Protective action in the workplace in the time of COVID-19: The role of worker representation.

BACKGROUND: This study addresses the contribution of worker representation to health and safety in the pandemic context. To do so, we examine whether the self-reported presence of representatives in workplaces is associated with the implementation of anti-COVID-19 protective action and with which type of measures their existence is most strongly associated (individual, collective or organizational). The article also explores how the presence of worker representatives and anti-COVID-19 protective measures are distributed according to workers' socio-professional characteristics and company features. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study based on an online survey conducted in Spain (n = 19,452 workers). Multiple Correspondence Analysis was used for the multivariate description while the association between worker representation and protective measures was assessed by robust Poisson regressions. RESULTS: The maps resulting from the Multiple Correspondence Analysis allow for the identification of patterns of inequalities in protection, with a clear occupational social class divide. The regression models show that protective measures are applied more frequently where worker representatives exist, this association being particularly strong in relation to organizational measures. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of worker representation is systematically associated with a greater presence of protective measures, which could have implications for the reduction of social inequalities resulting from labor-management practices.

JOB INSECURITY, MENTAL AND GENERAL HEALTH OVER TIME: A LONGITUDINAL UPDATE OF A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY.

OBJECTIVE: To test the relationship between different conceptualizations of job insecurity and health over time by applying a longitudinal design. METHODS: 543 workers were re-interviewed after one year to check if being exposed to job insecurity affected their general and mental health. Robust Poisson regressions were fitted to calculate the incidence rate ratio between job insecurities and two health outcomes. RESULTS: Cognitive job loss insecurity increases the risk of poor mental and general health. Other expressions of job insecurity such as labor market insecurity and working conditions insecurity, as well as affective job insecurity, are not significantly related to health across time. CONCLUSIONS: Caution is needed when interpreting cross-sectional results. Protection against the threat of losing a job would prevent mental health issues and poor general health.

Sickness Presenteeism and Psychosocial Risk Factors According to Inequality Axes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between psychosocial risk factors (PSRs) and sickness presenteeism (SP) and examine possible differences according to the major axes of inequality in the labor market. Methods: Cross-sectional study based on a representative sample of the Spanish salaried population. Results: Although nearly all PSR show crude associations with SP, when adjusted for every other PSR, only the workers exposed to lack of role clarity (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR], 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.68), having role conflicts (aPR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.77) and lack of sense of community at work (aPR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.59) show a significant association. Conclusions: After adjusting for all PSR, those significantly associated to SP belong to the interpersonal relationships domain. Some of the PSR effects change according to the segmentation axes analyzed.

Is clinical coordination across care levels different according to the secondary care medical speciality? Results from the Catalan health system.

BACKGROUND: Despite the scarce evidence, some studies suggest that cross-level clinical coordination may vary among secondary care (SC) doctors, influenced by their speciality and organisational model, including degree of decentralisation to primary care (PC). The aim was to determine the differences in experience and perception of cross-level clinical coordination and related factors according to the SC doctor's speciality in the Catalan health system. METHODS: Cross-sectional study, based on an on-line survey using the COORDENA-CAT questionnaire, to SC doctors (n = 1666). Descriptive and multivariate analysis were used to compare five groups of SC specialities (decentralised, hospital-based, internists/geriatricians, gynaecologist, and paediatricians), for experience, perception and factors related to coordination. RESULTS: When comparing with decentralised specialities, hospital-based specialities and internal medicine/geriatrics reported lower care consistency and follow up across levels, while gynaecology and paediatrics, higher accessibility. General perception of cross-level coordination was lower in hospital-based specialities (PR:0.80, 95% CI 0.72-0.89) and higher in gynaecology (PR:1.36, 95% CI 1.18-1.56). Moreover, hospital-based specialities reported a lower use of some coordination mechanisms and lower knowledge of the primary care doctors (PR:0.42, 95% CI 0.23-0.72), while gynaecology a higher knowledge (PR:2.04, 95% CI 1.22-3.45). CONCLUSIONS: Results show differences in experience, perception of coordination, organisational and interactional factors across specialities. These differences may be explained by their complexity, coordination needs and organisational model. Further research is needed to clarify and understand the causes of such differences and the particular needs of coordination of each speciality to identify strategies to improve cross-level clinical coordination.

Mental health inequalities in times of crisis: evolution between 2005 and 2021 among the Spanish salaried population.

