Developing a typology of interventions to support doctors' mental health and wellbeing.

BACKGROUND: The problem of mental ill-health in doctors is complex, accentuated by the COVID-19 pandemic, and impacts on healthcare provision and broader organisational performance. There are many interventions to address the problem but currently no systematic way to categorise them, which makes it hard to describe and compare interventions. As a result, implementation tends to be unfocussed and fall short of the standards developed for implementing complex healthcare interventions. This study aims to develop: 1) a conceptual typology of workplace mental health and wellbeing interventions and 2) a mapping tool to apply the typology within research and practice. METHODS: Typology development was based on iterative cycles of analysis of published and in-practice interventions, incorporation of relevant theories and frameworks, and team and stakeholder group discussions. RESULTS: The newly developed typology and mapping tool enable interventions to be conceptualised and/or mapped into different categories, for example whether they are designed to be largely preventative (by either improving the workplace or increasing personal resources) or to resolve problems after they have arisen. Interventions may be mapped across more than one category to reflect the nuance and complexity in many mental health and wellbeing interventions. Mapping of interventions indicated that most publications have not clarified their underlying assumptions about what causes outcomes or the theoretical basis for the intervention. CONCLUSION: The conceptual typology and mapping tool aims to raise the quality of future research and promote clear thinking about the nature and purpose of interventions, In doing so it aims to support future research and practice in planning interventions to improve the mental health and wellbeing of doctors.

How prepared are newly qualified allied health professionals for practice in the UK? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: It is important that allied health professionals (AHPs) are prepared for clinical practice from the very start of their working lives to provide quality care for patients, for their personal well-being and for retention of the workforce. The aim of this study was to understand how well newly qualified AHPs were prepared for practice in the UK. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ERIC and BEI were searched from 2012 to 2024. Grey literature searching and citation chasing were also conducted. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included primary studies reporting the preparedness for practice of UK graduates across 15 professions; all study types; participants included graduates who were up to 2 years postgraduation, their supervisors, trainers, practice educators and employers; and all outcome measures. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: A standardised data extraction form was used. Studies were quality assessed using the Quality Appraisal for Diverse Studies tool. 10% of articles were independently double-screened, extracted and quality assessed; 90% was completed by one researcher. RESULTS: 14 reports were included (9 qualitative, 3 mixed-method and 2 quantitative). Six papers focused on radiographers, three on a mixture of professions, two on paramedics, and one each on physiotherapists, clinical psychologists and orthotists. An important finding of the review is the paucity and low-medium quality of research on the topic. The narrative synthesis tentatively suggests that graduates are adequately prepared for practice with different professions having different strengths and weaknesses. Common areas of underpreparedness across the professions were responsibility and decision-making, leadership and research. Graduates were generally well prepared in terms of their knowledge base. CONCLUSION: High-quality in-depth research is urgently needed across AHPs to elucidate the specific roles, their nuances and the areas of underpreparedness. Further work is also needed to understand the transition into early clinical practice, ongoing learning opportunities through work, and the supervision and support structures in place. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022382065.

Repairing disrupted care processes as sources of stability, learning and change in a Finnish hospital: An activity-theoretical study.

INTRODUCTION: In high-income countries, it is estimated that one in every 10 patients is harmed while receiving hospital care; 50% of these are preventable. The aim of this study was to deepen our understanding of disruptions of care processes and how the repairing of disruptions can be sources of stability, learning and change in complex health care settings. METHODS: The organisational interactions associated with disruptions in the standard care processes of 15 surgical patients were followed in a public sector hospital in Finland. The patients and medical professionals were interviewed in situ during the observation of the care processes. An activity-theoretically informed methodological framework was used to identify and analyse disruptions and the associated repair efforts and repair solutions. RESULTS: Disruptions were frequent and found in all 15 care processes. These related to (1) the patient's worsening physiological state, (2) the equipment used in surgical care, (3) the information flow, (4) delays in the care process and (5) the unclear division of labour within the team. The actors carried out three types of repair efforts (technical, cognitive-emotional and extended collaborative) to overcome the disrupted processes, which usually led to repair solutions that restored stability. DISCUSSION: The different repair efforts required different kinds of collaboration and learning. Extended collaborative repair was most demanding, providing challenges and opportunities for practice change and expansive learning.

