to poor outcomes, and the United Kingdom has one of the highest levels of income inequality in Europe. Devolution of responsibility for health care services since the late 1990s to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland has resulted in divergence in policies between countries, including in prescription charges, and eligibility for publicly funded social care services. However, more commonalities than differences remain between these health care systems. The United Kingdom initially experienced one of the highest death rates associated with COVID-19; however, the success and speed of the United Kingdom's vaccination programme has since improved the United Kingdom's performance in this respect. Principal health reforms in each country are focusing on facilitating cross-sectoral partnerships and promoting integration of services in a manner that improves the health and well-being of local populations. These include the establishment of integrated care systems in England, integrated joint boards in Scotland, regional partnership boards in Wales and integrated partnership boards in Northern Ireland. Policies are also being developed to align the social care funding model closer to the National Health Service funding model. These include a cap on costs over an individual's lifetime in England, and a national care service free at the point of need in Scotland and Wales. Currently, and for the future, significant investment is needed to address major challenges including a growing backlog of elective care, and staffing shortfalls exacerbated by Brexit.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , State Medicine , European Union , Humans , Quality of Health Care , United Kingdom
15.
Acta Orthop Belg ; 88(1): 211-213, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1836674

ABSTRACT

The United Kingdom (UK) Covid-19 pandemic has led to unique changes in the operation of the National Health Service (NHS) including within trauma and orthopaedics. This has led to a significant impact on the NHS ability to provide hip fracture care and sustain emergency surgery. This has led to local hip fracture services changing operations to provide more sustainable care and significant impacts on best practice tariffs. Data was collected using the National Hip Fracture Database data submitted by UHL and split into two cohorts - Pre Covid-19 and Post Covid-19. Data has been collected for 67 consecutive patients in April 2019 (Pre Covid-19) and 87 consecutive patients in April 2020 (Post Covid-19) as of 4th May after the introduction of the Covid-19 measures locally. Data has been collected on demographics- age and sex, ASA, admission time, time of operation, 30 day mortality and length of stay. The average time to theatre in the pre Covid-19 cohort was 27.3 hours and in the post Covid-19 cohort was 45.1 hours. This is an increase of 65.2%. All patients in the pre Covid-19 cohort were operated on and 4 in the post Covid-19 were conservatively managed. However, there were no significant effects on 30 day mortality or length of stay. In conclusion, the measures taken due to the Covid-19 pandemic had a profound impact on the care of hip fracture patients with significant delays in time to theatre. As a result, it is clear that the measures influenced practice at UHL and the best practice tariffs were not met.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hip Fractures , Hip Fractures/surgery , Hospitals, University , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , State Medicine
16.
BMJ Open ; 12(5): e058526, 2022 05 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1832460

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, changes to established care pathways and discharge thresholds for patients with fragility fractures were made. This was to increase hospital bed capacity and minimise the inpatient risk of contracting COVID-19. This study aims to identify the excess death rate in this population during the first wave of the pandemic. DESIGN: A longitudinal cohort study of patients with fragility fractures identified by specific International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes. The first wave of the pandemic was defined as the 3-month period between 1 March and 1 June 2020. The control group presented between 1 March and 1 June 2019. SETTING: Two acute National Health Service hospitals within the East Midlands region of England. PARTICIPANTS: 1846 patients with fragility fractures over the aforementioned two specified matched time points. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Four-month mortality of all patients with fragility fractures with a subanalysis of patients with fragility hip fractures. RESULTS: 832 patients with fragility fracture were admitted during the pandemic period (104 diagnosed with COVID-19). 1014 patients presented with fragility fractures in the control group. Mortality in patients with fragility fracture without COVID-19 was significantly higher among pandemic period admissions (14.7%) than the pre-pandemic cohort (10.2%) (HR=1.86; 95% CI 1.41 to 2.45; p<0.001) adjusted for age and sex. Length of stay was shorter during the pandemic period (effect size=-4.2 days; 95% CI -5.8 to -3.1, p<0.001). Subanalysis of patients with fragility hip fracture revealed a mortality of 8.4% in the pre-pandemic cohort, and 15.48% during pandemic admissions with no COVID-19 diagnosis (HR=2.08; 95% CI 1.11 to 3.90; p=0.021). CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant increase in excess death, not explained by confirmed COVID-19 infections. Altered care pathways and aggressive discharge criteria during the pandemic are likely responsible for the increase in excess deaths.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hip Fractures , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Critical Pathways , Hip Fractures/epidemiology , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , State Medicine
17.
BMJ Open ; 12(5): e057467, 2022 05 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1832456

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare students have played a significant role in the National Health Service during the COVID-19 pandemic. We captured data on the well-being of medical students during the acute phase of the pandemic with the Social and Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on medical students: a national survey Evaluation (SPICE-19) study. We will evaluate changes in mental health and well-being of medical and nursing students 1 year after SPICE-19, in a cross-sectional study, to understand the impact of the pandemic, and inform well-being policies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will be a national, multi-institution, cross-discipline study. An online 53-item survey of demographics, mental health and well-being will be used to record responses. Students studying for a medical or nursing degree at any UK universities will be eligible to participate. The survey will be advertised through the Neurology and Neurosurgery Interest Group national network. Participation is anonymous and voluntary, with relevant mental health resources made available to participants. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by the University of Oxford Central University Research Ethics Committee (R75719/RE001) on 21 May 2021. Study findings will be presented at national and international meetings, and submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Students, Medical , Students, Nursing , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Pandemics , State Medicine , United Kingdom/epidemiology
18.
BMJ Open ; 12(4): e055679, 2022 04 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1832448