BACKGROUND: Studying the working population's mental health in times of crisis (such as the 2008 recession or the COVID-19 pandemic) is very relevant. This study aims to assess the prevalence of poor mental health among the Spanish salaried population, according to the labour market inequality axes (2005-2021). METHODS: Repeated cross-sectional study by comparing different surveys from 2005, 2010, 2016 and 2021 on workers residing in Spain who had been working in a salaried job during the week preceding the survey. n=7197 (2005), n=4985 (2010), n=1807 (2016) and n=18 870 (2021). OUTCOME VARIABLE: poor mental health (Mental Health Inventory of the 36-item Short Form Health Survey scale). Explanatory variables: gender, age, occupational class and type of contract. Prevalence of poor mental health was estimated for each year by means of logistic regression models with robust clustered SEs, stratifying by the explanatory variables. Additionally, prevalence ratios (PR) were estimated by means of robust Poisson regression models to assess differences between the explanatory variables' categories. All analyses were weighted to address unrepresentativeness. RESULTS: Poor mental health significantly increased in 2021 (55.92%), compared with the previous years of study (15%-17.72%). Additionally, pattern changes were identified on inequality axes in 2021, with better mental health status among older workers (oldest group PR: 0.76; 95% CI 0.71 to 0.8) and permanent workers (PR: 0.9; 95% CI 0.85 to 0.94). CONCLUSION: This study shows a steep worsening of mental health among the salaried population in 2021 compared with previous periods. In 2021, health inequalities have apparently narrowed, although not by improving the disadvantaged groups' mental health but by worsening the typically advantaged groups' mental health.

¿La integración de la gestión de servicios sanitarios mejora la coordinación clínica? Experiencia en Cataluña / Does the integration of health services management improve clinical coordination? Experience in Catalonia

Objetivo: Analizar la experiencia y la percepción de coordinación clínica entre niveles asistenciales y los factores relacionados, organizativos y de interacción entre profesionales, según el tipo de integración de la gestión de los servicios de salud del área en Cataluña. Método: Estudio transversal basado en una encuesta on-line mediante autoadministración del cuestionario COORDENA-CAT (octubre-diciembre 2017). Población de estudio: médicos/as de atención primaria y especializada de agudos y media y larga estancia del sistema sanitario catalán. Muestra: 3308 médicos/as. Variables de resultado: experiencia y percepción de coordinación clínica, conocimiento y uso de mecanismos de coordinación y factores relacionados. Variables explicativas: área según tipo de gestión (integrada, semiintegrada, no integrada), sociodemográficas, laborales y de actitud. Análisis descriptivos por tipo de área y multivariados mediante regresión de Poisson robusta. Resultados: Se observaron mejores resultados de experiencia y percepción de coordinación clínica en áreas integradas que en semiintegradas, en especial en la transferencia de información y el seguimiento adecuado entre niveles. En cambio, no se encontraron diferencias entre áreas integradas y no integradas en la experiencia, aunque sí en la percepción de coordinación y algunos factores. Algunos problemas identificados son comunes a todas las áreas, como la accesibilidad entre niveles. Conclusiones: Las pocas diferencias entre áreas integradas y no integradas parecen indicar que la integración de la gestión puede facilitar la coordinación clínica, pero no es condición suficiente. Las diferencias con áreas semiintegradas parecen indicar la necesidad de promover la cooperación entre todos los proveedores de un territorio, con objetivos y mecanismos de coordinación comunes, para evitar desigualdades en la calidad asistencial. (AU)

Objective: To analyze the experience and perception of clinical coordination across care levels and doctor's organizational and interactional related factors, according to the type of management integration of the healthcare services of the area, in Catalonia. Method: Cross-sectional study based on an online survey by self-administration of the questionnaire COORDENA-CAT. Data collection: October-December 2017. Study population: primary and secondary care (acute and long-term care) doctors of the public Catalan health system. Sample: 3308 doctors. Outcome variables: experience and perception of clinical coordination, knowledge and use of coordination mechanisms and organizational and interactional factors; explanatory variables: area according to type of management (integrated, semi-integrated, non-integrated), socio-demographic, employment characteristics and attitude toward work. Descriptive analysis by type of area and multivariate analysis by robust Poisson regression. Results: Better clinical coordination was observed in integrated areas compared to those semi-integrated, mainly in relation to information transfer, adequate follow-up and perception of coordination in the area. No differences were found between integrated and non-integrated areas in the clinical coordination experience, although there were differences in perception and some related factors. There are common problems across areas, such as accessibility to secondary care. Conclusions: Few differences were found between integrated and non-integrated areas, revealing that management integration may facilitate clinical coordination but is not enough. Differences with semi-integrated areas indicate the need to promote cooperation formulas between all the providers of the territory, with common objectives and coordination mechanisms, in order to avoid inequalities in quality of care. (AU)