Care Under Pressure 2: a realist synthesis of causes and interventions to mitigate psychological ill health in nurses, midwives and paramedics.

BACKGROUND: Nurses, midwives and paramedics comprise over half of the clinical workforce in the UK National Health Service and have some of the highest prevalence of psychological ill health. This study explored why psychological ill health is a growing problem and how we might change this. METHODS: A realist synthesis involved iterative searches within MEDLINE, CINAHL and HMIC, and supplementary handsearching and expert solicitation. We used reverse chronological quota screening and appraisal journalling to analyse each source and refine our initial programme theory. A stakeholder group comprising nurses, midwives, paramedics, patient and public representatives, educators, managers and policy makers contributed throughout. RESULTS: Following initial theory development from 8 key reports, 159 sources were included. We identified 26 context-mechanism-outcome configurations, with 16 explaining the causes of psychological ill health and 10 explaining why interventions have not worked to mitigate psychological ill health. These were synthesised to five key findings: (1) it is difficult to promote staff psychological wellness where there is a blame culture; (2) the needs of the system often over-ride staff psychological well-being at work; (3) there are unintended personal costs of upholding and implementing values at work; (4) interventions are fragmented, individual-focused and insufficiently recognise cumulative chronic stressors; and (5) it is challenging to design, identify and implement interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Our final programme theory argues the need for healthcare organisations to rebalance the working environment to enable healthcare professionals to recover and thrive. This requires high standards for patient care to be balanced with high standards for staff psychological well-being; professional accountability to be balanced with having a listening, learning culture; reactive responsive interventions to be balanced by having proactive preventative interventions; and the individual focus balanced by an organisational focus. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020172420.

Causes and solutions to workplace psychological ill-health for nurses, midwives and paramedics: the Care Under Pressure 2 realist review.

Background: Nurses, midwives and paramedics are the largest collective group of clinical staff in the National Health Service and have some of the highest prevalence of psychological ill-health. Existing literature tends to be profession-specific and focused on individual interventions that place responsibility for good psychological health with nurses, midwives and paramedics themselves. Aim: To improve understanding of how, why and in what contexts nurses, midwives and paramedics experience work-related psychological ill-health; and determine which high-quality interventions can be implemented to minimise psychological ill-health in these professions. Methods: Realist synthesis methodology consistent with realist and meta-narrative evidence syntheses: evolving standards' reporting guidelines. Data sources: First round database searching in Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online Database ALL (via Ovid), cumulative index to nursing and allied health literature database (via EBSCO) and health management information consortium database (via Ovid), was undertaken between February and March 2021, followed by supplementary searching strategies (e.g. hand searching, expert solicitation of key papers). Reverse chronology screening was applied, aimed at retaining 30 relevant papers in each profession. Round two database searches (December 2021) targeted COVID-19-specific literature and literature reviews. No date limits were applied. Results: We built on seven key reports and included 75 papers in the first round (26 nursing, 26 midwifery, 23 paramedic) plus 44 expert solicitation papers, 29 literature reviews and 49 COVID-19 focused articles in the second round. Through the realist synthesis we surfaced 14 key tensions in the literature and identified five key findings, supported by 26 context mechanism and outcome configurations. The key findings identified the following: (1) interventions are fragmented, individual-focused and insufficiently recognise cumulative chronic stressors; (2) it is difficult to promote staff psychological wellness where there is a blame culture; (3) the needs of the system often override staff well-being at work ('serve and sacrifice'); (4) there are unintended personal costs of upholding and implementing values at work; and (5) it is challenging to design, identify and implement interventions to work optimally for diverse staff groups with diverse and interacting stressors. Conclusions: Our realist synthesis strongly suggests the need to improve the systemic working conditions and the working lives of nurses, midwives and paramedics to improve their psychological well-being. Individual, one-off psychological interventions are unlikely to succeed alone. Psychological ill-health is highly prevalent in these staff groups (and can be chronic and cumulative as well as acute) and should be anticipated and prepared for, indeed normalised and expected. Healthcare organisations need to (1) rebalance the working environment to enable healthcare professionals to recover and thrive; (2) invest in multi-level system approaches to promote staff psychological well-being; and use an organisational diagnostic framework, such as the NHS England and NHS Improvement Health and Wellbeing framework, to self-assess and implement a systems approach to staff well-being. Future work: Future research should implement, refine and evaluate systemic interventional strategies. Interventions and evaluations should be co-designed with front-line staff and staff experts by experience, and tailored where possible to local, organisational and workforce needs. Limitations: The literature was not equivalent in size and quality across the three professions and we did not carry out citation searches using hand searching and stakeholder/expert suggestions to augment our sample. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020172420. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020172420. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR129528) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 9. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

