Return to driving after total hip and knee arthroplasty - the perspective of employed patients.

PURPOSE: To address the paucity of research on patient perspectives regarding return to driving after Total Hip and Total Knee arthroplasty (THA; TKA), and how this impacts on return-to-work. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Employed participants, who had undergone THA or TKA, took part in semi-structured telephone interviews. They were asked about support received regarding driving, who provided this information, and the impact of this on their return to driving and consequently work. RESULTS: Thirty-eight people were interviewed. Although sources of information and advice were available, patients struggled to know who to approach. Interviewees reported variations and contradictions in the advice given on when they could safely return to driving after surgery. Of note, there was little difference in the advice given to those who had undergone THA compared to TKA. Many participants devised their own plan for returning to driving. CONCLUSIONS: There is inconsistency in driving advice provided after THA and TKA. Consequently, patients make their own decisions about how and when to drive, and develop strategies to accelerate the process. Greater clarity is required from healthcare professionals on time frames for driving post-surgery and for advising patients on their responsibilities around informing the DVLA and insurance companies of their surgery.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONHealthcare professionals should be aware of medico-legal requirements when advising patients about their legal responsibilities regarding driving after joint arthroplasty.Given the pivotal role of driving in the resumption of work after joint arthroplasty, there needs to be greater importance placed on the provision of explicit advice and support on driving for those undergoing orthopaedic surgery.As driving is a complex skill, the advice given to patients should be individualised.Factors to be considered should be the type of vehicle driven e.g., automatic/manual transmission; height of the vehicle from the ground; the side of the surgery; any medication prescribed which might impact on driving, and consideration of any comorbidities.

Return to work advice after total hip and knee replacement.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the information and advice on return to work received by patients undergoing total hip and knee replacement. AIMS: To investigate patients' views and experiences of work-related advice provided by clinicians, and how this might be improved. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with patients who had undergone total hip and knee replacement, were working prior to surgery and intended to return to work. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Forty-five patients from three UK regions were consented. Eight themes were identified including lack of information, lack of an individualized approach and accessibility and acceptability of information dissemination methods. Patients identified their information needs and who they felt was best placed to address them. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receive little information and advice on return to work following total hip and knee replacement, although not all patients required this. However, more focus is needed on providing this, and patients should be screened to ensure resources are best targeted with interventions being tailored to the individual.

Engaging workplace representatives in research: what recruitment strategies work best?

Background: Workplaces are key stakeholders in work and health but little is known about the methods used to recruit workplace representatives (WRs), including managers, occupational health advisers and colleagues, to externally funded healthcare research studies. Aims: To detail the strategies used in recruiting WRs from three areas of the UK to a qualitative study concerning their experience of employees undergoing hip or knee replacement, to compare the strategies and inform recruitment methods for future studies. Methods: Six strategies were used to recruit WRs from organizations of different sizes and sectors. Data on numbers approached and responses received were analysed descriptively. Results: Twenty-five WRs were recruited. Recruitment had to be extended outside the main three study areas, and took several months. It proved more difficult to recruit from non-service sectors and small- and medium-sized enterprises. The most successful strategies were approaching organizations that had participated in previous research studies, or known professionally or personally to team members. Conclusions: Recruiting a diverse sample of WRs to healthcare research requires considerable resources and persistence, and a range of strategies. Recruitment is easier where local relationships already exist; the importance of building and maintaining these relationships cannot be underestimated. However, the potential risks of bias and participant fatigue need to be acknowledged and managed. Further studies are needed to explore how WRs can be recruited to health research, and to identify the researcher effort and costs involved in achieving unbiased and representative samples.

How do GPs complete fit note comments?

BACKGROUND: The 'fit note' was introduced in the UK in April 2010, to facilitate return to work (RTW). However, no research to date has reported on how general practitioners (GPs) complete the comments section of the fit note. AIMS: To investigate the content of GPs' comments in a sample of actual fit notes. METHODS: Data were collected in a service evaluation of fit notes issued by a regular general practice and those issued by a fit for work service (FFWS), where the fit notes for patients using the service are signed by GPs who have completed or are studying for a Diploma in Occupational Medicine. Content analysis was conducted on the fit note comments. RESULTS: There were 1212 fit notes available for analysis. Seven hundred and twelve were issued by the general practice and 500 by the FFWS. The FFWS made comments in 98% of those who may be fit and 90% of those not fit against 72% and 12%, respectively, for comments by the general practice. Fourteen different categories were identified in the comments. Most comments made some reference to RTW but few described the functional effects of the patient's condition. Comments frequently covered more than one category and appeared to be serving a number of different purposes. CONCLUSIONS: There was a wide variety in how the comments section was completed, and GPs were not completing the fit note as intended. The information provided may require improvement if it is to be useful to employers.

Bacillus thuringiensis: ecology, the significance of natural genetic modification, and regulation.

Legislation and regulation in respect of genetically modified microorganisms must be based on rick-assessment principles rather than on the current European concept of pathogenicity, which is a measure of hazard. Natural genetic modification has commerical attractions where the processes can be exempted from regulation. Bacillus thuringiensis is used to illustrate this in the context of the European Directives and UK regulation.