[Does the integration of health services management improve clinical coordination? Experience in Catalonia]. / ¿La integración de la gestión de servicios sanitarios mejora la coordinación clínica? Experiencia en Cataluña.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the experience and perception of clinical coordination across care levels and doctor's organizational and interactional related factors, according to the type of management integration of the healthcare services of the area, in Catalonia. METHOD: Cross-sectional study based on an online survey by self-administration of the questionnaire COORDENA-CAT. DATA COLLECTION: October-December 2017. STUDY POPULATION: primary and secondary care (acute and long-term care) doctors of the public Catalan health system. SAMPLE: 3308 doctors. OUTCOME VARIABLES: experience and perception of clinical coordination, knowledge and use of coordination mechanisms and organizational and interactional factors; explanatory variables: area according to type of management (integrated, semi-integrated, non-integrated), socio-demographic, employment characteristics and attitude toward work. Descriptive analysis by type of area and multivariate analysis by robust Poisson regression. RESULTS: Better clinical coordination was observed in integrated areas compared to those semi-integrated, mainly in relation to information transfer, adequate follow-up and perception of coordination in the area. No differences were found between integrated and non-integrated areas in the clinical coordination experience, although there were differences in perception and some related factors. There are common problems across areas, such as accessibility to secondary care. CONCLUSIONS: Few differences were found between integrated and non-integrated areas, revealing that management integration may facilitate clinical coordination but is not enough. Differences with semi-integrated areas indicate the need to promote cooperation formulas between all the providers of the territory, with common objectives and coordination mechanisms, in order to avoid inequalities in quality of care.

Understanding How to Improve the Use of Clinical Coordination Mechanisms between Primary and Secondary Care Doctors: Clues from Catalonia.

Clinical coordination between primary (PC) and secondary care (SC) is a challenge for health systems, and clinical coordination mechanisms (CCM) play an important role in the interface between care levels. It is therefore essential to understand the elements that may hinder their use. This study aims to analyze the level of use of CCM, the difficulties and factors associated with their use, and suggestions for improving clinical coordination. A cross-sectional online survey-based study using the questionnaire COORDENA-CAT was conducted with 3308 PC and SC doctors in the Catalan national health system. Descriptive bivariate analysis and logistic regression models were used. Shared Electronic Medical Records were the most frequently used CCM, especially by PC doctors, and the one that presented most difficulties in use, mostly related to technical problems. Some factors positively associated with frequent use of various CCM were: working full-time in integrated areas, or with local hospitals. Interactional and organizational factors contributed to a greater extent among SC doctors. Suggestions for improving clinical coordination were similar between care levels and related mainly to the improvement of CCM. In an era where management tools are shifting towards technology-based CCM, this study can help to design strategies to improve their effectiveness.

Do primary and secondary care doctors have a different experience and perception of cross-level clinical coordination? Results of a cross-sectional study in the Catalan National Health System (Spain).

BACKGROUND: Clinical coordination across care levels is a priority for health systems around the world, especially for those based on primary health care. The aim of this study is to analyse the degree of clinical information and clinical management coordination across healthcare levels in the Catalan national health system experienced by primary (PC) and secondary care (SC) doctors and explore the associated factors. METHODS: Cross-sectional study based on an online survey using the self-administered questionnaire COORDENA-CAT. DATA COLLECTION: October-December 2017. STUDY POPULATION: PC and SC (acute and long term) doctors of the Catalan national health system. Participation rate was 21%, with a sample of 3308 doctors. OUTCOME VARIABLES: cross-level clinical information coordination, clinical management coordination, and perception of cross-level coordination within the area. Explanatory variables: socio-demographic, employment characteristics, attitude towards job, type of area (according to type of hospital and management), interactional factors, organizational factors and knowledge of existing coordination mechanisms. Stratification variable: level of care. Descriptive and multivariate analysis by logistic regression. RESULTS: The degree of clinical coordination experienced across levels of care was high for both PC and SC doctors, although PC doctors experienced greater exchange and use of information and SC doctors experienced greater consistency of care. However, only 32.13% of PC and 35.72% of SC doctors found that patient care was coordinated across care levels within their area. In both levels of care, knowing the doctors of the other level, working in an area where the same entity manages SC and majority of PC, and holding joint clinical case conferences were factors positively associated with perceiving high levels of clinical coordination. Other associated factors were specific to the care level, such as being informed of a patient's discharge from hospital for PC doctors, or trusting in the clinical skills of the other care level for SC doctors. CONCLUSIONS: Interactional and organizational factors are positively associated with perceiving high levels of clinical coordination. Introducing policies to enhance such factors can foster clinical coordination between different health care levels. The COORDENA questionnaire allows us to identify fields for improvement in clinical coordination.