The National Health Service needs healthy, motivated staff to provide high-quality patient care. Nurses, midwives and paramedics experience poor psychological health (e.g. stress/anxiety) because of pressured environments and the difficulties of healthcare work. This study planned to better understand the causes of poor psychological ill-health in nurses, midwives and paramedics and find which interventions might help and why. We analysed the literature using a method called 'realist review' to understand how interventions work (or not), why, and for who. We tested our findings with patients, the public, nurses, midwives and paramedics in our stakeholder group. We reviewed over 200 papers/reports and identified five main findings: (1) existing solutions (interventions) are disjointed, focus mainly on the individual (not the system) and do not recognise enduring stressors enough; (2) when there is a blame culture it is difficult to encourage staff psychological well-being; (3) the needs of the system often override staff psychological well-being at work; (4) upholding and implementing personal and professional values at work can have negative personal costs; and (5) it is difficult to design, identify and implement solutions that work well for staff groups in different circumstances with varied causes of poor psychological health. Healthcare organisations should consider: (1) changing (rebalancing) the working environment to help healthcare professionals rest, recover and thrive; (2) investing in multiple-level system (not just individual) approaches to staff psychological well-being; (3) continuing to reduce stigma; (4) ensuring the essential needs of staff are prioritised (rest-breaks/hydration/hot food) as building blocks for other solutions; (5) addressing the blame culture, assuming staff are doing their best in difficult conditions; (6) prioritising staff needs, as well as patient needs. We will provide guidance and recommendations to policy-makers and organisational leaders to improve work cultures that tackle psychological ill-health and suggest new areas for research.

Medical Student Intentions to Move Abroad: A UK-Based Realist Evaluation.

Introduction: Medical students moving abroad after qualification may contribute to domestic healthcare workforce shortages. Greater insights into how medical students make decisions about moving abroad may improve post-qualification retention. The aim was to develop a programme theory explaining medical students' intentions to move abroad or not. Methods: In Phase 1 the initial programme theory was generated from a literature review. In Phase 2, the theory was developed through 30 realist interviews with medical students from a medical school in the United Kingdom. In Phase 3 the final programme theory was used to produce recommendations for stakeholders. Results: The findings highlight the complex decision-making that medical students undertake when deciding whether to move abroad. We identified five contexts and six mechanisms leading to two outcomes (intention to move abroad and no intention to move abroad). Conclusions: This realist evaluation has demonstrated how contexts and mechanisms may interact to enable specific outcomes. These insights have allowed evidence-based recommendations to be made with a view to retaining graduates, including protected time within medical curricula to experience other healthcare systems, improved availability of domestic postgraduate posts providing domestic career certainty and stronger domestic-based social support networks for graduates.

A roadmap to realist interviews in health professions education research: Recommendations based on a critical analysis.

CONTEXT: Realist evaluation is increasingly employed in health professions education research (HPER) because it can unpack the extent to which complex educational interventions work (or not), for whom under what circumstances and how. While realist evaluation is not wedded to particular methods, realist interviews are commonly the primary, if not only, data collection method in realist evaluations. While qualitative interviewing from an interpretivist standpoint has been well-articulated in the HPER literature, realist interviewing differs substantially. The former elicits participants' views and experiences of a topic of inquiry, whereas realist interviewing focuses on building, testing and/or refining programme theory. Therefore, this article aims to help readers better understand, conduct, report and critique realist interviews as part of realist evaluations. METHODS: In this paper, we describe what realist approaches are, what realist interviewing is and why realist interviewing matters. We outline five stages to realist interviewing (developing initial programme theory, realist sampling/samples, the interview itself, realist analysis and reporting realist interviews), drawing on two illustrative cases from our own realist evaluations employing interviewing to bring theory to life. We provide a critical analysis of 12 realist evaluations employing interviewing in the HPER literature. Alongside reporting standards, and our own realist interviewing experiences, this critical analysis of published articles serves to foreground our recommendations for realist interviewing. CONCLUSIONS: We encourage HPE researchers to consider realist interviews as part of realist evaluations of complex interventions. Our critical analysis reveals that realist interviews can provide unique insights into HPE, but authors now need to report their sampling approach, type of interviewing and interview questions more explicitly. Studies should also more explicitly draw on existing realist interviewing literature and follow reporting guidelines for realist evaluations. We hope this paper provides a useful roadmap to conducting, reporting and critically appraising realist interviews in HPER.

How can NHS trusts in England optimise strategies to improve the mental health and well-being of hospital doctors? The Care Under Pressure 3 (CUP3) realist evaluation study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The growing incidence of mental ill health in doctors was a major issue in the UK and internationally, even prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. It has significant and far-reaching implications, including poor quality or inconsistent patient care, absenteeism, workforce attrition and retention issues, presenteeism, and increased risk of suicide. Existing approaches to workplace support do not take into account the individual, organisational and social factors contributing to mental ill health in doctors, nor how interventions/programmes might interact with each other within the workplace. The aim of this study is to work collaboratively with eight purposively selected National Health Service (NHS) trusts within England to develop an evidence-based implementation toolkit for all NHS trusts to reduce doctors' mental ill health and its impacts on the workforce. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The project will incorporate three phases. Phase 1 develops a typology of interventions to reduce doctors' mental ill health. Phase 2 is a realist evaluation of the existing combinations of strategies being used by acute English healthcare trusts to reduce doctors' mental ill health (including preventative promotion of well-being), based on 160 interviews with key stakeholders. Phase 3 synthesises the insights gained through phases 1 and 2, to create an implementation toolkit that all UK healthcare trusts can use to optimise their strategies to reduce doctors' mental ill health and its impact on the workforce and patient care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted for phase 2 of the project from the NHS Research Ethics Committee (REC reference number 22/WA/0352). As part of the conditions for our ethics approval, the sites included in our study will remain anonymous. To ensure the relevance of the study's outputs, we have planned a wide range of dissemination strategies: an implementation toolkit for healthcare leaders, service managers and doctors; conventional academic outputs such as journal manuscripts and conference presentations; plain English summaries; cartoons and animations; and a media engagement campaign.

How is transition to medical practice shaped by a novel transitional role? A mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVES: This study considered a novel 'interim' transitional role for new doctors (termed 'FiY1', interim Foundation Year 1), bridging medical school and Foundation Programme (FP). Research questions considered effects on doctors' well-being and perceived preparedness, and influences on their experience of transition. While FiY1 was introduced in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, findings have wider and ongoing relevance. DESIGN: A sequential mixed-methods study involved two questionnaire phases, followed by semi-structured interviews. In phase 1, questionnaires were distributed to doctors in FiY1 posts, and in phase 2, to all new FP doctors, including those who had not undertaken FiY1. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants were newly qualified doctors from UK medical schools, working in UK hospitals in 2020. 77% (n=668) of all participants across all phases had undertaken FiY1 before starting FP in August. The remainder started FP in August with varying experience beforehand. OUTCOME MEASURES: Questionnaires measured preparedness for practice, stress, anxiety, depression, burnout, identity, and tolerance of ambiguity. Interviews explored participants' experiences in more depth. RESULTS: Analysis of questionnaires (phase 1 n=441 FiY1s, phase 2 n=477 FiY1s, 196 non-FiY1s) indicated that FiY1s felt more prepared than non-FiY1 colleagues for starting FP in August (ß=2.71, 95% CI=2.21 to 3.22, p<0.0001), which persisted to October (ß=1.85, CI=1.28 to 2.41, p<0.0001). Likelihood of feeling prepared increased with FiY1 duration (OR=1.02, CI=1.00 to 1.03, p=0.0097). Despite challenges to well-being during FiY1, no later detriment was apparent. Thematic analysis of interview data (n=22) identified different ways, structural and interpersonal, in which the FiY1 role enhanced doctors' emerging independence supported by systems and colleagues, providing 'supported autonomy'. CONCLUSIONS: An explicitly transitional role can benefit doctors as they move from medical school to independent practice. We suggest that the features of supported autonomy are those of institutionalised liminality-a structured role 'betwixt and between' education and practice-and this lens may provide a guide to optimising the design of such posts.

Constraints and affordances for UK doctors-in-training to exercise agency: A dialogical analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The goal of medical education is to develop clinicians who have sufficient agency (capacity to act) to practise effectively in clinical workplaces and to learn from work throughout their careers. Little research has focused on experiences of organisational structures and the role of these in constraining or affording agency. The aim of this study was to identify priorities for organisational change, by identifying and analysing key moments of agency described by doctors-in-training. METHODS: This was a secondary qualitative analysis of data from a large national mixed methods research programme, which examined the work and wellbeing of UK doctors-in-training. Using a dialogical approach, we identified 56 key moments of agency within the transcripts of 22 semi-structured interviews with doctors based across the UK in their first year after graduation. By analysing action within the key moments from a sociocultural theoretical perspective, we identified tangible changes that healthcare organisations can make to afford agency. RESULTS: When talking about team working, participants gave specific descriptions of agency (or lack thereof) and used adversarial metaphors, but when talking about the wider healthcare system, their dialogue was disengaged and they appeared resigned to having no agency to shape the agenda. Organisational changes that could afford greater agency to doctors-in-training were improving induction, smoothing peaks and troughs of responsibility and providing a means of timely feedback on patient care. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings identified some organisational changes needed for doctors-in-training to practise effectively and learn from work. The findings also highlight a need to improve workplace-based team dynamics and empower trainees to influence policy. By targeting change, healthcare organisations can better support doctors-in-training, which will ultimately benefit patients.

Graduates' preparedness for the changing doctor-patient relationship: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: A positive doctor-patient relationship is a crucial part of high-quality patient care. There is a general perception that it has been changing in recent years; however, there is a lack of evidence for this. Adapting to the changing doctor-patient relationship has been identified as an important skill doctors of the future must possess. This study explores (1) multiple stakeholder perspectives on how the doctor-patient relationship is changing and (2) in what ways medical graduates are prepared for working in this changing doctor-patient relationship. METHODS: We conducted a national qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with multiple stakeholders across the United Kingdom. Interviews lasting 45-60 minutes were conducted with 67 stakeholders including doctors in the first 2 years of practice (ECD's), patient representatives, supervisors, deans, medical educators and other health care professionals. The interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed, analysed, coded in NVivo and analysed thematically using a Thematic Framework Analysis approach. RESULTS: The main ways the doctor-patient relationship was perceived to be changing related to increased shared decision making and patients having increasing access to information. Communication, patient-centred care and fostering empowerment, were the skills identified as being crucial for preparedness to work in the changing doctor-patient relationship. Graduates were reported to be typically well-prepared for the preconditions (communication and delivering patient-centred care) of patient empowerment, but that more work is needed to achieve true patient empowerment. CONCLUSION: This study offers a conceptual advance by identifying how the doctor-patient relationship is changing particularly around the 'patient-as-knowledge-source' dimension. On the whole ECD's are well-prepared for working in the changing doctor-patient relationship with the exception of patient empowerment skills. Further research is now needed to provide an in-depth understanding of patient empowerment that is shared among key stakeholders (particularly the patient perspective) and to underpin the design of educational interventions appropriate to career stage.

The impact of shared social spaces on the wellness and learning of junior doctors: A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Impaired wellness among junior doctors is a significant problem. Connectedness and sense of belonging may be important factors to prevent and reduce mental ill-health. Shared social spaces in which health care staff can meet informally are thought to improve connectedness; however, these spaces are in decline. It is unclear what is known about such spaces, how they are used, and their impact on wellness and learning. This study aims to identify and synthetise available literature that informs our current understanding of the nature of shared social spaces as an intervention impacting wellness and learning of junior doctors. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted following the Arksey and O'Malley five-step framework. The review question is 'What is the evidence of the impact of shared social spaces on wellness and learning of junior doctors?' We searched five databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, APA PsychINFO, APA PsychExtra, and ERIC. We conducted thorough supplementary searches in addition to the database search. RESULTS: We included 41 articles. These were predominantly letters, commentaries, and editorials with only five primary research studies. We identified four significant common attributes of shared social spaces, which can be credited with positive impacts on wellness and learning: (1) Informal: fostering connectedness and belonging, trust and teamwork and offering access to informal help and support; (2) safe: allowing reflection, debrief and raising of concerns; (3) functional: there is planning of clinical care activity, sense of control and engagement from users and provision of refreshment; (4) legitimate: regular maintenance and use of shared social spaces affect role modelling, sustainability and wellness culture. DISCUSSION: This review identified several ways in which shared social spaces impact positively on learning and wellness. There is little primary research in this area. Future research would be useful to further examine how and why this works.

'I'd have to fight for my life there': a multicentre qualitative interview study of how socioeconomic background influences medical school choice.

Students from lower socio-economic backgrounds who were educated in state funded schools are underrepresented in medicine in the UK. Widening access to medical students from these backgrounds has become a key political and research priority. It is known that medical schools vary in the number of applicants attracted and accepted from non-traditional backgrounds but the reasons for this are poorly understood. This study aims to explore what applicants value when choosing medical schools to apply to and how this relates to their socioeconomic background. We conducted a multicentre qualitative interview study, purposively sampling applicants and recent entrants based on socioeconomic background, stage of application and medical school of application. We recruited participants from eight UK medical schools. Participants attended semi-structured interviews. We performed a framework analysis, identifying codes inductively from the data. Sixty-six individuals participated: 35 applicants and 31 first year medical students. Seven main themes were identified; course style, proximity to home, prestige, medical school culture, geographical area, university resources, and fitting in. These were prioritised differently depending on participants' background. Participants from lower socioeconomic backgrounds described proximity to home as a higher priority. This was typically as they intended to be living at home for at least part of the course. Those from higher socioeconomic backgrounds were more concerned with the perceived prestige of medical schools. Since medicine is a highly selective course, only offered at a minority of UK higher education institutions, these differences in priorities may help explain observed differential patterns of medical school applications and success rates by applicant social background.

Tipping the balance: A systematic review and meta-ethnography to unfold the complexity of surgical antimicrobial prescribing behavior in hospital settings.

Surgical specialties account for a high proportion of antimicrobial use in hospitals, and misuse has been widely reported resulting in unnecessary patient harm and antimicrobial resistance. We aimed to synthesize qualitative studies on surgical antimicrobial prescribing behavior, in hospital settings, to explain how and why contextual factors act and interact to influence practice. Stakeholder engagement was integrated throughout to ensure consideration of varying interpretive repertoires and that the findings were clinically meaningful. The meta-ethnography followed the seven phases outlined by Noblit and Hare. Eight databases were systematically searched without date restrictions. Supplementary searches were performed including forwards and backwards citation chasing and contacting first authors of included papers to highlight further work. Following screening, 14 papers were included in the meta-ethnography. Repeated reading of this work enabled identification of 48 concepts and subsequently eight overarching concepts: hierarchy; fear drives action; deprioritized; convention trumps evidence; complex judgments; discontinuity of care; team dynamics; and practice environment. The overarching concepts interacted to varying degrees but there was no consensus among stakeholders regarding an order of importance. Further abstraction of the overarching concepts led to the development of a conceptual model and a line-of-argument synthesis, which posits that social and structural mediators influence individual complex antimicrobial judgements and currently skew practice towards increased and unnecessary antimicrobial use. Crucially, our model provides insights into how we might 'tip the balance' towards more evidence-based antimicrobial use. Currently, healthcare workers deploy antimicrobials across the surgical pathway as a safety net to allay fears, reduce uncertainty and risk, and to mitigate against personal blame. Our synthesis indicates that prescribing is unlikely to change until the social and structural mediators driving practice are addressed. Furthermore, it suggests that research specifically exploring the context for effective and sustainable quality improvement stewardship initiatives in surgery is now urgent.

'The WOW factors': comparing workforce organization and well-being for doctors, nurses, midwives and paramedics in England.

BACKGROUND: High rates of poor mental health in healthcare staff threatens the quality and sustainability of healthcare delivery. Multi-factorial causes include the nature and structure of work. We conducted a critical review of UK NHS (England) data pertaining to: doctors, nurses, midwives and paramedics. SOURCES OF DATA: Key demographic, service architecture (structural features of work) and well-being indicators were identified and reviewed by a stakeholder group. Data searching prioritized NHS whole workforce sources (focusing on hospital and community health services staff), which were rated according to strength of evidence. FINDINGS: Key differences between professions were: (i) demographics: gender (nursing and midwifery female-dominated, doctors and paramedics more balanced); age (professions other than doctors had ageing workforces); ethnicity (greater diversity among doctors and nurses); (ii) service architecture: despite net staffing growth, turnover and retention were problematic in all professions; 41.5% doctors were consultants but smaller proportions held high grade/band roles in other professions; salaries were higher for doctors; (iii) well-being: all reported high job stress, particularly midwives and paramedics; sickness absence rates for nurses, midwives and paramedics were three times those of doctors, and presenteeism nearly double. GROWING POINTS: Sociocultural factors known to increase risk of poor mental health may explain some of the differences reported between professions. These factors and differences in service architecture are vital considerations when designing strategies to improve well-being. AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: Multi-level systems approaches to well-being are required that consider intersectionality and structural differences between professions; together with inter-professional national databases to facilitate monitoring.

Getting palliative medications right across the contexts of homes, hospitals and hospices: protocol to synthesise scoping review and ethnographic methods in an activity theory analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Prescribing and medication use in palliative care is a multistep process. It requires systems coordination and is enacted through activities of patients, informal carers and professionals. This study compares practice to idealised descriptions of what should happen; identifying when, how and why process disturbances impact on quality and safety. Our objectives are to:Document an intended model (phase 1, scoping review).Refine the model with study of practice (phase 2, ethnography).Use the model to pinpoint 'hot' (viewed as problematic by participants) and 'cold' spots (observed as problematic by researchers) within or when patients move across three contexts-hospice, hospital and community (home).Create learning recommendations for quality and safety targeted at underlying themes and contributing factors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The review will scope Ovid Medline, CINAHL and Embase, Google Scholar and Images-no date limits, English language only. The Population (palliative), Concept (medication use), Context (home, hospice, hospital) framework defines inclusion/exclusion criteria. Data will be extracted to create a model illustrating how processes ideally occur, incorporating multiple steps of typical episodes of prescribing and medication use for symptom control. Direct observations, informal conversations around acts of prescribing and medication use, and semistructured interviews will be conducted with a purposive sample of patients, carers and professionals. Drawing on activity theory, we will synthesise analysis of both phases. The analysis will identify when, how and why activities affect patient safety and experience. Generating a rich multivoiced understanding of the process will help identify meaningful targets for improvement. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval granted by the Camden & Kings Cross NHS Regional Ethics Committee (21/LO/0459). A patient and public involvement (PPI) coinvestigator, a multiprofessional steering group and a PPI engagement group are working with the research team. Dissemination of findings is planned through peer-reviewed publications and a stakeholder (policymakers, commissioners, clinicians, researchers, public) report/dissemination event.