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To understand the experiences and perceived benefits of virtual visiting from the perspectives of intensive care unit (ICU)-experienced clinicians and non-ICU-experienced family liaison team members. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive study. SETTING: Adult intensive care setting across 14 hospitals within the UK National Health Service. PARTICIPANTS: ICU-experienced clinicians and non-ICU-experienced family liaison team members deployed during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Semistructured telephone/video interviews were conducted with ICU clinicians. Analytical themes were developed inductively following a standard thematic approach, using 'family-centred care' and 'sensemaking' as sensitising concepts. RESULTS: We completed 36 interviews, with 17 ICU-experienced clinicians and 19 non-ICU-experienced family liaison team members. In the context of inperson visiting restrictions, virtual visiting offered an alternative conduit to (1) restoring the family unit, (2) facilitating family involvement, and (3) enabling sensemaking for the family. Virtual visits with multiple family members concurrently and with those living in distant geographical locations restored a sense of family unit. Family involvement in rehabilitation, communication and orientation activities, as well as presence at the end of life, highlighted how virtual visiting could contribute to family-centred care. Virtual visits were emotionally challenging for many family members, but also cathartic in helping make sense of their own emotions and experience by visualising their relatives in the ICU. Being able to see and interact with loved ones and their immediate care providers afforded important cues to enable family sensemaking of the ICU experience. CONCLUSIONS: In this UK qualitative study of clinicians using virtual ICU visiting, in the absence of inperson visiting, virtual visiting was perceived positively as an alternative that promoted family-centred care through virtual presence. We anticipate the perceived benefits of virtual visiting may extend to non-pandemic conditions through improved equity and timeliness of family access to the ICU by offering an alternative option alongside inperson visiting.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Critical Care/psychology , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Pandemics , State Medicine
19.
Br J Anaesth ; 128(6): 971-979, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1828008

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic generated a surge of critically ill patients greater than the capacity of the UK National Health Service (NHS). There have been multiple well-documented impacts associated with the national COVID-19 pandemic surge on ICU staff, including an increased prevalence of mental health disorders on a scale potentially sufficient to impair high-quality care delivery. We investigated the prevalence of five mental health outcomes; explored demographic and professional predictors of poor mental health outcomes; and describe the prevalence of functional impairment; and explore demographic and professional predictors of functional impairment in ICU staff over the 2020/2021 winter COVID-19 surge in England. METHODS: English ICU staff were surveyed before, during, and after the winter 2020/2021 surge using a survey which comprised validated measures of mental health. RESULTS: A total of 6080 surveys were completed, by ICU nurses (57.5%), doctors (27.9%), and other healthcare staff (14.5%). Reporting probable mental health disorders increased from 51% (before) to 64% (during), and then decreased to 46% (after). Younger, less experienced nursing staff were most likely to report probable mental health disorders. During and after the winter, >50% of participants met threshold criteria for functional impairment. Staff who reported probable post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, or depression were more likely to meet threshold criteria for functional impairment. CONCLUSIONS: The winter of 2020/2021 was associated with an increase in poor mental health outcomes and functional impairment amongst ICU staff during a period of peak caseload. These effects are likely to impact on patient care outcomes and the longer-term resilience of the healthcare workforce.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Mental Health , Pandemics , State Medicine
20.
BMJ Open ; 12(4): e056420, 2022 04 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1822070

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) is associated with significant impairment of functioning and high treatment costs. Identification of patients at high risk of TRS at the time of their initial diagnosis may significantly improve clinical outcomes and minimise social and functional disability. We aim to develop a prognostic model for predicting the risk of developing TRS in patients with first-episode schizophrenia and to examine its potential utility and acceptability as a clinical decision tool. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use two well-characterised longitudinal UK-based first-episode psychosis cohorts: Aetiology and Ethnicity in Schizophrenia and Other Psychoses and Genetics and Psychosis for which data have been collected on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. We will identify candidate predictors for the model based on current literature and stakeholder consultation. Model development will use all data, with the number of candidate predictors restricted according to available sample size and event rate. A model for predicting risk of TRS will be developed based on penalised regression, with missing data handled using multiple imputation. Internal validation will be undertaken via bootstrapping, obtaining optimism-adjusted estimates of the model's performance. The clinical utility of the model in terms of clinically relevant risk thresholds will be evaluated using net benefit and decision curves (comparative to competing strategies). Consultation with patients and clinical stakeholders will determine potential thresholds of risk for treatment decision-making. The acceptability of embedding the model as a clinical tool will be explored using qualitative focus groups with up to 20 clinicians in total from early intervention services. Clinicians will be recruited from services in Stafford and London with the focus groups being held via an online platform. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The development of the prognostic model will be based on anonymised data from existing cohorts, for which ethical approval is in place. Ethical approval has been obtained from Keele University for the qualitative focus groups within early intervention in psychosis services (ref: MH-210174). Suitable processes are in place to obtain informed consent for National Health Service staff taking part in interviews or focus groups. A study information sheet with cover letter and consent form have been prepared and approved by the local Research Ethics Committee. Findings will be shared through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and social media. A lay summary will be published on collaborator websites.


Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents , Psychotic Disorders , Schizophrenia , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Health Care Costs , Humans , Psychotic Disorders/therapy , Schizophrenia/drug therapy , State Medicine
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL